Caporegime
- Joined
- 30 Jul 2013
- Posts
- 30,438
Last edited:
Russell Brand.
- Thread starter Von Smallhausen
- Start date
That guy seems a couple of Andrew Tate podcasts away from stabbing his girlfriend.
Last edited:
Podcasts can make you stab someone?!?
Soldato
- Joined
- 23 May 2006
- Posts
- 8,986
i think people who are already of a certain disposition can be brainwashed to do things they perhaps otherwise would not do (Andrew Tate and social media is not really any different to certain "preachers" who radicalise people to do all sorts of crazy things). That said i suspect jigger was being (slightly) deliberately OTT for effect.
Last edited:
Depends are you a top G?
Well, it was joke. But it seems to have stirred up feelz.
Soldato
- Joined
- 23 May 2006
- Posts
- 8,986
everyone deserves a fair trial, but if they are guilty they also should face the justice they deserve as well.
Last edited:
If that's a serious question then yes, everyone deserves a fair trial. Otherwise how can we know whether they are actually guilty of the alleged crime and it's not a mistake, false allegation or whatever?
Depends, do they look like a nonce?
Taking that point at face value, some people have had their life made a misery by the media because they look a bit odd and happen to be in the wrong place. Fortunately it doesn't usually go as far as mob justice in the UK (although there was a completely unjustified lynching in Bristol a few years back) and the police/legal system will hopefully exclude them from enquiries as the investigation progresses.
I'm the first G I'd say
Which is my point in support of yours really. It's why we need trials and not guilt by media.
Hmm, probably best to avoid podcasts if unsure.
Yes, but not at any cost. People do need to be protected and that requires being informed of potential dangers.
Soldato
- Joined
- 23 May 2006
- Posts
- 8,986
i accept it is a difficult one and respect others who disagree... but i feel, shall we say uncomfortable with the status quo at the moment.
That a person could accuse me of rape and i could have my name plastered all over the place, whilst the alleged victim is anonymous does not sit right with me (i would almost rather be accused of murder i think than rape such is the social stigma).
either it should be everyone is named (which i dont agree with) or no one is named, which i agree may not be perfect but i think is the lesser of 2 evils, and it is up to the judge then to deem if i am a risk to "the people" and if i am i should not get bail (but then trials should not take for ever to come up in that case)......
I do know 1 person who was accused of rape btw... .and whilst he did turn out to be a bit of an asshat for other reasons, he was not a rapist and ultimately the girl who accused him (also a friend of mine at the time) later admitted it was not true and she ended up getting psychiatric help.
The main issue i have is long gone are the days where our media and news is actually used for reporting news for the public good. its all about shock value and gas lighting now... and social media just dials up the bonkers even more! and when it is real lives being affected, sometimes people not proven of any crime that does not really sit right with me, even if ultimately eventually the accused sometimes do turn out to be wronguns.
I know some people - certainly some on this forum! - think the law was heavy handed on those spreading lies and FUD on social media trying to incite violence a few months back (because freedom of speech) ..... I am not sure where i sit on that to be honest BUT i do know words can have very real consequences and in general freedom of speech does not mean freedom of responsibility.
Last edited:
I kind of feel the same way. In fact I heard another headline today about a Snooker player who's been accused of pretty much the worst crimes possible. Again, we have accusations by anonymous now presuambly ~30 year old individuals for historical crimes commited around 20 years ago. Obviously if he's guilty then we'd all happy cheer as he's thrown under the bus. However, once again on the basis of anonymous allegations he's had his reputation destroyed, his career and ability to work suspeneded for at least year and it's something he may never recover from even if proven innocent.
I can understand the reasons for it but something about this whole process just seems fundamentally wrong when we have the media reporting on crimes like this for essentially clicks, headlines and advertising revenue yet they haven't been proven and the accusers are completely left out of any reports regardless of the outcome.
"Unconfortable" is the word I'd use to describe how justice is being carried out as it seems utterly one-sided and frankly unfair on those who are "accused" of these crimes before it's even gone to trial. Particularly when one party is completely anonmyous and suffers no negative impact in the event the case isn't proven and the suspect is found innocent.
Likewise. I think the reason being if you're accused of murder and found innocent people tend to believe the verdict. Whereas if you're found innocent of the accusation of sexual assault you're often seen as having "gotten away with it" and many will still view you as though you were guilty regardless of the verdict. The accusation alone is basically enough to destroy your reputation and guarantuee you'll never work again. Particularly as you presumably can't provide any details/circumstances about the case or accused after the verdict in an attempt to clear your name. That's why the anonymity aspect concerns me as it utterly removes your abiility to defend yourself in the media before and even after the trial.
Last edited:
Associate
- Joined
- 15 Mar 2024
- Posts
- 104
- Location
- Bristol
Are you talking about poor old Edward Colston?
Anyway, trail by media has to be once of the worst traits of todays society... An example, Andrew Tate (btw I am not a fan of his, to this day he has not been convicted of any crime) but was not that long ago being tarnished in the media by Huw Edwards, look how that ended!!
We still have a high number of people who believe anything the media tell them. Which is why this crazy "trail by media" exists. Everyone is entitled to a fair trail, and should be treated as innocent till proven guilty.
No, Bijan Ebrahimi. His neighbours harassed him for years and accused him of being a pedophile. The police did nothing to stop them (even when an angry mob gathered) so people got the impression they could take the law into their own hands, even though he had never been charged with a crime. The authorities finally took notice in 2013 after his neighbours beat him to death and set his body on fire.
Seven years of abuse and discrimination, the horrific story of Bijan Ebrahimi
Step by step, year by year, Bijan Ebrahimi was the victim of sustained hate crime, but the police simply didn't believe him
No, Bijan Ebrahimi. His neighbours harassed him for years and accused him of being a pedophile. The police did nothing to stop them (even when an angry mob gathered) so people got the impression they could take the law into their own hands, even though he had never been charged with a crime. The authorities finally took notice in 2013 after his neighbours beat him to death and set his body on fire.
Seven years of abuse and discrimination, the horrific story of Bijan Ebrahimi
Step by step, year by year, Bijan Ebrahimi was the victim of sustained hate crime, but the police simply didn't believe himwww.bristolpost.co.uk
I remember that, may have posted about it on here. Horrible. Complete failure of the authorities.