Are you a proponent of Diplock courts?
Tearing down statues
- Thread starter siezar
- Start date
Are you a proponent of Diplock courts?
Ah the famous - I won't give homeless people money because they'll spend it on drugs and drink.........
......coincidentally exactly what I plan on spending it on
Quite a few years back now my wife offered a beggar sitting by an ATM in Rathbone Place off Oxford Street W.1 £8 worth of Luncheon Vouchers, he’d told her to stick them up her ****, perhaps he’d just had lunch?
I don’t think that he was starving, but I don’t know for sure, and I’m inclined to believe that he might have been an alcoholic rather than a junkie, but I have no idea really.
Gimme a break, which one of Robin Hood’s Men are you?
Oh for sure. What you are alluding to though, is that the letter of law should always be followed to the dot.
So in your ideal world it would still be a jailable offence to be gay.
Maybe he was after a show? Don't be kink shaming
I have dealt with this asinine point already.
Laws outlawing homosexuality are in and of themselves not justifiable because they target a certain group of society only and in a way that is not objectively fair or necessary.
Criminal Damage laws apply universally to all people and there's nothing intrinsically unfair about the criminal damage act of 1971.
If juries cannot apply just laws because they wish to allow their own prejudices to guide verdicts then maybe jury trials are not appropriate for certain cases.
theres a school of thought that for certain types of case juries shouldn’t be involved. Though generally heavy fraud cases tend to be the most frequently cited case type.
the whole point of juries is that they bring their own collective judgment to the table. Some jurors clearly pay attention and follow closely, some fall asleep, some don’t really understand. Some will vote green, some will be racist, some have very traditional views. Others just want to leave ASAP and will pressure a verdict. It is precisely what you’d expect with 12 random members of society.
I think the only example which might please the anti jury posters is having a system like Jersey of Jurat which are professional juries in essence.
I can generally get sympathetic to doing away with juries when we are talking long and conplex fraud trials. Otherwise no.
But then aren't we simply baking unfairness and inconsistency into the system?
Maybe that's good for lawyers/practitioners (it would be naïve of me to assume self-interest never plays a part).
If the same trial could go to two different juries and get two different outcomes, then are we a just society?
And I, yours.
So we have what's known as an impasse. This is also why we have jurys.
I think that’s just a part of it that’s accepted. Sometimes you’ll win cases unexpectedly and others you’ll know you won’t get much sympathy.
Unless robots determine things (there were proposals for this for small claims trials) then the human condition will always play some part.
Edit: there is always litigation risk, even in so called strong cases.
Soldato
- Joined
- 25 Nov 2005
- Posts
- 12,666
There is if you're an easily offended anarchist
You live in your parents basement?
If so you are the one of kind of people who purchases the Onlyfans content the girls I shoot with are making…
If so this is making it all the more hilarious that you’ve admitted you don’t have the intelligence to follow along with the arguments that multiple people have tried to explain to you.
I like that you think I’m a leader, I can assure you I’m not, I just like exposing statue shaggers.
The people who patronise you are the ones with more money than sense. I can assure you I'm not among their number.
In any case, as a self-confessed high-IQ intellectual, how has being a rent boy provided you the mental stimulation you require?
I think I’ve already explained that what I do and have done has never been rentboying if you go by it’s actual definition.
I don’t think I’ve ever mentioned IQ, but it’s ok, we know you’ve admitted you are a bit simple and that you get confused, but are you really asking me how performing with women or taking them to Torture Garden / Verboten, mainly ones who are so attractive people pay to see photos of them, message them on the internet or their used clothing, is stimulating? Jesus wept man, stay in your dads basement, if you can’t figure that one out maybe don’t try and weigh in or argue with people who have managed to move out of their parents house.
Going by some recent posts in this thread, it might actually be the prostitutes.
@hurfdurf You saying things and me quoting them is not the same as me saying things. I know you think your word is law, and your opinion is the ultimate authority, but really, you shouldn't start ascribing your views to other people, just because they've quoted you.
People quote you to disagree with you, and the act of quoting does not indicate agreement. Glad I could help.
And I know you say you perform with women, but since we already know you think men are women, and that these men are hotter than 99% of women (things you've actually said before), then I'm simply going to assume you perform with men. You can call them women if you like, but you aren't fooling many.
People quote you to disagree with you, and the act of quoting does not indicate agreement. Glad I could help.
And I know you say you perform with women, but since we already know you think men are women, and that these men are hotter than 99% of women (things you've actually said before), then I'm simply going to assume you perform with men. You can call them women if you like, but you aren't fooling many.
