Foot in Mouth Syndrome II
Have you ever said something and wished the ground would open up and swallow you? Tell us your tales of social embarrassment.
Thanks to BraynDedd for the suggestion
( , Thu 16 Aug 2012, 14:12)
Have you ever said something and wished the ground would open up and swallow you? Tell us your tales of social embarrassment.
Thanks to BraynDedd for the suggestion
( , Thu 16 Aug 2012, 14:12)
« Go Back | See The Full Thread
Let's face it, he's looks like the sort doesn't he?
A proper 'Supermatt' going on there.
( , Tue 21 Aug 2012, 13:45, closed)
A proper 'Supermatt' going on there.
( , Tue 21 Aug 2012, 13:45, closed)
I can't find any flaws
in any of the zero references you provided.
( , Tue 21 Aug 2012, 14:07, closed)
in any of the zero references you provided.
( , Tue 21 Aug 2012, 14:07, closed)
He isn't helped by looking and sounding and acting like a creepy rapist
I'm sure the jury will look kindly on Julian though
( , Tue 21 Aug 2012, 14:12, closed)
I'm sure the jury will look kindly on Julian though
( , Tue 21 Aug 2012, 14:12, closed)
The court transcripts are freely available. Google them.
His legal defence against extradition (or one of them) was that what he did, while it consitutes assault and rape in Sweden, it doesn't in the UK. This was shown to be demonstrably wrong at every level of UK legal process. It is very clearly rape to have sex with someone when they are not in a position to consent.
The purpose of questioning and a trial would be to decide if there is enough grounds to believe he thought he had prior consent (if he did, he's merely a fucking creepy cunt, becuase having sex with someone who isn't conscious is a pretty disturbing thing to do) or if he didn't have prior consent, in which case he's a rapist. It's pretty simple.
( , Tue 21 Aug 2012, 14:40, closed)
His legal defence against extradition (or one of them) was that what he did, while it consitutes assault and rape in Sweden, it doesn't in the UK. This was shown to be demonstrably wrong at every level of UK legal process. It is very clearly rape to have sex with someone when they are not in a position to consent.
The purpose of questioning and a trial would be to decide if there is enough grounds to believe he thought he had prior consent (if he did, he's merely a fucking creepy cunt, becuase having sex with someone who isn't conscious is a pretty disturbing thing to do) or if he didn't have prior consent, in which case he's a rapist. It's pretty simple.
( , Tue 21 Aug 2012, 14:40, closed)
It's a flaw in the post
since the post was a defence against me pointing out you have no references.
"Google them" isn't a reference. It's not up to anyone else to find out whether there's information that supports what you're saying.
You have no references for what you're saying.
( , Tue 21 Aug 2012, 16:00, closed)
since the post was a defence against me pointing out you have no references.
"Google them" isn't a reference. It's not up to anyone else to find out whether there's information that supports what you're saying.
You have no references for what you're saying.
( , Tue 21 Aug 2012, 16:00, closed)
no, it was an instruction
Why the sweet fuck should I waste my precious time? You've provided no reference to your tinfoil hatted idiocy that he's at risk of extradition to the US, either.
In any case, my post wasn't to provide references to back up B_D, it was to provide more depth of information, to clarify the point. If you don't believe it, fine, suit yourself, but don't whine when your bollocks is shot down on here, eh?
Magistrates court
high court
supreme court
( , Tue 21 Aug 2012, 16:08, closed)
Why the sweet fuck should I waste my precious time? You've provided no reference to your tinfoil hatted idiocy that he's at risk of extradition to the US, either.
In any case, my post wasn't to provide references to back up B_D, it was to provide more depth of information, to clarify the point. If you don't believe it, fine, suit yourself, but don't whine when your bollocks is shot down on here, eh?
Magistrates court
high court
supreme court
( , Tue 21 Aug 2012, 16:08, closed)
This is the most piss weak argument I've ever seen.
You're just floundering now because you know that ten seconds on Google will prove you wrong.
( , Tue 21 Aug 2012, 16:09, closed)
You're just floundering now because you know that ten seconds on Google will prove you wrong.
( , Tue 21 Aug 2012, 16:09, closed)
« Go Back | See The Full Thread