VIP paedophile ring

[exxon]

You have no legal knowledge do you.

I am far from oblivious as to the actions of the MP - You seem to think that his actions would prevent any trial - Provide the legal basis for such an assertion.

Not as to whether the fact seemingly some of the material is in the public domain and has been commented upon which might cause a jury to feel that the evidence wasn't of sufficient quality to lead them to convict - but how it would stop any prosecution in the first place.

 

If that's what you want to think that is up to you. But this case is dead in the water now. The so called evidence has been destroyed in the public domain. It would be impossible to bring the tainted evidence to court under the jury system. Well done Tom.

 

---------- Post added 23-10-2015 at 13:38 ----------

 

I would have to disagree most strongly.

 

You don't seem to realise the extent to which the media is controlled and manipulated. Much of it is pure propaganda.

 

Mainstream media is the last place to go for the facts.

 

I understand pretty well thanks. It is nothing to do with the media other than the fact that Tom Watson wanted it there. This case should have been examined in private by the proper authorities. Then a decision made whether it should go to court. The case has been destroyed by Watson's interference. If any victims feel agrieived they should perhaps push for his prosecution.

Edited October 23, 2015 by exxon

[Anna B]

You obviously don't understand at all..... The media is where the battle is being fought.

Edited October 23, 2015 by Anna B

[exxon]

You obviously don't understand at all..... The media is where the battle is being fought.

 

It certainly is but there is nothing left to fight. Idiots who had nothing to do with the case put words into the mouths of the victims which they repeated to the media. The victims then let it be known that the accusations were false and had been suggested to them by those idiots. This is a dead duck floating on the water. Tom Watson and his mates did it. He's a complete disgrace.

[Anna B]

It certainly is but there is nothing left to fight. Idiots who had nothing to do with the case put words into the mouths of the victims which they repeated to the media. The victims then let it be known that the accusations were false and had been suggested to them by those idiots. This is a dead duck floating on the water. Tom Watson and his mates did it. He's a complete disgrace.

 

You've proved my point.

 

This is one story out of literally thousands of cases, but now apparently your mind is made up that its all nonsense.

 

The power of the press eh....

[truman]

You've proved my point.

 

This is one story out of literally thousands of cases, but now apparently your mind is made up that its all nonsense.

 

The power of the press eh....

 

Which unbiased source do you use for your info Anna?

[exxon]

You've proved my point.

 

This is one story out of literally thousands of cases, but now apparently your mind is made up that its all nonsense.

 

The power of the press eh....

 

I don't want to upset your rant but we are talking about one case here. That is the one where Tom Watson decided to involve himself. Where Tom Watson went to the media with his witch hunt. The one where the victims were primed with details of events that never happened. The one with alegations involving Leon Brittain at a time where he wasn't actually in the UK. That is the case that is dead in the water. The damage that it has done to other cases that actually occured can't even be estimated. Tom Watson should be put in the stocks.

[Anna B]

Which unbiased source do you use for your info Anna?

 

I at least use a variety of sources, including mainstream and internet media, and I check and cross reference claims before I believe them.

 

I rarely believe one particular source alone.

 

I also save newspaper cuttings and cross reference these (I know, I should get a life..) but it's amazing how the same story varies, and how different papers contradict each other. and how stories alter like chinese whispers.

 

I've done various media courses which taught me well.

[exxon]

I at least use a variety of sources, including mainstream and internet media, and I check and cross reference claims before I believe them.

 

I rarely believe one particular source alone.

 

I also save newspaper cuttings and cross reference these (I know, I should get a life..) but it's amazing how the same story varies, and how different papers contradict each other. and how stories alter like chinese whispers.

 

I've done various media courses which taught me well.

 

So no info that you didn't get from the media then?

[truman]

I at least use a variety of sources, including mainstream and internet media, and I check and cross reference claims before I believe them.

 

I rarely believe one particular source alone.

 

I also save newspaper cuttings and cross reference these (I know, I should get a life..) but it's amazing how the same story varies, and how different papers contradict each other. and how stories alter like chinese whispers.

 

I've done various media courses which taught me well.

 

You said mainstream media was the last place to go for the facts...why do you use it?

 

Mainstream media is the last place to go for the facts.

 

and the internet is full of people with axes to grind one way or another..

Edited October 23, 2015 by truman

[Anna B]

I don't want to upset your rant but we are talking about one case here. That is the one where Tom Watson decided to involve himself. Where Tom Watson went to the media with his witch hunt. The one where the victims were primed with details of events that never happened. The one with alegations involving Leon Brittain at a time where he wasn't actually in the UK. That is the case that is dead in the water. The damage that it has done to other cases that actually occured can't even be estimated. Tom Watson should be put in the stocks.

 

Again you've proved my point.

 

Are you talking about the rape case which Tom Watson asked to be investigated and was subsequently dropped for lack of evidence, or the other multiple cases against Leon Britton which are still being investigated. Or are you talking about the carefully edited and confusing Panorama programme on TV which wasn't specifically just about Leon Britton, and mixed up several cases, and claims?

 

You see your post shows you aren't talking about one case at all.