Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
6 minutes ago, Bkk Brian said:

How do you know he does not know about the evidence? Did you read the other link about not being able to reveal all because it’s a live case?


How is revealing the basis of his claims about police/CPS/Government motivations related to the need to not speculate about the case?

  • Confused 1
Posted
4 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:


How is revealing the basis of his claims about police/CPS/Government motivations related to the need to not speculate about the case?

Ask the reporter who is not allowed to reveal all as in the link.....lol

  • Like 2
Posted
43 minutes ago, proton said:

 

You mean the way Starmer accused those arrested at protests as being far right thugs before they were convicted, how come he can do it and we cannot?


The people rioting, looting and committing arson, those far right thugs?

  • Confused 4
Posted
15 minutes ago, proton said:

 

No, the people protesting against a muslim murdering 3 kids who were proved right, not far right

Do you have access to information the police have not released?

 

 

  • Confused 4
Posted
2 hours ago, Chomper Higgot said:

I’m looking forward to the budget… and the response from the rightwing.

its going to p1$$ a lot of people off i can pretty much guarantee that although I currently have no proof for you.        I can also guarantee that just like those who were present at the demonstrations which descended into riots, the overwhelming majority of people who will be angry at further tax takes will not be "right wing" jst normal working people struggling to make ends meet which will of course include many who voted for Mr two tier.

  In fact other than the chancellor and starmer himself I'm pretty sure only one person will be in favour of it, in fact you have probably prepared your approval statement already

  • Thanks 2
Posted (edited)
6 minutes ago, Bday Prang said:

its going to p1$$ a lot of people off i can pretty much guarantee that although I currently have no proof for you.        I can also guarantee that just like those who were present at the demonstrations which descended into riots, the overwhelming majority of people who will be angry at further tax takes will not be "right wing" jst normal working people struggling to make ends meet which will of course include many who voted for Mr two tier.

  In fact other than the chancellor and starmer himself I'm pretty sure only one person will be in favour of it, in fact you have probably prepared your approval statement already

 Never one to wait and see.

 

Fast draw on the ‘I guarantee’.

 

Edited by Chomper Higgot
  • Confused 1
Posted (edited)
37 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

He admitted his guilt

In order to receive a reduced sentence as he knew he was <deleted>   he had no other option

Edited by metisdead
You will not post vulgarities, obscenities or profanities.
  • Like 1
Posted
33 minutes ago, Bday Prang said:

In order to receive a reduced sentence as he knew he was <deleted>   he had no other option

I’ve not seen that detail in the court reports, have you?

  • Haha 1
Posted
2 hours ago, Chomper Higgot said:

I’ve not seen that detail in the court reports, have you?

As it happens no.I have never been inclined to look  but i doubt he admitted his guilt to ensure receiving a harsher sentence.   surprisingly I don't have a link to back that bit of common sense up for you

  • Agree 1
Posted

Full investigation on this coverup is needed. The massive and destructive consequences of it were plain for all to see.

 

Former prime minister Liz Truss, speaking on TalkTV, said that the materials subject to the new charges would have been found “fairly soon” after the knife attack when the suspect’s home was searched. She said she found it “extraordinary” that the Prime Minister would not have known, and that it seemed that the public had not been told the truth.

 

Even Terror law watchdog Jonathan Hall KC said:

"I would always say to the government – and do say to the government, as I say to the police – if there is information that you can give, put it in the public domain, and be really careful that you don’t fall into the trap of saying ‘we can only say zilch, because there are criminal proceedings’."

  • Like 1
  • Agree 1
Posted
8 hours ago, Bday Prang said:

As it happens no.I have never been inclined to look  but i doubt he admitted his guilt to ensure receiving a harsher sentence.   surprisingly I don't have a link to back that bit of common sense up for you

Maybe he realized he was banged to rights, the evidence presented in court certainly indicates that to be the case.

 

 

Posted
58 minutes ago, Bkk Brian said:

Full investigation on this coverup is needed. The massive and destructive consequences of it were plain for all to see.

 

Former prime minister Liz Truss, speaking on TalkTV, said that the materials subject to the new charges would have been found “fairly soon” after the knife attack when the suspect’s home was searched. She said she found it “extraordinary” that the Prime Minister would not have known, and that it seemed that the public had not been told the truth.

 

Even Terror law watchdog Jonathan Hall KC said:

"I would always say to the government – and do say to the government, as I say to the police – if there is information that you can give, put it in the public domain, and be really careful that you don’t fall into the trap of saying ‘we can only say zilch, because there are criminal proceedings’."

