MrSmith

I didn't force you to make the statement that prompted my response and you didn't have to respond to my response. This is after all a discussion forum, not sure what you expect to happen when you express your opinion on it. I don't have an opinion either way because I'm not privy to all the evidence.

How can I be wrong, I know what I think and I don't think what you and several other members think I think, therefor you have all formed the same incorrect conclusion and all created a memory of something I didn't say, and in doing so proved the point I made several pages ago. No, what I have done is demonstrate that you are wrong in your assertion that a guilty plea means the person must have committed the crime.

No it isn't, as demonstrated by this topic, several of you all share the same false memory. ---------- Post added 21-06-2013 at 16:18 ---------- No idea what you are talking about, just to clarify, I haven't tried to defend anyone, therefor I haven't put any effort into defending anyone.

I also heard this, so either we both have stupid minds and good imaginations or he actually went.

Private landlords supply accommodation which usually more expensive than buying. Renting a home is now more expensive than buying – even though most would-be purchasers are unable to get on the property ladder. According to new research buying a home has become £1,440 a year cheaper than renting.

I haven't put any effort into trying to disprove a crime. I accept that because people are all unique some will misinterpret what they see and what they ear, some will create memories of things they didn't see or ear which its quite normal for us humans.

They wouldn't, hence the government might want to look into incentivising them through substantial tax brakes.

So not definitely a fact then, which is what I've been saying and everyone else as been disagreeing with. I have not excused sexually abusive behavior.

That's also a possibility, its possible to believe with 100% certainty that you didn't do something that you actually did.

Since they are memories and I am adult. Here's another example for you, recently we have been viewing properties, we have looked at several properties over several months, my memory of each house is different to my wife's memory of each house, she remembers thing that I don't and I remember things that she doesn't, when we discuss the house we often disagree on which room belong to which house despite both looking at the houses at the same time and in the same order. This is the problem with memory, it can easily combine two completely separate events into one coherent event. ---------- Post added 21-06-2013 at 10:11 ---------- Complete fiction created in your mind, you might even believe what you have typed despite it being complete nonsense. More evidence that the mind can and does get facts and fiction mixed into one memory.

Its a proven fact and can easily be demonstrated, it only takes few seconds to create a memory of something you didn't see, read or do. Its very unlikely that a memory from decades ago can be proved to be accurate or inaccurate, what evidence would you expect to find? I have memories from my child hood that are apparently inaccurate, I remember doing things that I am told I didn't do, there are also apparently things that I did that I have no memory of doing. Again this demonstrates how you personal prejudice is clouding your views and leading you to an incorrect conclusion.

The government are currently borrowing money, some of that money is given in the form of housing benefits to landlords, the tax payer pays for something but gets sod all in return, so diverting that borrowed money to house building would be a better use of it. The housing benefits some people get is enough to buy an house, so you get builders to build houses and the government buys them with the money they are dishing out in housing benefits.

In areas that people need to or want to live, many of the empty properties are in areas of high unemployment, the only way to bring them into use is increase employment in those areas or move long term unemployed from other areas into them.

Again your problem is how you have interpreted the information, this is the very problem I have been highlighting, you are reading my posts and then your emotions, bias and prejudices are inserting information that isn't on the page, which leads you to the wrong conclusion. ---------- Post added 21-06-2013 at 07:16 ---------- Its very apparent you are incapable of understanding the point, we will just have to agree to disagree. ---------- Post added 21-06-2013 at 07:17 ---------- :loopy::loopy:

Right to buy could have been better if covenants had been put onto the properties, so they could only be sold to first time buyers on low incomes and must be owner occupied, with the sale at 75% market value.

This post proves the point I have made, you have created a false memory of something I haven’t typed, it will be based on your own prejudices and bias. This is the problem when relying on memory to recall events of the past, it’s not always an accurate recollection, your error is just over a couple of hours just imagine the potential error when trying to recall events from decades ago.

That would require me to ignore the alternative possibilities, but because I'm not driven by emotion I can take them into consideration.

An emotional bias is a distortion in cognition and decision making due to emotional factors.

No I am not, that’s just an emotional responds based on your bias, you are clearly to emotional to discuss this topic with any degree of reason.

c)Hall may or may not be one of them.

I’m not clutching at straws; all I have done is presented an alternative possibility to the assertion that because Hall pleaded guilty he must have committed the crimes he is accused of.

No it doesn't, I have already provided you with the reason why some innocent people plead guilty, but sadly you can’t accept them because of your obvious emotional bias. ---------- Post added 20-06-2013 at 20:46 ---------- No it isn't, that's just your interpretation of the words I have typed, and your interpretation is based on your emotional bias.

I haven't suggested they are lying, that just in your head, you are letting your emotions run riot with common sense.

I'm not the one in the hole, I proved my point a while back.

I imagine it's also common sense every time an innocent person is charged and convicted based of corroborating evidence from multiple witnesses, even though several years later it is proved that they were infact inocent allalong. Makes you wonder how they got it wrong so many times when its just commen sense.