Jump to content
Note to existing users - password reset is required Read more... ×
Sign in to follow this  
William Darby

Looks like McNamee is happy to sit on his bum

Recommended Posts

[quote user="LeJuge"][quote user="Gene Tierney"][quote user="TIL 1010"]

[quote user="LeJuge"] he was seen waving a bottle[/quote]

He was charged with violent disorder for heavens sake.You will be saying next that anybody charged with burglary was found wandering around inside a shop that was closed for business.

[/quote]Do you reckon a perv could get away with the excuse that he only happened to be waving his penis around near a kiddies playground?[/quote]What a stupid and slightly sick analogy, likening somebody causing a bit of trouble in a riot to a peadophile. Do you know how many mature middle aged men with respectable families and decent jobs got into a spot of bother as a kid? People deserve second chances just as much as they deserve punishment. The reaction to the riots, asides from the most serious of offenders (e.g. arsonists) is ludicrious and way out of proportion. Locking people up for 6 months for stealing a £2 bottle of water is only going to further alienate the youth of today from society. Most of the kids involved were no worse than football hooligans in the seventies, and no worse than those Norwich lads who got put down for violence in Leicester, yet people were quick to glorify the hooligan mobs when they turned vigilantes in the aftermath of the first few days of trouble. Manchester United at Carrow Road anybody? Public disorder is not a new thing, it is an ancient thing. Some kids change, some kids don''t, but they are no worse than anybody else who commits a criminal offence. It''s not as if ALL of the types of crimes committed in the London riots aren''t committed in every major city every day of the week is it? When relativity is applied, it sounds as if the lad in question is a pretty minor offender in the grand scheme of things. For a start, they don''t give bail to dangerous or prolific criminals, he would have been kept on remand. Secondly, there were murders and attempted murders committed, serious acts of arson, and mass depletion of shop stock (and I''m talking about organized gangs filling vans full of iPhones). "violent disorder" is a charge which suggests no actual physical damage had been caused to humans or human property, else he would be charged with ABH, GBH, Assault, or criminal damage. That makes him, in the grand scheme of things, no worse than the kids that frequent footy grounds countrywide at 3pm each Saturday to have scuffles with the police and with opposing fans. It shouldn''t even have made news, it wouldn''t in any other week. If only you knew the stuff that happens each week that doesn''t make the paper, I was privy to those records for one particular court for some time. Christ, you lot would lose the plot if you knew what really went on week in week out. The London Riots were an inevitable eventually, a realisation of the ineffectiveness of our social policies and our inadequate police force. I can call the police force inadequate if I wish, seeing as i NEVER see any patrolling my area, and the only time that I have EVER had to call them they didn''t bother turning up and three hours later I was in hospital. No point in getting tough on crime now, the damage is already done, and we can all expect more riots. [/quote]They''re all as ****ing bad as each other you muppet.  All the rioters share responsibility for the murder of those young men. All the rioters share responsibility of the act of arson.  All the rioters share responsibility for terrorising the streets.  As far as I''m concerned they''re all delinquent tosspots, and people who try and defend are the same. Why? because you never hear of personal responsibility, just lame excuses blaming everything else except the knuckle draggers themselves. Plus violent disorder is a group threatening violence, which causes the public to be fearful... FFS

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="LeJuge"][quote user="諾維奇城"]I get the impression AM is more interested in his music than football at the moment by looking at his facebook page...[/quote]Lot''s of people have interests away from their day job, otherwise what kind of life would we all be living? They are footballers, not catholic priests! We can assume that your interest out of work is searching for people that you don''t know on Facebook? Are you more interested in facebook than your job by any chance? [/quote]

I was just pointing out that maybe he has fallen out of love with game a little, happens to alot of footballers, im probably wrong but no need to get abusive about it. So based on the fact im freinds with AM on Facebook makes me a stalker? Well by looking at your posts and the amount you have made in recent months your an over opinionated TW@T!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Lets put the riot talk to one side.

McNamee is doing something he truely believes in. I admire him for it. I don''t think he has been to public with it, so again not going for a good PR. But believes he can offer something for the individual that with the parents and groups with interest can be of good to the individual.

Fair play to him, now yes I would rather he was looking for a club. But we''ll see, still think those palyers that do not go on loan or at least move this year will not be offered contracts the year after. It is a very competitive industry where those fringe players in the championship all the way down have to work hard to get work, in fact former prem players do to, j lloyd samuel etc.

