Re: Hillsborough - Another disaster? : Wed Jul 24, 2013 2:14 pm  

Mintball wrote:

No. A jury decided that he did not break the law. That was why he was acquitted/found not guilty – as in not guilty of breaking the laws that he was charged with breaking.

A jury decided Zimmerman was not guilty. You said it was it because their laws are wrong and the racism of the US.

For some reason I was reading about a Coronation Street actor who'd been charged and went to trial because he broke someone's jaw in a nightclub. He walked free after after he claimed self-defence.

Steven Gerrard walked from court with a not guilty verdict because he said he thought he was going to get smacked.

The first guy to start beating the DJ was found guilty. Gerrard's other 3 mates were found guilty. But Gerrard walked.

You need help?

Why? Thinking Jenna Haze is hot? But that guy watching fisting porn and stuff shoved in someone's penis doesn't?

Re: Hillsborough - Another disaster? : Wed Jul 24, 2013 2:19 pm  

Rock God X wrote:

I didn't realise that merely appearing in court as a defendant automatically means you have broken the law. I was under the (apparently erroneous) impression that the whole purpose of a court case was to decide whether or not the defendant had broken the law. Silly me.

If I've robbed your house. Or broken your jaw in an attack. Under the eyes of the law I am innocent unless I have found guilty in court of doing it.

So does that mean that your house hasn't been robbed and your jaw is not really broken if the cops can't even devote the time to make a case?

If I get off because I've got a fake alibi. Does that mean I didn't do it?

Re: Hillsborough - Another disaster? : Wed Jul 24, 2013 2:33 pm  

Lord God Jose Mourinho wrote:

If I've robbed your house. Or broken your jaw in an attack. Under the eyes of the law I am innocent unless I have found guilty in court of doing it.

You are confused. The presumption of innocence becomes relevant only when you are charged with a criminal offence, which you do not admit.

If asked, the guy who burgled your house, or broke your jaw, might freely admit that, yeah, he did it. It's just silly to say all such people are nevertheless "innocent", the only relevant context would be that if charged and he denied either offence.

Lord God Jose Mourinho wrote:

If I get off because I've got a fake alibi. Does that mean I didn't do it?

Anyway, the first answer is, it means that you have committed perjury, and will go to jail if/when this is proved as well as being re-tried for the original charge. But then you knew that.

However, and I don't blame you for being legally confused, can I just point out the rather obvious fact is that just because you've got a fake alibi, clearly is irrelevant as to whether or not you DID do it.

Re: Hillsborough - Another disaster? : Wed Jul 24, 2013 2:44 pm  

Lord God Jose Mourinho wrote:

If I've robbed your house. Or broken your jaw in an attack. Under the eyes of the law I am innocent unless I have found guilty in court of doing it.

So does that mean that your house hasn't been robbed and your jaw is not really broken if the cops can't even devote the time to make a case?

If I get off because I've got a fake alibi. Does that mean I didn't do it?

What? You said that the defendant in the 'Porn Trial' had broken the law 'enough to be prosecuted'. This is obvious nonsense. The purpose of a prosecution is to decide whether or not the defendant is guilty of an offence. In the case in question, a man (quite legally) viewed some adult material and was found not to have committed any offence. Build as many broken-jawed strawmen as you like, but it doesn't alter the fact that your post was quite a lot of horseshit.

Re: Hillsborough - Another disaster? : Wed Jul 24, 2013 3:16 pm  

Rock God X wrote:

What? You said that the defendant in the 'Porn Trial' had broken the law 'enough to be prosecuted'. This is obvious nonsense. The purpose of a prosecution is to decide whether or not the defendant is guilty of an offence. In the case in question, a man (quite legally) viewed some adult material and was found not to have committed any offence. Build as many broken-jawed strawmen as you like, but it doesn't alter the fact that your post was quite a lot of horseshit.

Are you sure you don't mean horseshit-contaminated BS bombs?

Re: Hillsborough - Another disaster? : Wed Jul 24, 2013 3:25 pm  

Ferocious Aardvark wrote:

However, and I don't blame you for being legally confused, can I just point out the rather obvious fact is that just because you've got a fake alibi, clearly is irrelevant as to whether or not you DID do it.

And you know what the laws are like surrounding porn. Just hearing about the videos he was watching you know he will have broken a law just by watching it. Just like I know that my Jenna Haze video is probably illegal now, and will definitely be illegal if the new porn laws were brought in.

The reasoning for this is mainly, IMO, because if the laws let me watch my Jenna Haze vid, then the suspected child abuser whose computer is full of real recorded rapes, is going to use that law to walk by claiming that they are in the same category as my Jenna Haze vid.

Having seen those videos and his computer. He'll be done for having obscene videos. He'll go to court and get hammered.

And sometimes dumb **** like this will get through to court and they'll throw it out.

But we will have all broken the laws as they are written.

Re: Hillsborough - Another disaster? : Wed Jul 24, 2013 3:30 pm  

Lord God Jose Mourinho wrote:

... Why? Thinking Jenna Haze is hot? But that guy watching fisting porn and stuff shoved in someone's penis doesn't?

Ah. So you're viewing pictures of the aforementioned Ms Haze while posting here. That explains it.

Re: Hillsborough - Another disaster? : Wed Jul 24, 2013 3:31 pm  

Rock God X wrote:

What? You said that the defendant in the 'Porn Trial' had broken the law 'enough to be prosecuted'. This is obvious nonsense.

I agree. A terrible choice of words on my part.

Re: Hillsborough - Another disaster? : Wed Jul 24, 2013 3:34 pm  

Mintball wrote:

Ah. So you're viewing pictures of the aforementioned Ms Haze while posting here. That explains it.

Were you being fisted when you posted your nonsense about Zimmerman?

Re: Hillsborough - Another disaster? : Wed Jul 24, 2013 3:35 pm  

Lord God Jose Mourinho wrote:

And you know what the laws are like surrounding porn....

As mentioned before, I contributed to the consultation on the law that was used to prosecute Simon Walsh, so I am fairly familiar with it and the issues surrounding it.

It is an abysmal piece of legislation, drafted badly and aimed at pleasing the Mail and its ilk.