MrSmith

Go private, you'll get the scan the next day

My advice too, it took the NHS two years to sort my other half’s knee, by which time she had developed a back problem, five years on and she still not getting any joy with the NHS, she is now seeing a private physio and her back is improving rapidly.

But there's no argument, he didn't go to trial and was found guilty, he ADMITTED the charges of his own free will.

 

Why are you persistently taking this round the houses? It does nothing for the victims of these assaults and it's only their interests that concern me.

He wasn't found guilty, he pleaded guilty and you keep ignoring the fact he may have pleaded guilty for reasons other than guilt.

Many people that claim to be innocent plead guilty of lesser charges to avoid going to court where there is always the possibility of being found guilty, despite not being guilty.

I've no idea, I didn't see the evidence, what false memories are you appending to the victim statements?

I'm just suggesting a possible alternative to your insistence that he must have abused them because he pleaded guilty, he might have abuse them, he might not have abused them, he might not remember anything at all, the victims might be remembering being abused despite not being abused.

I've no idea it's not something I've ever contemplated.

 

Yes there will be similarities, but as far as the police are concerned the features of interest will be the ones unique to a particular offender and when they hear those accounts from different people they know a jury will be likely to believe them.

 

Hall would not have plead guilty unless there was a feature of his offending behaviour that was of the smoking gun variety that his defence would have struggled to overcome.

What is this unique feature you speak of.

Not very patriotic of you MrSmith. The government failed in their duty of care to provide safe transport for our troops and will pay the price for it. If soldiers are going to get themselves blown to bits at least get them into the field of battle first

War is a messy business and its not always possible to afford troops the best possible protection, clearly the best way to protect them is to not go to war, when I joined up I understood the risks and accepted them as part of the job.

But as I said not all the detail of his offending style and behaviour is in the public domain.

By challenging the account in court..it's not rocket science. If I said something about you and it went to court I'd be expected to provide a three dimensional account of my allegation against you, not something I dreamt up on the back of a fag packet.

 

Really? How do you suppose a 'false memory' fills in the gaps of an indecent assault allegation if the facts were never known to the witness?

How many different ways do you think one can sexually abuse someone, read the press and there are any number of cases of sexual abuse, they all have similarities despite being different victims and different abusers.

For all of you who always moan about the HRA and call for it to be abolished, here's a case that was brought by the families of dead British soldiers who can now pursue damages against the British government..all because of the Human Rights Act.

 

"Families of soldiers killed in Iraq can pursue damages against the government, the Supreme Court has ruled.

 

Legal action was brought by relatives of three men killed by roadside bombs while in Snatch Land Rovers and another killed while in a Challenger tank.

 

The judges ruled the families could make damages claims under human rights legislation and sue for negligence.

 

The defence secretary has said the ruling could make it "more difficult for troops to carry out operations".

 

The ruling comes after a lengthy legal battle and previous judgements by the High Court and the Court of Appeal."

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-22967853

 

Wonder what Nick Griffin and Nigel Farage, outspoken critics of the HRA have to say about this.

Another idiotic ruling, its time the human rights act was scrapped.

Well obviously if they're all victims of him abusing them then they will have encountered him in the past! But just meeting him would not give them knowledge of his offending behaviour unless he assaulted them.

 

Also don't forget for all the foolish scenarios you keep producing, Hall had a defence team that's seen it all and would devour inept, coerced or false witnesses.

Or they are all people that encountered him in the past have because of media coverage have formed false memories of being abused by him.

---------- Post added 19-06-2013 at 18:09 ----------

Also don't forget for all the foolish scenarios you keep producing, Hall had a defence team that's seen it all and would devour inept, coerced or false witnesses.

How would they set about proving a memory from many years ago is false.

Much easier to plee bargain and get him a lighter charge.

That's why the witnesses should be independent to each other. The police also won't release all the information to the press relating to the offences, but you can imagine the light bulbs will come on when a number of compelling witnesses start disclosing the same information that was hitherto unknown..what would you think if you were a member of a jury hearing their accounts?

The witnesses could all be linked in the fact they all met Stuart Hall at some point in the past, all got reasonably close to him and all read the same information relating to other cases in which celebrates abused people. The brain then fills in the blanks.

Indeed and if they're false they won't be corroborated by other victims statements.

Its possible for many people to form the same or very similar false memories.

Let's say you've just witnessed a crime, later, you talk to other witnesses and read the news coverage about it. The police ask you leading questions. Each of these acts has the potential to alter the information you initially stored in your brain. If another witness mentions the criminal's blue jacket, you may very well work that jacket into your own recollection. Likewise, a suggestive question such as "Did you see the man's gun?" could make you believe you observed him brandishing such a weapon even if you didn't

Those figures don't mean much, what are you trying to say?

The figures are saying that unemployment is lower in many countries with higher rates of home ownership than the UK.

Singapore unemployment is 1.9%, home ownership is 90.1%

Russia unemployment is 6.4% home ownership is 84.7%

Mexico unemployment is 5.12% home ownership is 84%

Norway unemployment is 3.0% home ownership is 77%

Brazil unemployment is 4.7% home ownership is 74%

United Kingdom unemployment 7.9% home ownership is 69%

Wrong, God spoke to many men.