As always the strength of player power is at the very high end, the Lampards etc. once you are a championship player you do have some clout but there are always new boys coming through or europe where we can pick up players.

A career could be soon very similar to that of an American Footballer who is training kids at a summer camp and then get a one year contract at the league minimum to return to professional sports.

In fact some have been known to be wroking in supermarkets and then getting a call about playing in the nfl. Our footballers have to be aware they can be thrown off this cart very easily and unless they have a back up they will be struggling without a career or very poor job prospects.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
LeJuge I''ve agreed with most of your points on here and was pretty gobsmacked when you came out with that in reply to my post. in no way have a I ever criticised McNamee for anything from his footballing ability to his fitness. I was merely posting a link in a thread based on him. I actually rated McNamee, all he lacked was consistency and maybe could be a bit more direct IMO. and now your speculating about my social status? assuming something about me that you''d like to believe so you think your superior to me. I''m a 16 year old Norwich fan and of course I''m going to have a little look at McNamee''s facebook as he''s a professional footballer which I look up to and am interested in finding out more about our players. why do you think footballers have so many followers on twitter? because people are interested in their personal lives as fans. so I guess looking at Rio Ferdinand''s twitter is stalking him and being nosey. McNamee accepts all friend requests so if he didn''t want me looking at anything on his facebook he wouldn''t accept fans. you give me a paragraph criticising me, I''ll give one back. I stick up for the guy above with his name in Asian. he was only saying that he may be more interested in music atm, he wasn''t going into a rant about what he should or shouldn''t be doing. and in fact I have 900 friends on facebook all of which I know from childhood up until the end of high school. so stop being arrogant and find out a little bit more about peopls before assuming they are something they''re not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Gene Tierney"]


http://www.metro.co.uk/news/872690-norwich-citys-anthony-mcnamee-houses-brixton-riots-suspect

Looks like he intends on stating here...

[/quote]

 

He played a part in last season, is still considered a fringe player and is employed by the club with a contract so he''s entitled to get paid just like anyone else is.

How can people slag down  our own players in such a nasty way is beyond me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I support every player for our team. From Holt to Steven Smith. one thing that irritates me is when our own fans verbally abuse a player for doing something wrong. I heard De Laet get called a tw*t on sat. what kind of support is that?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Mrs Tierney"]LeJuge I''ve agreed with most of your points on here and was pretty gobsmacked when you came out with that in reply to my post. in no way have a I ever criticised McNamee for anything from his footballing ability to his fitness. I was merely posting a link in a thread based on him. I actually rated McNamee, all he lacked was consistency and maybe could be a bit more direct IMO. and now your speculating about my social status? assuming something about me that you''d like to believe so you think your superior to me. I''m a 16 year old Norwich fan and of course I''m going to have a little look at McNamee''s facebook as he''s a professional footballer which I look up to and am interested in finding out more about our players. why do you think footballers have so many followers on twitter? because people are interested in their personal lives as fans. so I guess looking at Rio Ferdinand''s twitter is stalking him and being nosey. McNamee accepts all friend requests so if he didn''t want me looking at anything on his facebook he wouldn''t accept fans. you give me a paragraph criticising me, I''ll give one back. I stick up for the guy above with his name in Asian. he was only saying that he may be more interested in music atm, he wasn''t going into a rant about what he should or shouldn''t be doing. and in fact I have 900 friends on facebook all of which I know from childhood up until the end of high school. so stop being arrogant and find out a little bit more about peopls before assuming they are something they''re not.[/quote]"I''ve agreed with most of your points on here"If you agree with most of my posts on here, assuming you mean this thread, then you wouldn''t be posting pictures of McNamees belly... because I''m telling people to get off of his back. If you mean on the Pink Un general, then so what? You can agree with my posts on one thread and not on another, we don''t have to pick people to cling to, I even agree with Smudger occassionally. It makes sense that you are 16. When I was 16 the media and the public in general had a lot more respect for those with minor celebrity status, we live in the days of phone hacking, facebook being used routinely as a spying tool, the likes of Perez Hilton, and upskirt shots. Commenting on somebodies physical appearance reminds me precisely of that, the diet and looks obsessed material world of celebrity magazines."Why do you think footballers have so many followers on twitter?"In order to reply to this, I had a little search for McNamee on Facebook. First time I have ever searched for a footballer on there. It turns out that his profile is private. Twitter on the other hand is not private. If he has choosen not to allow the entire web on his facebook profile, then he doesn''t want his personal stuff shared to the world, and one would assume that includes photos. "I guess looking at Rio Ferdinand''s twitter is stalking him and being nosey"No, because Twitter does not have privacy options. You have been accepted as McNamees friend, and then breached trust, by posting private stuff publicly. People can choose to make their fb stuff visible to the WHOLE world, or to a limited group of people. He has choosen to make it public to a limited group of people, including you. To be precise, you are allowed a maximum of 5000 followers on fb. It''s nice that he allowed a young kid access, it says a lot about the man. It says a lot about the young kid if he starts sharing his images to the world. The 17 year old is only a year older than you, again, it says a lot about the man.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="諾維奇城"][quote user="LeJuge"][quote user="諾維奇城"]I get the impression AM is more interested in his music than football at the moment by looking at his facebook page...[/quote]Lot''s of people have interests away from their day job, otherwise what kind of life would we all be living? They are footballers, not catholic priests! We can assume that your interest out of work is searching for people that you don''t know on Facebook? Are you more interested in facebook than your job by any chance? [/quote]

