For COPS only

[Grahameeboy]

Hey Lou... I thought you constantly spout on about "innocent until proven guilty"...

Jumping the gun a bit are we???

Yep.....it's called deranged confusion...............apparently, no known cure......

[Patrick]

Yep.....it's called deranged confusion...............apparently, no known cure......

Aaahhhh.... dodgy weather coming his way? He's opened up the reds too soon andpolished off half a case already?

[Grahameeboy]

Aaahhhh.... dodgy weather coming his way? He's opened up the reds too soon andpolished off half a case already?

Now ya could look at that 2 ways eh......."Red Reps"........"Glass half empty"......he he

[Lou Girardin]

Fair enough. Personally I'd rather gargle tacks.

Another question for you;

Hypothetically, if they were facing 10 charges, are convicted of 2 and acquited of the other 8, should the state pick up 80% of their legal bill?

Now you're getting highly testicle. Would the lawyer itemise his bill in terms of each charge?

Yes Patrick, I do. But I'm not referring to the rape charges. I'm referring to the low-life scum who gangbang an 18 year old. Whether it was with consent or not.
BTW I see you have a new playmate from Devonport. But he runs out of rational argument too soon.

PS Anyone know what the attraction is with gangbangs? Is it true that the woman is really just a surrogate?

[ManDownUnder]

Now you're getting highly testicle. Would the lawyer itemise his bill in terms of each charge?

The lawyer would be obliged to, and considering they account for time in 12 minute intervals it should be easy enough

[Lou Girardin]

In that case, bugger them. Guilty of any is enough. As long as it's heard at the same time.

[Psalm42]

I wasn't asking you, your reply is completely out of context.

Sorry spud, being an open forum and all, I thought that was a question to any one. And its only out of context if you don't get sarcasm.

[GIXser]

Originally Posted by MisterD
The suffering he has inflicted on himself should only come into play when the judge decides on the sentence, and in this case I think he would and should have been freed (don't know what the legal term is for this..).

Absolutely right!

What a load of bollocks---- go you tree hugger. like he has a say when his suffering should start, i'll stick by what i said when i started this, fuck the system and double skull fuck the pigs
who laid the charges==
for anyone that disagrees,
FUCK YOU CUNTS

[Madness]

Sure a bloke wanting to have a threesome with at least one other bloke has to be the closest thing possible to being a full-blown homosexual???

[spudchucka]

Originally Posted by MisterD
The suffering he has inflicted on himself should only come into play when the judge decides on the sentence, and in this case I think he would and should have been freed (don't know what the legal term is for this..).


What a load of bollocks---- go you tree hugger. like he has a say when his suffering should start, i'll stick by what i said when i started this, fuck the system and double skull fuck the pigs
who laid the charges==
for anyone that disagrees,
FUCK YOU CUNTS

Your post is full of your usual intelligent and reasoned arguements and your language is as discriptive and colourfull as ever, congratulations on being consistent.

[GIXser]

i knew that would get a response from ya Spud-- so predictable--!!!

[GIXser]

Sure a bloke wanting to have a threesome with at least one other bloke has to be the closest thing possible to being a full-blown homosexual???

You'll have to ask Spud !

[Winston001]

well in this case the main victims were charged! Other than the kid killed......

"other than the kid killed......" Almost an afterthought - very telling.

Lets be clear here - there was one victim - a little girl. She deserved to be protected by her parents. Her father made a bad error of judgement and was correctly charged. The jury were swayed by emotion but frankly that is why lawyers prefer juries.

But the fact remains that a little girl will never grow up, be a joy to others, have her own family - she's dead. There is the victim.

[Patrick]

Originally Posted by MisterD
The suffering he has inflicted on himself should only come into play when the judge decides on the sentence, and in this case I think he would and should have been freed (don't know what the legal term is for this..).


What a load of bollocks---- go you tree hugger. like he has a say when his suffering should start, i'll stick by what i said when i started this, fuck the system and double skull fuck the pigs
who laid the charges==
for anyone that disagrees,
FUCK YOU CUNTS

So you agree that we are useful, as cunts are very useful, aren't they? Sounds like your head is too far up your arse you don't know what you're talking about. Come up for air some time soon...

[Patrick]

I'm referring to the low-life scum who gangbang an 18 year old. Whether it was with consent or not.
BTW I see you have a new playmate from Devonport. But he runs out of rational argument too soon.

Guilty already again I see...

Know of lots of teens and twenty somethings who liked getting into threeways...know some older too. By your reasoning, they are all gangbangers and guilty to boot too??

Devonport sounds sober...unlike some in this thread...