Alleged cover up.


Liz Truss expecting things to unfold in short order is no surprise.

 

I’m sure Hall KC understands allegations need to be backed by evidence.

Posted
6 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Alleged cover up.


Liz Truss expecting things to unfold in short order is no surprise.

 

I’m sure Hall KC understands allegations need to be backed by evidence.

Really why is it no surprise? Why do you think Hall does not understand that?

  • Like 1
Posted
27 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Maybe he realized he was banged to rights, the evidence presented in court certainly indicates that to be the case.

 

 

 

Nonsense.   Since these are not career criminals we are talking about here and most have never been in trouble before then they would have trusted the poor advice from their public "defender" and caved into the pressure of a promise of a more lenient sentence.   The only one who refused to cave in to this pressure was acquitted by a jury.  

 

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cpqd9ljgqd9o

 

The "crime" that he was wrongly arrested for, remanded in custody and then bailed with a tag, was for posting (correctly as it turns out) that a muslim had carried out the attack.   He was also pressured to plead guilty for a more lenient sentence.   Everyone currently in jail who did not commit any violence or looting should be immediately released.   Obviously it is too late for the grandfather (with no prior criminal record and committed no violence) since he is now dead because of this tyrannical government.  

  • Agree 2
Posted
12 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

?

 

I didn’t say he doesn’t understand that.

 

 

Being a senior lawyer in terrorism indeed he does understand it. So if he said it and understands it then there is a reason for it. He also said failing to do that then the void would be filled by social media which is exactly what happened. So what was your point? 

 

Why is it no surprise for you with Truss? Considering her commonsense remarks on the police finding the evidence fairly soon after?

  • Like 1
Posted
Just now, Bkk Brian said:

Being a senior lawyer in terrorism indeed he does understand it. So if he said it and understands it then there is a reason for it. He also said failing to do that then the void would be filled by social media which is exactly what happened. So what was your point? 

 

Why is it no surprise for you with Truss? Considering her commonsense remarks on the police finding the evidence fairly soon after?

Perhaps then you can provide evidence of this coverup you allege.

 

Contact your pal Hall KC if you don’t understand why allegations need evidence.

  • Confused 1
Posted
1 minute ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Back to accusations of lying I see.

 

 

They were lies. The links to Islam have now been released and they are very clear. 

 

Either you believed the lies and repeated them, or pretended to believe the lies and repeated them. That's the only 2 possibilities. 

Posted
Just now, Chomper Higgot said:

Perhaps then you can provide evidence of this coverup you allege.

 

Contact your pal Hall KC if you don’t understand why allegations need evidence.

Where did I claim that allegations do not need evidence? Why did I say an investigation is needed? Why do you thing I need to contact Hall a senior lawyer who you are now calling my mate.....😅

 

 

Posted
1 minute ago, Bkk Brian said:

Where did I claim that allegations do not need evidence? Why did I say an investigation is needed? Why do you thing I need to contact Hall a senior lawyer who you are now calling my mate.....😅

 

 

You didn’t, you made the allegation but you have no evidence.


Let’s see your evidence of the cover up you allege.

Posted
7 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

 

They were lies. The links to Islam have now been released and they are very clear. 

 

Either you believed the lies and repeated them, or pretended to believe the lies and repeated them. That's the only 2 possibilities. 

You need to look up the definition of what constitutes a lie.

 

Posted
1 minute ago, Chomper Higgot said:

You didn’t, you made the allegation but you have no evidence.


Let’s see your evidence of the cover up you allege.

I know you claimed you don't watch videos it's now clear you don't read posts

Posted
27 minutes ago, James105 said:

 

Nonsense.   Since these are not career criminals we are talking about here and most have never been in trouble before then they would have trusted the poor advice from their public "defender" and caved into the pressure of a promise of a more lenient sentence.   The only one who refused to cave in to this pressure was acquitted by a jury.  

 

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cpqd9ljgqd9o

 

The "crime" that he was wrongly arrested for, remanded in custody and then bailed with a tag, was for posting (correctly as it turns out) that a muslim had carried out the attack.   He was also pressured to plead guilty for a more lenient sentence.   Everyone currently in jail who did not commit any violence or looting should be immediately released.   Obviously it is too late for the grandfather (with no prior criminal record and committed no violence) since he is now dead because of this tyrannical government.  

I see you don’t want to talk about Wayne O'Rourke anymore.

 

A person being found not guilty is not proof that the many others found guilty were not.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.




×
×
  • Create New...