I was just pointing out that maybe he has fallen out of love with game a little, happens to alot of footballers, im probably wrong but no need to get abusive about it. So based on the fact im freinds with AM on Facebook makes me a stalker? Well by looking at your posts and the amount you have made in recent months your an over opinionated TW@T!!![/quote]If you are friends with him on Facebook then why not ASK him if he has fallen out of love with the game. The idea that somebody can''t be into two things at once is ludicrious, Dion Dublin didn''t seem to have fallen out of love with the game whilst he was inventing a percussion instrument did he? Matt Gill is doing alright, despite owning half a tennis club?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Gene Tierney"][quote user="LeJuge"][quote user="Gene Tierney"][quote user="TIL 1010"]

[quote user="LeJuge"] he was seen waving a bottle[/quote]

He was charged with violent disorder for heavens sake.You will be saying next that anybody charged with burglary was found wandering around inside a shop that was closed for business.

[/quote]Do you reckon a perv could get away with the excuse that he only happened to be waving his penis around near a kiddies playground?[/quote]What a stupid and slightly sick analogy, likening somebody causing a bit of trouble in a riot to a peadophile. Do you know how many mature middle aged men with respectable families and decent jobs got into a spot of bother as a kid? People deserve second chances just as much as they deserve punishment. The reaction to the riots, asides from the most serious of offenders (e.g. arsonists) is ludicrious and way out of proportion. Locking people up for 6 months for stealing a £2 bottle of water is only going to further alienate the youth of today from society. Most of the kids involved were no worse than football hooligans in the seventies, and no worse than those Norwich lads who got put down for violence in Leicester, yet people were quick to glorify the hooligan mobs when they turned vigilantes in the aftermath of the first few days of trouble. Manchester United at Carrow Road anybody? Public disorder is not a new thing, it is an ancient thing. Some kids change, some kids don''t, but they are no worse than anybody else who commits a criminal offence. It''s not as if ALL of the types of crimes committed in the London riots aren''t committed in every major city every day of the week is it? When relativity is applied, it sounds as if the lad in question is a pretty minor offender in the grand scheme of things. For a start, they don''t give bail to dangerous or prolific criminals, he would have been kept on remand. Secondly, there were murders and attempted murders committed, serious acts of arson, and mass depletion of shop stock (and I''m talking about organized gangs filling vans full of iPhones). "violent disorder" is a charge which suggests no actual physical damage had been caused to humans or human property, else he would be charged with ABH, GBH, Assault, or criminal damage. That makes him, in the grand scheme of things, no worse than the kids that frequent footy grounds countrywide at 3pm each Saturday to have scuffles with the police and with opposing fans. It shouldn''t even have made news, it wouldn''t in any other week. If only you knew the stuff that happens each week that doesn''t make the paper, I was privy to those records for one particular court for some time. Christ, you lot would lose the plot if you knew what really went on week in week out. The London Riots were an inevitable eventually, a realisation of the ineffectiveness of our social policies and our inadequate police force. I can call the police force inadequate if I wish, seeing as i NEVER see any patrolling my area, and the only time that I have EVER had to call them they didn''t bother turning up and three hours later I was in hospital. No point in getting tough on crime now, the damage is already done, and we can all expect more riots. [/quote]They''re all as ****ing bad as each other you muppet.  All the rioters share responsibility for the murder of those young men. All the rioters share responsibility of the act of arson.  All the rioters share responsibility for terrorising the streets.  As far as I''m concerned they''re all delinquent tosspots, and people who try and defend are the same. Why? because you never hear of personal responsibility, just lame excuses blaming everything else except the knuckle draggers themselves. Plus violent disorder is a group threatening violence, which causes the public to be fearful... FFS[/quote]What complete tosh. All of the rioters should share responsibility for murder and arson? What a complete load of crap you talk. When somebody dies on Prince of Wales Road after a punch to the head, should all 8000 drinkers share responsibility for that? What a complete load of carp.  Complete rubbish.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="cityangel"][quote user="Gene Tierney"]

