Also in the News - Part 2

[foxile5]

13 minutes ago, MPH said:

 

I don’t think he was defending a rapist, I took at it as more of a ‘ they’re all at it” kind of thing..

No no no I know.

 

I mean objecting to government ministers calling for vengeance before he's found guilty. It's a dangerous precedent.

[Daggers]

1 hour ago, foxile5 said:

For clarity - Brand, if guilty, should be punished. But not before due process. People should be up in arms at the attempt by government to circumnavigate due process. Even if the accused is, by another standard, is guilty they should still have the right to presumed legal innocence. Without that the system walks into chaos and it opens the door wider to further abuse.

He admits it in verified texts.

 

There are documented medical records from the rape centre following the event.

 

You don’t need 12 good men and true to pronounce his innocence or guilt, you just need to use your intelligence to appraise the evidence that is in the public domain.

 

Brand is guilty. Brand said he was guilty. To fvck around with “due process” is a mockery and a fop to the misogynist society we live in. You do your mother, sisters and daughters a disservice by arguing to the contrary.

 

”The system” was designed by men for the benefit of men. If knocking that down invites chaos then bring it the fvck on.

[foxile5]

7 minutes ago, Daggers said:

He admits it in verified texts.

 

There are documented medical records from the rape centre following the event.

 

You don’t need 12 good men and true to pronounce his innocence or guilt, you just need to use your intelligence to appraise the evidence that is in the public domain.

 

Brand is guilty. Brand said he was guilty. To fvck around with “due process” is a mockery and a fop to the misogynist society we live in. You do your mother, sisters and daughters a disservice by arguing to the contrary.

 

”The system” was designed by men for the benefit of men. If knocking that down invites chaos then bring it the fvck on.

I'm not arguing that he shouldn't be punished. We just shouldn't use an example of obvious guilt for ministers to start the process of manipulating the system.

 

He's guilty. He will be found guilty. He will be punished. 

 

That is a totally different issue and one that I entirely agree with you on.

 

It shouldn't be an opportunity for those in charge to start manipulating the system. This is  a tactic for future abuse of power. 

 

I do not disagree on his guilt nor his odious character.

[Daggers]

48 minutes ago, foxile5 said:

I'm not arguing that he shouldn't be punished. We just shouldn't use an example of obvious guilt for ministers to start the process of manipulating the system.

 

He's guilty. He will be found guilty. He will be punished. 

 

That is a totally different issue and one that I entirely agree with you on.

 

It shouldn't be an opportunity for those in charge to start manipulating the system. This is  a tactic for future abuse of power. 

 

I do not disagree on his guilt nor his odious character.

Yes. Agreed. MPs and members of the upper house should not be seen to be attempting to influence businesses - they should be doing that without anyone asking them to. 

[TamworthFoxes]

9 hours ago, foxile5 said:

I'm not arguing that he shouldn't be punished. We just shouldn't use an example of obvious guilt for ministers to start the process of manipulating the system.

 

He's guilty. He will be found guilty. He will be punished. 

 

That is a totally different issue and one that I entirely agree with you on.

 

It shouldn't be an opportunity for those in charge to start manipulating the system. This is  a tactic for future abuse of power. 

 

I do not disagree on his guilt nor his odious character.

I very much doubt Brand will be found guilty of anything in a court of law.

The difficulty of getting convictions for rape and sexual offences is well documented.

Mendy got a not guilty for numerous allegations of rape which were far more recent.

It would be interesting to see of the tiny % of rapes that lead to a conviction (not a charge from CPS), how many are due to the defendant (rapist) actually going guilty and admitting the offence.

[fox_up_north]

Sadly, I agree. Things like paedophilia and having child abuse images are much easier to convict because you just present the computer evidence. 

 

At the end of the day, it comes down to how good a solicitor is at convincing 2-3 people that their client is not guilty (crucial wording). This is made easier when a lot of the evidence is, effectively, one word against others.

