Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
Just now, Lighthouse said:

That article only goes to prove how difficult it is get a conviction for rape, not that the Police aren’t trying. Your own article says itself - 40% of cases are dropped because the victim doesn’t support prosecution and very often refuses to hand over their phone. I completely get that; why a victim would feel ashamed and not want anyone to invade her privacy after what she’s been through, but how do you think it’d look in court? The defence lawyer would just stand up and say, "they had a consensual relationship and had been dating for some time etc." The prosecution would refuse to provide any evidence otherwise and the trial would be over.

Yep. It only needs a bit of doubt around consent (assuming he's bang to rights on having sex with her). It's not humane, or in the interests of justice, to put the woman through the ordeal of giving evidence if its likely that the jury are likely to have doubt. For that reason, many cases don't get to the stage of charge, or if they do, result in an acquittal or the case is withdrawn. 

 

 

Posted
8 minutes ago, SKD said:

Mostly in the Middle East (Along with LGBT issues). Yet you never see these ‘feminists’ protesting about their human rights do you. In fact you often see them waving Palestine flags. Laughable and hypocritical. 

I highly doubt that. On what basis are you making the claim that the middle east has the biggest problem with sexual crime? If I had to guess it would be be 'Catholic' South America or Southern Africa - also not known for its Islamic fundamentalism  

Posted
1 minute ago, buctootim said:

I highly doubt that. On what basis are you making the claim that the middle east has the biggest problem with sexual crime? If I had to guess it would be be 'Catholic' South America or Southern Africa - also not known for its Islamic fundamentalism  

Utterly pointless discussion really. If you think the UK has problems with sexual crimes going unreported, I can’t imagine what it’s like in either devout Muslim or Catholic countries. Anyway, it’s not a competition; both of those religions have an appealing record when it comes to treatment of women.

Posted
8 minutes ago, buctootim said:

Unlike almost every other crime which hinges on whether or not something took place  - theft, murder, fraud, criminal damage whatever rape hinges not on the act but on consent. By nature there are rarely witnesses so it becomes her word against his - almost zero chance of 'beyond reasonable doubt'. Few women are going to want to go through a trial with those odds.  

How do you suggest you change that? Serious question? I don’t know the answer. It’s very tricky ground. 

Posted
5 minutes ago, buctootim said:

I highly doubt that. On what basis are you making the claim that the middle east has the biggest problem with sexual crime? If I had to guess it would be be 'Catholic' South America or Southern Africa - also not known for its Islamic fundamentalism  

Just pointing out the completely hypocritical nonsense that comes out of these ‘female rights’ mouths. 

I’m sure both are as bad as one another, regardless, the UK isn’t anywhere near them. So what are the protests for? 

Posted

Lie 1 - we all had masks on 

Lie 2 - it was a silent vigil

Lie 3 - the police kettled us and made social distancing impossible 

 

Posted
1 minute ago, SKD said:

How do you suggest you change that? Serious question? I don’t know the answer. It’s very tricky ground. 

No idea. It's a real problem very smart lawyers and civil servants have tinkered with for years. Everybody knows too many rapists are getting away with it, but reducing the burden of proof isnt the answer either.  I do think there might be a problem with sentencing though. Date rape where both had been intimate before and were pissed should be treated very differently to stranger attacks   

Posted (edited)

The thread is about how useless Dick is in regard to doing her job, which is preventing crime and protecting the public, who pay her inflated and undeserved salary. She seems to think the police force is about policing the public to make sure we are all obeying the law by the use of force in that regard.

Her decision to deploy the Met in the way she did to attempt the dispersal of a peaceful vigil, in respect to a young women, allegedly killed by one of her own force, just shows why her judgement led to the killing of de Menezes, as the officer directly in charge that morning. She's toast and it's long overdue. She'll be gone by the end of next week.

Edited by Guided Missile
Posted
10 minutes ago, Guided Missile said:

The thread is about how useless Dick is in regard to doing her job, which is preventing crime and protecting the public

Is that based on your long experience in senior police operations? Or just vacuous nonsense blaming a lesbian Police Chief for a rape and murder? 

Posted
17 minutes ago, RedArmy said:

Lie 1 - we all had masks on 

Lie 2 - it was a silent vigil

Lie 3 - the police kettled us and made social distancing impossible 

 

Is this one of those times like when you get a few eejits in a crowd of 50,000 at a football match filmed for TV news and you get upset that its not typical or representative? 

Posted
29 minutes ago, Guided Missile said:

The thread is about how useless Dick is in regard to doing her job, which is preventing crime and protecting the public, who pay her inflated and undeserved salary. 

It was but it has progressed with people applying logic and context which your posts lack.

Dick didn't make this bloke kill that woman. Dick couldn't have prevented it. Dick can't stop another loon killing a woman. 

You're barking up the wrong tree. 

 

Posted
4 minutes ago, egg said:

It was but it has progressed with people applying logic and context which your posts lack.

Dick didn't make this bloke kill that woman. Dick couldn't have prevented it. Dick can't stop another loon killing a woman. 

You're barking up the wrong tree. 

 

The force she runs hired that loon and failed to act when he flashed his todger in a fast food restaurant. She was gold commander when De Menezez was killed. I think you'll find I'm far from the only dog barking up this particular tree.

Posted
10 minutes ago, egg said:

It was but it has progressed with people applying logic and context which your posts lack.

Dick didn't make this bloke kill that woman. Dick couldn't have prevented it. Dick can't stop another loon killing a woman. 

You're barking up the wrong tree. 

 

Dick had nothing to do with Opration Midland either, but the OP claimed she did. GM, as usual, clueless and posting bollox.