http://www.metro.co.uk/news/872690-norwich-citys-anthony-mcnamee-houses-brixton-riots-suspectLooks like he intends on stating here...[/quote]

 

He played a part in last season, is still considered a fringe player and is employed by the club with a contract so he''s entitled to get paid just like anyone else is.

How can people slag down  our own players in such a nasty way is beyond me.

[/quote]Well said, we got promoted as a squad not as an XI.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="smooth"]Lets put the riot talk to one side.

McNamee is doing something he truely believes in. I admire him for it. I don''t think he has been to public with it, so again not going for a good PR. But believes he can offer something for the individual that with the parents and groups with interest can be of good to the individual.

Fair play to him, now yes I would rather he was looking for a club. But we''ll see, still think those palyers that do not go on loan or at least move this year will not be offered contracts the year after. It is a very competitive industry where those fringe players in the championship all the way down have to work hard to get work, in fact former prem players do to, j lloyd samuel etc.

As always the strength of player power is at the very high end, the Lampards etc. once you are a championship player you do have some clout but there are always new boys coming through or europe where we can pick up players.

A career could be soon very similar to that of an American Footballer who is training kids at a summer camp and then get a one year contract at the league minimum to return to professional sports.

In fact some have been known to be wroking in supermarkets and then getting a call about playing in the nfl. Our footballers have to be aware they can be thrown off this cart very easily and unless they have a back up they will be struggling without a career or very poor job prospects.[/quote]Agree with your sentiment there, it''s a short career at best, plenty of players quit at 21/22, and these days whilst it is more likely that a footy player is in good physical condition in his mid thirties, he has to get the contracts! Look at Simon Whaley, playing at pretty much Wroxham level now in front of a couple of hundred fans. I reckon McNamee would have no trouble getting a deal in League 1 to be honest, but nobody can blame him for taking his time finding the right move whilst he is on decent money. He would be a good player for a League 1 team, he was for us.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Mrs Tierney"]I support every player for our team. From Holt to Steven Smith. one thing that irritates me is when our own fans verbally abuse a player for doing something wrong. I heard De Laet get called a tw*t on sat. what kind of support is that?[/quote]You will always get that, and always will.To be fair, some of it was justified in the Roeder days and the end of the Worthington days. I was happy to give Fotheringham some stick, and Carl Robinson didn''t often seem to break a sweat. But we have just won two successive promotions, some people will never be happy. I seem to remember Greeno sticking his fingers up at the Riverend once too, before never playing again because of the inevitable stick he would have got. Steven Smith is a slightly different proposition, he has actually cost us money and forced us into having three senior left backs in the squad.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Norfolk Mustard"]

Some think McNamnee doing is somehow doing a ''good deed''?

I don''t agree.

The lad our footballer is harbouring is an alledged thug. Let him stand trial and if proven guilty take his punishment - just like all the rest of the disruptive little s**** who were just waiting for an excuse to behave like they did.

Yes, MacNamee can have who he wants in his house; but Norwich fans are paying for it. Unlike the lad who appears to be somewhat averse to paying for things he took a fancy to. Allegedly.

 

 

[/quote]

You quite obviously don''t understand what the word ''harbour'' means. How is he harbouring him when authorities have placed the kid with him?

