IamChiChi

Thanks for that, Corker. For some reason, it completely misses out that channel, and it won't let me go to it by typing the number in. I will be giving Virgin a call. I seriously thought that it had just been taken off Virgin.

As surprising as this may be, I am a lecturer.

I wasn't referring to the enjoyment. I was referring to the need for visual stimuli to paint a clear picture of what has happened for me.

Wait wait, It's on Virgin Media? What channel? I have a feeling I have been robbed. I have the full Virgin package

It is a perfectly valid analogy. I was comparing the fact that both sport and the story are real events. And in order for me to get a true picture of both events in my mind, I would need visual stimuli. I was not comparing the actual act. Surely you understand this?

I think you actually raise some good points. I clearly don't see things the same as more 'normal' people do, just differently. Different doesn't = wrong though. So I fully take on board your learning disabilty comment. The differnce between me and the Bulger killers, is that my curiosity doesn't harm anyone, and neither would I want to.

I will be watching it online just like Corker.

Enquiring about a video is hardly going out of ones way.

Of course I can read a novel in its textual form. When reading a novel, you can rely on your own imagination to interpret it however you want When there is a news story, your own interpretation and/or imagination is not factual. I would rather see a goal on match of the day, rather than read about it.

Are those that continue to watch, 'sick'?

Someone that understands. Thank you. I fully realise that my curiosity is a lot higher than the norm. That doesn't make me sick. It merely means that I have a higher cut off point when it comes to what I don't mind seeing. Also, I am very much a person that understands more via visual stimuli. I find it much harder to grasp a story through textual means alone.

You come into this thread making out that I have said things which I clearly haven't, yet I'm the one taking the thread off topic? I'm not too sure how you work that one out, darlin'.

I never said they did. Another ridiculous claim, sunshine.

Are you Muslim?

No, because I haven't made such a claim, son.

Can you link me to the source for these statistics?

I saw that. On the 3 @ Three programme. Was pretty interesting.

I'm from Leicester.

Awful merge.

Ruby Dizzle pulls again. This seems to be a common theme.

What kind of hair does he have?

I know, that's why I was saying it was a problem. I doubt most parents would question the validity of their daughter saying she had been raped. This includes parents who agree with being a vigilante.

The problem here, is that when it comse to your own family. You don't need proof. If someones daughter had been raped and then tells one of their parents (the ones who support vigilantiism), that parent is hardly likely to ask their daughter for proof. They will take it as given that she is telling the truth.

As bad as some of my experiences have been, I actually do agree with this. In fact I would say Sheffield as a while is relatively safe to walk through at night, no matter what part. There are no ghettos in Sheffield.

This is similar to my view on it. If someone hurt my a child of mine in certain ways, I would more than likely seek to do harm to that person. The difference though, is that I know what I am doing is wrong. I don't think it can be justified, understood yes, but not justified.