Its a pity God didn't give them all the same information, maybe if it had there would have been fewer wars. I'll put my money on them all being loonies.

People are regularly convicted on eye witness testimony alone-if 10 people saw you shoot somebody, you'll be going to prison, DNA and other forensic evidence merely gilds the lily! So if 10 (independent) people claim, with total clarity, certainty and tell the same story about Hall's offending behaviour then it's likely to be believed by a jury.

 

The passage of time is only relevant because it might dull the memory ie result in fewer prosecutions, it doesn't mean a jury are going to make any concessions in that respect.

 

So cases of this nature are harder to bring to court, not easier. Hall plead guilty because he is GUILTY of the charges laid against him, he isn't sort of guilty because he fell on his sword due to a spurious rape allegation hanging over him.

 

 

 

 

So you believe he was guilty of the rape allegation?

Or create false memories, its very common to have memories of events that didn't happen.

This is great!

 

Simon Parkes, Labour Councillor, Says 'Sex With An Alien Is Causing Problems In My Marriage' http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2013/06/18/labour-councillor-simon-parkes-sex-alien-marriage-_n_3458236.html?utm_hp_ref=tw

 

What other claims by councillors / MPs can come close to the loonacy of this?

Billions of people believe God spoke to a man and aliens are substantially more likely than a God. So maybe aliens spoke to a man and are now bonking a man. Or billions of people are loonies.

Is it me or are the above few posts blank ?

It's you, they are clearly not blank.

Again sorry I can't be bothered

I'm not bothered that you can't be bothered ... but it's very cool that I've discovered invisibility mode!

That word, "discovered", I do not think it means what you think it means

(I discovered invisibility mode first!)

Oh great, yet another thread descends into accusations of invisibilism being thrown around like confetti.

Which is exactly the reason why the good people of Rotherham voted the BNP back in again.

 

Oh, hang on a sec... they didn't

He couldn't have been reelected because he didn't stand, the abuse he had to endure was intolerable.

Ah, yes... "The real world." ...in which infants of both sexes have their genitalia mutilated, 4 year old girls get forced into marriage to old men, girls can be shot in the head for daring to go to school, older girls can have acid thrown over them for showing a little flesh (...one imam has suggested only one eye should show through the slit in the 'pillar box' outfits as 2 eyes would be too tempting for men...), women who are raped can be stoned to death for having extra marital sex (or forced to marry the rapists), a woman's word is worth only half that of a man in a court, the punishment for apostacy is death, etc., etc., etc.

 

That "real world"? Or are you perhaps wearing rose tinted spectacles, maybe?

 

That little list is by no means comprehensive, and it's only concerned with treatment of other muslims. I'll run through some of the treatment reserved for non-muslims (and the 'wrong type' of muslim) if you like.

 

That is the real world.

Ah but Muslims that do those things aren't real Muslims, so there's nothing to worry about. Not sure what they are, but definitely not Muslims.

The people aren't worried about the BNP; it's the gravy-train riding career politicians who are afraid of losing their seats that are afraid of the BNP.

 

What did the BNP do when they had a couple of seats in Rotherham?

 

Other than take that cheating scumbag MP Macshane down... not much. Still the BNP deserve some credit for that

One of them did what he was elected to do, which was considerably more than the useless tool that held the seat before him.

who's worried?

they have no power, never will

So would you vote for them since they are nothing to worry about and in your opinion are exactly the same as the main parties.

Labour MPs worried about the rise of the British National Party (BNP) are setting up a parallel campaign organisation because they fear their own party is not doing enough to counter the far-Right.

complete and utter tripe, the bnp only tell it as it is as they're jealous, they'd be exactly the same as the big boys but will never get into power

Right, so you think the BNP would do everything the same as the main parties if they got into power, makes you wonder why people worry about them doesn't it?

Can't see anything being said that most of us don't already know. Councils are out of control, and do not give two hoots about the people that pay their wages.

Me neither, councils use our money like toilet paper, they flush great wads of it down the carsy.

All the parties including the Tories at times used to work hard for working people. The Tories used to have a solid working class vote, not unwarranted.

 

The game has changed now. None of them care. As a former Labour supporter I don't think I could be any more angry about what they have become. I hate them.

If you want the main parties to change, vote BNP.

I doubt anyone that votes BNP actually wants them to form a government, I doubt Nick Griffin wants to form a government, my guess is the BNP just want change and will disappear once that change arrives.

Just looking for abit of advice,

My wife has been suffering with really bad sciatica and it doesnt seem to be easing. Does anyone know of any treatment or methods to ease the pain, as we are going away in a few weeks and I don't want her to be in pain.

 

Thank You

To start, don't waste your time with the NHS, they are useless, after 3 years of pain and many many visits to the hospital quacks, my wife went to a private physiotherapist, and with a combination of acupuncture and mobilisations over six weeks the pain had gone and she can once again bend over and touch her toes.

How quickly things change, last week we were concerned about edl etc etc, this week we hear of the increasing polarisation if the different strands of Islam suni and shia. Is this outrage between these factions?

 

Do they use the same Mosques?

At least 96% of Muslims in Britain, and approximately 1520 or 96% of masjids or mosques, are Sunni, and about 2% are Shi’a, with 67 masjids.