 

Such is the problem with sexual assault and rape convictions.

[Tommy G]

21 hours ago, Greg2607 said:

I'm going to get @Tommy G a job at my place and transform his thinking about WFH. lol. 

You know full well that’s going to cost you big bucks Greg 

[kyleolly]

13 hours ago, Daggers said:

He admits it in verified texts.

 

There are documented medical records from the rape centre following the event.

 

You don’t need 12 good men and true to pronounce his innocence or guilt, you just need to use your intelligence to appraise the evidence that is in the public domain.

 

Brand is guilty. Brand said he was guilty. To fvck around with “due process” is a mockery and a fop to the misogynist society we live in. You do your mother, sisters and daughters a disservice by arguing to the contrary.

 

”The system” was designed by men for the benefit of men. If knocking that down invites chaos then bring it the fvck on.

Verified by who?

[Tommy G]

44 minutes ago, kyleolly said:

Verified by who?

Exactly. Brand may or may not be guilty - either way because we live in society where our criminal justice system, although far from perfect, allows people to be put on trial for their alleged crimes, rather than getting their head chopped off in places like Saudi Arabia. 
 

I personally think Brand is a pillock, but you don’t just chuck him in jail to rot without going through the justice system. 
 

The truth will come out eventually. 

[leicsmac]

18 minutes ago, Tommy G said:

Exactly. Brand may or may not be guilty - either way because we live in society where our criminal justice system, although far from perfect, allows people to be put on trial for their alleged crimes, rather than getting their head chopped off in places like Saudi Arabia. 
 

I personally think Brand is a pillock, but you don’t just chuck him in jail to rot without going through the justice system. 
 

The truth will come out eventually. 

Maybe. Or perhaps it won't. I'm prepared to bet there is a whole load of such offences that have gone unreported and undisclosed for a long time, because of the sensitive nature of them and the difficulty to obtaining truly actionable evidence.

 

Still, I guess that's the price for the justice system we have and it's the way it should be.

 

However, as others have pointed out, social consequences are a rather different sphere to that with a different burden of proof, and that's the way that should be too.

[BKLFox]

Whilst we argue if Brand should be tried through the courts or over some social platform i see that the tax payer will foot the no doubt over inflated bill for Daniel Khalife's 4 week trial starting 13th November to see if he is guilty of breaking out of prison or not...omfd

[Sampson]

27 minutes ago, BKLFox said:

Whilst we argue if Brand should be tried through the courts or over some social platform i see that the tax payer will foot the no doubt over inflated bill for Daniel Khalife's 4 week trial starting 13th November to see if he is guilty of breaking out of prison or not...omfd

Of course the public sector should offer fair trials to all, of course the tax payers should foot the bill to all, and that includes Khalife. What kind of country do you want to live in that doesn’t offer this?
 

The right to a fair trial should be absolute. As should be the right to a publicly funded lawyer or legal expert. 

Once you make a single exception then you’ve created a new case law and legal loophole which is there for eternity allowing the government to prosecute and lock up whoever they like without trial. 
 

If you want to live in a society based on rules and laws that apply to individuals and protect them against people who break these laws to their harm rather than the whims of dictators or monarchs to do what they like to other individuals then I don’t see how you can possibly be annoyed by this.
 

Edited 22 September 2023 by Sampson

[BKLFox]

6 minutes ago, Sampson said:

Of course the public sector should offer fair trials to all, of course the tax payers should foot the bill to all, and that includes Khalife. What kind of country do you want to live in that doesn’t offer this?
 

The right to a fair trial should be absolute. As should be the right to a publicly funded lawyer or legal expert. 

Once you make a single exception then you’ve created a new case law and legal loophole which is there for eternity allowing the government to prosecute and lock up whoever they like without trial. 
 

