josephbloggs

1 hour ago, 3NUMBAS said:

Ice road truckers will never be using E trucks

This is a thread about someone wanting a passenger car and asking about BYD.

What have ice road truckers got to do with anything??

Intergalactic space ships will never be using e-rockets either. 

1 hour ago, BarraMarra said:

Doesn't matter on this thread whatever videos we show it will be classed as a riggt wing or someone that is going against the police. This is what the UK police and senior MPs want hidden from the UK. like him or not listen to what he says.

What?

1 hour ago, NanLaew said:

 

I one pleads guilty BEFORE going to trial, the route to justice, as already explained, is COMPLETELY different to the route to justice if one pleads not guilty, thus resulting in a trial.

 

There is absolutely NOTHING with regard to the airport assaults that is "uncomplicated", primarily due to the hotheads on BOTH sides of the camp stirring the pot, mostly via social media.

 

Saying otherwise stinks of ignorance.

Oh my God, hallelujah, I thought I was the only reasonable, non conspiracy nutcase person on here. 

32 minutes ago, riclag said:

They/ them come to this thread either to bash Trump or support a Socialist/ wanna be Commie!

You know McCarthyism is over, right?

7 minutes ago, nauseus said:

 

Due process my arm. They were all hoping it would just go away - like the rape gangs.

I agree, that's what was happening in your head.

 

3 hours ago, sungod said:

They did for Tommy Robinson

He went to jail for Contempt of Court. And he plead guilty.

He isn't persecuted. 

1 hour ago, Wyabcp said:

Thanks all, is it ok to type the responses on the form and print, or should I only use hand written responses. 

Type on the form and print is fine. Just leave the signature and sign in front of them on the day (not sure if that is strictly necessary but no harm in it - I always sign in front of them)

36 minutes ago, Geoff914 said:

It seemed to work to get Michael Amesbury prosecuted for an equally violent assault. Strangely that didn't take 5 months to press charges. Notice the differences.

He did not have his head stamped on by a policeman which was the first video that came to light and caused complaints about police excessive force. Therefore his case did not get referred to the IOPC or require an investigation by GMP.

He immediately plead guilty and was therefore dealt with by a magistrates court who could quickly pass sentence, it did not go to a full criminal trial. So no involvement of the CPS to gather evidence over a period of weeks, no scheduling of a complex criminal case in to an overloaded criminal justice system.

If you punch someone in a pub you will generally be seen by a magistrate the next day, plead guilty, accept your punishment, job done.

Do you really not understand the differences in the two cases? Really?? I don't understand how you can refuse to see what is so clearly obvious - the cases could not be more different.

39 minutes ago, topt said:

@CharlieH was this to highlight the inaccuracies and potential fake sites on Tiktok?

 

Otherwise I am a bit bemused by the posting.................

Yeah, I would expect better. I hope it was as you say. If it was it was genius and proves the point perfectly as numerous people got agitated by it and will probably tell others and that is how false information spreads. No one comes back to it to look for corrections, the seed is sown.

Not one other person thought to do an independent check, not one, they just believed the Tik Tok video. Quite depressing really.

2 minutes ago, Geoff914 said:

Eff off

I have made reasoned points, over and over again, you ignore all of them and this is where we end up. Says it all.

I'm done. 

1 minute ago, BarraMarra said:

Whats better evidence a video showing clearly an attack or a written statement god talk about being Dense.

You really don't get it do you. You really think a judge would accept a brief video clip without any other evidence or investigation? Is that how you think the criminal prosecution and crown court work? It would be thrown out immediately.

I am only glad you work nowhere near our legal system.

Jeez, this is hard going.

1 minute ago, BarraMarra said:

Well you got your reasons so you wont accept anything thats in your head joseph so theres no point trying to have a convo with you.

I agree no point in having a discussion anymore. I have consistently explained in detail how the process works and why it took the time it did and what the complexities of the case were and why due process takes time and why every case should follow it no matter what - it is the pillar of any functioning justice system.

You have ignored them all and just posted a foghorn, political grandstanding announcement full of conjecture and imagined scenarios which didn't even come to pass.

2 minutes ago, BarraMarra said:

Yes Geof not in Thailand but he's straw clutching.

I was drawing a parallel. I know you only draw with crayons, so never mind. 

24 minutes ago, BarraMarra said:

What Evidence do they need takes a few hours to watch all the footage from CCTV and Police Body Cams doesn't take over a year or are you going to dispute this with video evidence.

So you think the CPS just glance at a video clip and make a decision? Is that how flimsy you want their cases to be? Imagine how many people would get away with their crimes if the CPS just went "saw a ten second video clip on YouTube, prosecute. Next!"

Complete fantasy land stuff.

I have explained the due process in this case twice now, I am not going to do it a third time for you to ignore again. I have been doing it since the beginning too. Investigations done, evidence seemingly water-tight, complaints against the police dismissed, now in a criminal trial after which I fully expect to see a guilty verdict and jail time.  If the legal process went "watch video clip, ignore all inquiries and counter complaints, don't bother with witness interviews or cross checking of evidence,  send for immediate prosecution" they would be out already on a technicality or would have had their case dismissed by any decent lawyer. I thought you were all for law and order, no?

21 minutes ago, BarraMarra said:

Here you go Joseph. I hope you watch all this video instead of snippets on it. Even the CPS are being looked at hoping to quash this conviction.

 

 

 

 

Ha ha ha. Hilarious. Foghorning. Nothing more, nothing less.

Foghorn number two even makes it up as he goes along, saying it is under investigation by the IOPC (which it was) and that perhaps might mean the CPS don't prosecute which would blah blah blah, and if they don't prosecute we will crowd fund a private prosecution (not pay for it themselves even though Farage has got millions of pounds worth of your donations). No evidence that the CPS won't prosecute, just conjecture, what ifs, imagined scenarios, and nonsense. A it like this forum.