And you''re not paying for it, Macnamee is. Do you consider the money in your bank account to be yours or is it still the property of the employer you earned it from? Some people .... honestly [:|]  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Why is this thread even still on the board?If a thread about any ''alleged'' crime relating to a footballer is posted it is deleted promptly for fear of libel or putting a case in jeopardy. Does one rule apply to those with money, and another rule apply to those without?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="macdougalls perm"][quote user="Norfolk Mustard"]

Some think McNamnee doing is somehow doing a ''good deed''?

I don''t agree.

The lad our footballer is harbouring is an alledged thug. Let him stand trial and if proven guilty take his punishment - just like all the rest of the disruptive little s**** who were just waiting for an excuse to behave like they did.

Yes, MacNamee can have who he wants in his house; but Norwich fans are paying for it. Unlike the lad who appears to be somewhat averse to paying for things he took a fancy to. Allegedly.

 

 

[/quote]

You quite obviously don''t understand what the word ''harbour'' means. How is he harbouring him when authorities have placed the kid with him?

And you''re not paying for it, Macnamee is. Do you consider the money in your bank account to be yours or is it still the property of the employer you earned it from? Some people .... honestly [:|]  

[/quote]Don''t worry about it, we have already ascertained that this thread is populated by 16 year olds, whilst we know that there are plenty of Daily Mail readers around. I suspect that Norfolk Mustard was a regular News of the World customer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="CaptnCanary"]Perhaps McNamee needed a partner to play on his PS3 with - Grand Theft Auto maybe?[/quote]Just cause they''re black doesn''t mean they''re gonna be good at GTA.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="hogesar"][quote user="CaptnCanary"]Perhaps McNamee needed a partner to play on his PS3 with - Grand Theft Auto maybe?[/quote]Just cause they''re black doesn''t mean they''re gonna be good at GTA.[/quote]I despair!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="NWC"][quote user="hogesar"][quote user="CaptnCanary"]Perhaps McNamee needed a partner to play on his PS3 with - Grand Theft Auto maybe?[/quote]Just cause they''re black doesn''t mean they''re gonna be good at GTA.[/quote]I despair!! [/quote][:D]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="LeJuge"][quote user="Gene Tierney"][quote user="LeJuge"][quote user="Gene Tierney"][quote user="TIL 1010"]

[quote user="LeJuge"] he was seen waving a bottle[/quote]

He was charged with violent disorder for heavens sake.You will be saying next that anybody charged with burglary was found wandering around inside a shop that was closed for business.

[/quote]Do you reckon a perv could get away with the excuse that he only happened to be waving his penis around near a kiddies playground?[/quote]What a stupid and slightly sick analogy, likening somebody causing a bit of trouble in a riot to a peadophile. Do you know how many mature middle aged men with respectable families and decent jobs got into a spot of bother as a kid? People deserve second chances just as much as they deserve punishment. The reaction to the riots, asides from the most serious of offenders (e.g. arsonists) is ludicrious and way out of proportion. Locking people up for 6 months for stealing a £2 bottle of water is only going to further alienate the youth of today from society. Most of the kids involved were no worse than football hooligans in the seventies, and no worse than those Norwich lads who got put down for violence in Leicester, yet people were quick to glorify the hooligan mobs when they turned vigilantes in the aftermath of the first few days of trouble. Manchester United at Carrow Road anybody? Public disorder is not a new thing, it is an ancient thing. Some kids change, some kids don''t, but they are no worse than anybody else who commits a criminal offence. It''s not as if ALL of the types of crimes committed in the London riots aren''t committed in every major city every day of the week is it? When relativity is applied, it sounds as if the lad in question is a pretty minor offender in the grand scheme of things. For a start, they don''t give bail to dangerous or prolific criminals, he would have been kept on remand. Secondly, there were murders and attempted murders committed, serious acts of arson, and mass depletion of shop stock (and I''m talking about organized gangs filling vans full of iPhones). "violent disorder" is a charge which suggests no actual physical damage had been caused to humans or human property, else he would be charged with ABH, GBH, Assault, or criminal damage. That makes him, in the grand scheme of things, no worse than the kids that frequent footy grounds countrywide at 3pm each Saturday to have scuffles with the police and with opposing fans. It shouldn''t even have made news, it wouldn''t in any other week. If only you knew the stuff that happens each week that doesn''t make the paper, I was privy to those records for one particular court for some time. Christ, you lot would lose the plot if you knew what really went on week in week out. The London Riots were an inevitable eventually, a realisation of the ineffectiveness of our social policies and our inadequate police force. I can call the police force inadequate if I wish, seeing as i NEVER see any patrolling my area, and the only time that I have EVER had to call them they didn''t bother turning up and three hours later I was in hospital. No point in getting tough on crime now, the damage is already done, and we can all expect more riots. [/quote]They''re all as ****ing bad as each other you muppet.  All the rioters share responsibility for the murder of those young men. All the rioters share responsibility of the act of arson.  All the rioters share responsibility for terrorising the streets.  As far as I''m concerned they''re all delinquent tosspots, and people who try and defend are the same. Why? because you never hear of personal responsibility, just lame excuses blaming everything else except the knuckle draggers themselves. Plus violent disorder is a group threatening violence, which causes the public to be fearful... FFS[/quote]What complete tosh. All of the rioters should share responsibility for murder and arson? What a complete load of crap you talk. When somebody dies on Prince of Wales Road after a punch to the head, should all 8000 drinkers share responsibility for that? What a complete load of carp.  Complete rubbish. [/quote]Deeerrrrrrrrrr[8-)] 8000 drinkers aren''t breaking the law.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="cityangel"][quote user="Gene Tierney"]

