Are you a QOTWer? Do you want to start a thread that isn't a direct answer to the current QOTW? Then this place, gentle poster, is your friend.
(, Sun 1 Apr 2001, 1:00)
« Go Back | See The Full Thread
(, Mon 19 Sep 2011, 20:35, Reply)
Anyway, I think her name was Natasha Fox, and she's always going around these protests sticking her big fucking fanny in because she got the horse she really wanted growing up, or something like that.
Anyway, I was on the side of the Dale Farm people until all these fucking activists stuck their awe in, can't fucking stand them.
(, Mon 19 Sep 2011, 20:46, Reply)
but they still did it anyway. Then they bitch and whine about being turned out of their homes, as if they're being robbed of their ancient family homesteads.
(, Mon 19 Sep 2011, 20:50, Reply)
They quite like the double drop of benefits from both States
(, Mon 19 Sep 2011, 20:54, Reply)
(, Mon 19 Sep 2011, 20:58, Reply)
Not that the knackers had any credibility to begin with. I do hope mummy and daddys house in Buckinghamshire will have their driveway Tarmacadamed by their new found bredren.
(, Mon 19 Sep 2011, 20:53, Reply)
(, Mon 19 Sep 2011, 20:56, Reply)
The authors writes:
"Only 6.5% of reported rapes will result in a conviction of the attacker."
in August 2011.
This oft-quoted 'fact' comes from a misconstured AG's report from 2007-2008 and has actually led to a decrease in the number of rapes reported as people (quite understandably, if the 6.5% figure were correct) didn't think there was any point reporting it.
In actual fact the number of convictions at court is around 60%, which is very close to the average conviction rate, which frankly is quite staggering, given ultimately how hard it is to prove the requisite elements of a rape. By comparison, the lowest rate of conviction in court is (this is from memory now) Threat to kill which is around the 50% mark.
I think if you google it you can probably find the debates in the commons on Hansard where Lady Stern tears a strip off Harman and demands that the 6% figure 'never be used', as it is wrong and misleading.
Wrong and misleading, like that blog post.
(, Tue 20 Sep 2011, 9:37, Reply)
« Go Back | See The Full Thread