If you want to live in a society based on rules and laws that apply to individuals rather than the whims of dictators or monarchs to do what they like to other individuals then I don’t see how you can possibly be annoyed by this.
 

i was being ironic, social media has convicted Brand of the allegations on the bases of he said she said (this is not to water down the seriousness of the allegations) but no one saying that he is guilty or not guilty has anything to base their assumption on, yet here we have a man linked to terrorism that has strapped himself to the bottom of a truck, left the facility of his incarceration, went on the run for 3 days & now entitled to a costly trial because he said he didn't do it, 4 weeks this is set for, that's going to take some serious Sky Sports pre match / Ideal world shopping waffle to fill this case out but he's entitled to it..

 

But as we are here, someone said early that the justice system needs a revamp & it certainly does, the world moves on yet laws written decades ago stand still (this is not just about those 2 instances) everything should be looked at & kept up to date from the justice system to council tax & everything inbetween, as most is no longer fit for purpose in the changing world.

Take the highlighting of the Imprisonment for Public Protection (IPP) didn't have a clue what it was until we hear that Danny Weatherson served 18yrs for something he "might' have done in the future" after receiving a 15th month sentence for being found guilty of 'attempting' to rob a jacket & phone.
Ok he might have been a complete 'a'hole but how do you convict someone for something they might do in the future, where does that fit into fair & just?
He has served more time for something he 'might' have done than people who have actually killed??

 

We could go on, is it fair for an innocent person to only have the 1 chance of appeal to prove innocence before potentially spending the rest of their life behind bars, regardless of advances in forensics or new evidence that could then prove that persons innocence just because it was written way back when that you should have 1 chance of appeal.

[String fellow]

An anagram of 'Russell Brand' is 'blurs slander', which is what he seems to be doing with the allegations being made against him. 

[Parafox]

18 hours ago, Daggers said:

He admits it in verified texts.

 

There are documented medical records from the rape centre following the event.

 

You don’t need 12 good men and true to pronounce his innocence or guilt, you just need to use your intelligence to appraise the evidence that is in the public domain.

 

Brand is guilty. Brand said he was guilty. To fvck around with “due process” is a mockery and a fop to the misogynist society we live in. You do your mother, sisters and daughters a disservice by arguing to the contrary.

 

”The system” was designed by men for the benefit of men. If knocking that down invites chaos then bring it the fvck on.

 

18 hours ago, foxile5 said:

I'm not arguing that he shouldn't be punished. We just shouldn't use an example of obvious guilt for ministers to start the process of manipulating the system.

 

He's guilty. He will be found guilty. He will be punished. 

 

That is a totally different issue and one that I entirely agree with you on.

 

It shouldn't be an opportunity for those in charge to start manipulating the system. This is  a tactic for future abuse of power. 

 

I do not disagree on his guilt nor his odious character.

When's the trial, then?

[Steve_Guppy_Left_Foot]

What I don't get about all this russel brand stuff is why now? It's always been obvious he's a wrong un. It can't be to deflect and distract people from something else? 

[Daggers]

Just now, Steve_Guppy_Left_Foot said:

What I don't get about all this russel brand stuff is why now? It's always been obvious he's a wrong un. It can't be to deflect and distract people from something else? 

Because it takes time to gather evidence and conduct interviews

[Dunge]

1 hour ago, Steve_Guppy_Left_Foot said:

What I don't get about all this russel brand stuff is why now? It's always been obvious he's a wrong un. It can't be to deflect and distract people from something else? 

Why not now? Why any time?

Imagine the furore if a prominent anti-vaxxer was being pulled for this at the height of the pandemic. It’s actually a relatively neutral time for it to happen.

[Steve_Guppy_Left_Foot]

1 hour ago, Dunge said:

Why not now? Why any time?

Imagine the furore if a prominent anti-vaxxer was being pulled for this at the height of the pandemic. It’s actually a relatively neutral time for it to happen.

I get that, I'm not meaning to sound controversial, I just think they sit on these things, the press, and release them at a certain time for a certain reason. 