http://www.metro.co.uk/news/872690-norwich-citys-anthony-mcnamee-houses-brixton-riots-suspectLooks like he intends on stating here...[/quote]

 

He played a part in last season, is still considered a fringe player and is employed by the club with a contract so he''s entitled to get paid just like anyone else is.

How can people slag down  our own players in such a nasty way is beyond me.

[/quote]In what way is saying it looks like he intends to sit on his bum slagging him down?  Jeez there''s no sentiment in football you know.  Say for instance we had a high number of players we had to shift (12 or so) in order to get new ones in.  And they all said we''ll stay put cos we''re entitled.  Yeah, sure they are, but it''d put a different complexion on the situation if Lambert said we couldn''t sign anybody cos nobody wants to move on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
"All the rioters share responsibility for the murder of those young men"

It has not been proven yet that it was murder

It has not been proven that those that caused the death were rioters (by the nature of riot, people driving a car tend not to be viewed as rioters).

How far does your bizarre theory of common purpose extend ?

Because if taken to it''s logical conclusion all contributors to this forum ''share responsibility'' for your disturbing and rather unhinged ramblings.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mcnamee has a contract with the club and can dovas he please,his lodger is on bail because we have a justice system that is in the main fair and people are allowed to air their opinions on the matter on this forum...I hate this "facist" state!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="Arthur Wizard"]Mcnamee has a contract with the club and can dovas he please,his lodger is on bail because we have a justice system that is in the main fair and people are allowed to air their opinions on the matter on this forum...I hate this "facist" state![/quote]

I know AW, it''s so bad here that the foreign nationals amongst the rioters (over 10% of those charged) only caused trouble so that they could be deported from this Facist State.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="City1st"]"All the rioters share responsibility for the murder of those young men"

It has not been proven yet that it was murder

It has not been proven that those that caused the death were rioters (by the nature of riot, people driving a car tend not to be viewed as rioters).

How far does your bizarre theory of common purpose extend ?

Because if taken to it''s logical conclusion all contributors to this forum ''share responsibility'' for your disturbing and rather unhinged ramblings.[/quote]No you pedantic bone head. It''s perfectly simple.  All the knuckle heads that over the course the the few days that chose to join in the criminal activity all share responsibility, because they all chose to be sheep and follow each other.If you and anybody else think that opinion is disturbing and unhinged I really feel sorry for you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It is unhinged.

Your rants are not based on any reasoned understanding of law as it is held by other ''pedants''. Parliament, the police and the judiciary

Disturbing because you seem to believe that trial by the use of evidence and the presumption of innocence until proven guilty, do not apply in this country, nor should they.

If you have no wish for the law of the land to be applicable - why should others ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="City1st"]It is unhinged.

Your rants are not based on any reasoned understanding of law as it is held by other ''pedants''. Parliament, the police and the judiciary

Disturbing because you seem to believe that trial by the use of evidence and the presumption of innocence until proven guilty, do not apply in this country, nor should they.

If you have no wish for the law of the land to be applicable - why should others ?[/quote]What the hell are you babbling on about?  You seem to be talking out of your arse again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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
Sign in to follow this  

×