Oh, erm, the CPS did prosecute after due process. So this was showboating, foghorning, and based on no reasoned evidence, just "what if, if they don't, blah blah". Political showboating which is all Farage is capable of.

They did. The trial is ongoing.

Thank you.
 

2 minutes ago, Geoff914 said:

You will already have to my response. There is absolutely nothing complex about the assault of a member of the public in Star Bucks then resisting arrest. At an airport so oozing with cctv.

"If the evidence is not absolutely nailed down before charges are brought and they get off on a technicality what do you think would happen? Riots on the streets probably, so let them do their jobs." Well if they got off on a technicality of the first assault then no doubt we will all know where we stand.

So no link to the legal blogs then?

2 minutes ago, Geoff914 said:

Utter BS. Not complex at all. It is all on cctv.

Accusations of police brutality. This all began in Star Bucks long before the police got involved.

It took 21 weeks to bring charges for a very simple assault on a member of the public in Star Bucks.

 

 

Goalposts moving again. All I read on here was "he broke a policewoman's nose". No mention of Starbucks until today.

Anyway, I'll bow out now, I know how the criminal justice system works, especially when three agencies are involved. If you don't want to read it or take it in then that's up to you, discussions are impossible. 

It was all a cover up until Foghorn Farage got involved. And Yaxley-Lennon personally came to the policewoman's aid. I see the light now.

5 minutes ago, The Cyclist said:

 

From the well known right wing rag, AKA the Independent

 

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/reform-uk-nigel-farage-manchester-airport-independent-office-for-police-conduct-greater-manchester-police-b2649014.html

 

If you actually looked, you will find it widely reported in all the UK Media.

Jeez, how dense can you be? I asked for evidence that Farage had anything to do with the prosecution moving forward. He didn't, it was already moving through the system. You gave a link to him foghorning his mouth off - jumping on a bandwagon, nothing more nothing less.

I don't disagree that he jumped on a bandwagon and got some self serving publicity for his fanboys to lap up, I vehemently disagree his spouting had any influence over anything - of course it didn't. But give him his due, he knows when and where to get his foghorn out.

 

16 minutes ago, Geoff914 said:

100% correct. There was no end of internet chat, not just the public, but legal blogs as well saying why was this taking so long. The assaults took place on the 23 July 2024. They were not charged until the 20 Dec 2024, 5 months to bring charges. It must have taken a couple of hours to gather up the cctv footage and the body cam footage. So what took 21 weeks to decide yes a member of the public was violently assaulted, the culprits resisted arrest and violently assaulted the police. Hurty words are investigated, charged, taken to court and banged up in a fraction of that time. That actually takes a bit of detective work to determine who said the hurty words.

Oooo, we have a legal blog reader! Can you share a link to these legal discussions please?

I'll copy and paste my other reply and then maybe you can tell me which parts of it the legal blog people say is false. Leal blogs, right?

1. It was a complex case with multiple parties involved, needing thorough investigations by Greater Manchester Police (GMP), the Independent Office for Police Conduct (IOPC), and the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS). Yes, partly due to the complaints against the police violence, which was rightfully eventually dismissed.

2. Because there were accusations of police brutality that needed to be investigated, and there are racial/political undertones the CPS needed to go through all the evidence to make sure it was completely watertight, legally sound, defensible in court and there was no wriggle room for them to get out of it - surely that's a good thing? Or would you rather they rushed it through, there are holes their lawyers can exploit and they get out of it via a loophole or a mistake in evidence collection just to satisfy the braying mob by rushing things?

3. They were charged in December, less than five months after their arrest. That is not unusual for a complex case with multiple agencies and complaints and a vast array of evidence to be examined. It is not a simple open and shut case no matter what you think.

4. They plead not guilty which meant it needs a criminal trial and has to be scheduled in to the criminal justice system which always has a significant backlog of cases. And this is expected to be a 3-4 week trial, no small matter.

All of the above is verifiable, usual, and the way the course of justice goes, especially in a sensitive case such as this. If the evidence is not absolutely nailed down before charges are brought and they get off on a technicality what do you think would happen? Riots on the streets probably, so let them do their jobs.

What do your legal blogs say exactly?

18 minutes ago, nauseus said:

 

 

Good value for the money these days. 0-60 in 2.9s - not enough power?

The straight line acceleration is ok, just everything else about it is not - especially for the money. For close to £100k I want much much more.

14 minutes ago, Watawattana said:

Agree.  But if the police do not provide a file full of compelling evidence to the CPS that persuades the CPS there is a good probability of a successful prosecution then they likely won't prosecute.  Or, perhaps, they won't even know if a crime has been committed if the police don't raise the matter to them.

 

That's my understanding from having an uncle who was a copper and a friend who is a prosecutor.

That is all correct.

And then the CPS has to go through all the evidence supplied and decide if it will stand up in a court of law, be defensible, and stand up to scrutiny before they send it for prosecution.

12 minutes ago, nauseus said:

 

Blanks filled with more blanks. If all of the above is verifiable then why didn't you verify it with factual links?

 

Perhaps the threat of an independent prosecution might have interrupted a drawn-out, two-tier process?

Ok, I will dig out links of how the criminal justice system works.

Maybe you can dig out links of how this was "buried" in case Muslims got offended and how Farage had anything to do with the case.

14 minutes ago, faraday said:

 

Here you go, Jo Jo...

 

https://bbc.com/news/articles/clynyyqdnrdo

 

 

 

Isn't this thread and discussion about the trial of the Manchester airport attackers??