[String fellow]

With the surname Brand, there's probably plenty of scope for limericks to be written about him. This is my feeble attempt, but I'd love to read any others out lurking there....

There once was a fellow called Brand,

Who oft took his manhood in hand,

Then showed it to ladies,

In order to make babies,

But things did not work out as planned!

[fox_up_north]

6 hours ago, Steve_Guppy_Left_Foot said:

I get that, I'm not meaning to sound controversial, I just think they sit on these things, the press, and release them at a certain time for a certain reason. 

Lawyers, that's why. 

 

As noted - he's employed a top, top legal team. Having been a journalist, putting investigations together like this that can stand up to legal scrutiny takes time. 

 

There's also the issue that sex crimes are very different to other types of crime, in that admitting you've been a victim of them is much more difficult. Even before we get to the idea of questioning the validity of the victims, they themselves have to both realise and accept they've been victims before they're able to act.

 

Saville or Cosby are absolutely perfect examples of this. Would you go to any of their victims and ask them "why did you wait to so long?" 

 

Sadly, rape is one of the easiest crimes to get away with and one of the factors is because victims may not even want to state they've been a victim. A friend is a PTSD specialist and sex attacks require a completely different approach than any other form of PTSD. 

[The Year Of The Fox]

Tories now on about pulling out of phase 2 of HS2 😂😂😂

 

Now I’ve been a Tory voter since after the 2005 GE where I voted Labour, so I’m not aligned against them in the slightest.
 

But here’s another ridiculous idea from them now under serious consideration to be pulled. 
 

What a circus. Not that I’d blame Sunak again, I’d blame the idiot who came up with the idea in the first place. Just like the 2030 green energy nonsense also pulled this week 

 

Get Labour in ASAP ffs

Edited 24 September 2023 by The Year Of The Fox

[leicsmac]

2 minutes ago, The Year Of The Fox said:

Tories now on about pulling out of phase 2 of HS2 😂😂😂

 

Now I’ve been a Tory voter since after the 2005 GE where I voted Labour, so I’m not aligned against them in the slightest.
 

But here’s another ridiculous idea from them now under serious consideration to be pulled. 
 

What a circus. Not that I’d blame Sunak again, I’d blame the idiot who came up with the idea in the first place. Just like the 2030 green energy nonsense also pulled this week 

 

Get Labour in ASAP ffs

Honestly, when it comes to both public transport infrastructure projects and entirely necessary energy and environmental policy, other countries that might be considered peers of the UK make it look rather silly.

 

So yes, change of government please.

[The Year Of The Fox]

21 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

Honestly, when it comes to both public transport infrastructure projects and entirely necessary energy and environmental policy, other countries that might be considered peers of the UK make it look rather silly.

 

So yes, change of government please.

Would be much better off putting all these billions of £££s into the rail system we do have. Making the trains punctual, subsidising rail tickets, if using public transport is so important 

 

I mean, a London-Manchester train fare must be already over £100. It’ll probably be triple that to use the HS2 line. 
 

Put some of the money into the Ivanhoe railway line. I think coalville is the second largest town in the country that doesn’t have a train station.

[Zear0]

29 minutes ago, The Year Of The Fox said:

Tories now on about pulling out of phase 2 of HS2 😂😂😂

 

Now I’ve been a Tory voter since after the 2005 GE where I voted Labour, so I’m not aligned against them in the slightest.
 

But here’s another ridiculous idea from them now under serious consideration to be pulled. 
 

What a circus. Not that I’d blame Sunak again, I’d blame the idiot who came up with the idea in the first place. Just like the 2030 green energy nonsense also pulled this week 

 

Get Labour in ASAP ffs

Quite extraordinary that that's not even the low point within the last 24 hours for me. Leaked memo saying abolish inheritance tax as the population are too thick to understand it won't affect 96% of them was quite a read. Bit agnostic on the policy of it, more the absolute contempt they have for us unwashed.