Posted
2 minutes ago, Guided Missile said:

The force she runs hired that loon and failed to act when he flashed his todger in a fast food restaurant. She was gold commander when De Menezez was killed. I think you'll find I'm far from the only dog barking up this particular tree.

Bad shit and mistakes happen, it's a fact of life. Doesn't make change at the top necessary. 

  • Like 1
Posted
17 minutes ago, egg said:

Bad shit and mistakes happen, it's a fact of life. Doesn't make change at the top necessary. 

She's going to resign next week, mate and your post is a steaming dog turd.

Posted
5 minutes ago, Guided Missile said:

She's going to resign next week, mate and your post is a steaming dog turd.

Such a well reasoned post.

😂😂

Posted (edited)
9 minutes ago, Guided Missile said:

As in "Bad shit and mistakes happen"? 

They do.  "In March 2015, IARC classified glyphosate as “probably carcinogenic to humans” (Group 2A)" Linked to childhood leukaemia amongst other things.  You remember, that stuff you berated the EU for controlling use of.  Shall I blame you for peddling it?  

 

https://www.iarc.who.int/featured-news/media-centre-iarc-news-glyphosate/

https://www.npr.org/2019/05/13/723056453/california-jury-awards-2-billion-to-couple-in-roundup-weed-killer-cancer-trial

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2019/jul/30/toxic-america-families-seek-answers-childhood-cancers

Edited by buctootim
Posted
3 minutes ago, Guided Missile said:

As in "Bad shit and mistakes happen"? 

Absolutely. I dumbed it down for you. 

Human beings can do awful things. It's not always preventable, or even foreseeable. Also, it's not always someone's fault when it happens, but if there is fault along the way, it doesn't mean that change at the top is needed or justified. 

Even Dick resigns it'll be because of yesterday's events, not because the nonsense you've posted. 

 

Posted
1 minute ago, egg said:

Also, it's not always someone's fault when it happens, but if there is fault along the way, it doesn't mean that change at the top is needed or justified. 

Even Dick resigns it'll be because of yesterday's events, not because the nonsense you've posted. 

 

Her force hired the nutter charged with murder and then use male officers to manhandle women, peacefully holding a vigil and you say she's not responsible. Mate, you're a crackpot. Luckily, Priti Patel isn't.

Posted
Just now, Guided Missile said:

Her force hired the nutter charged with murder and then use male officers to manhandle women, peacefully holding a vigil and you say she's not responsible. Mate, you're a crackpot. Luckily, Priti Patel isn't.

Crackpot?!?? Brilliant. 

As I said, if she goes it'll be because of yesterday, not the nonsense you posted. The head of the met shouldn't resign because of one rogue copper.

Posted
5 hours ago, The Cat said:

The right to protest should be available to anyone. In these times they should liaise with police first to outline their intentions and work with them to make sure it's carried out peacefully and within certain guidelines.

If people then start kicking off they know the consequences. 

They discussed it with the police.  The police said it wasn't possible for the vigil to take place safely during the pandemic and taking the laws on gatherings into consideration.

The organising group didn't like being told they couldn't hold the vigil so appealed against the police decision to the High Court.

The High Court refused to make a declaration that any ban on gatherings should not apply to protests.

The Met re-iterated that people should not attend the vigil.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-56379248

Quote

Commander Catherine Roper of the Met Police said the force's message to those wishing to attend vigils was "stay at home or find a lawful and safer way to express your views".

She added: "I understand this ruling will be a disappointment to those hoping to express their strength of feeling, but I ask women and allies across London to find a safe alternative way to express their views."

Pretty clear they were told before hand that they should not attend, so presumably you are happy that they should 'own' the consequences of their actions?

Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Guided Missile said:

Her force hired the nutter charged with murder,.......

He transferred to the Diplomatic Protection Squad from the Civil Nuclear Defence Constabulary, based at Dungeness.

Edited by badgerx16
Posted
50 minutes ago, Weston Super Saint said:

They discussed it with the police.  The police said it wasn't possible for the vigil to take place safely during the pandemic and taking the laws on gatherings into consideration.

The organising group didn't like being told they couldn't hold the vigil so appealed against the police decision to the High Court.

The High Court refused to make a declaration that any ban on gatherings should not apply to protests.

The Met re-iterated that people should not attend the vigil.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-56379248

Pretty clear they were told before hand that they should not attend, so presumably you are happy that they should 'own' the consequences of their actions?

The consequences of their actions though should not include being wrestled to the floor and handcuffed, that is in no way proportionate to the rules they were breaking.

It was poorly handled. That much is obvious.

Posted
10 minutes ago, The Cat said:

The consequences of their actions though should not include being wrestled to the floor and handcuffed, that is in no way proportionate to the rules they were breaking.

It was poorly handled. That much is obvious.

The problem with these Police confrontations is that it’s only the crescendo that gets filmed and posted on social media.  There were numerous videos posted on Twitter during the BLM marches, with captions like, "look, he was stood still doing nothing wrong for 3 whole seconds before the Cops jumped on him!"

 

Normally incidents like that follow a sustained period of someone pushing their luck off camera.

Posted
1 minute ago, Lighthouse said:

The problem with these Police confrontations is that it’s only the crescendo that gets filmed and posted on social media.  There were numerous videos posted on Twitter during the BLM marches, with captions like, "look, he was stood still doing nothing wrong for 3 whole seconds before the Cops jumped on him!"

 

Normally incidents like that follow a sustained period of someone pushing their luck off camera.

That is 100% correct. There was one in the statue protests where some guy got nicked but he'd been acting up for ages before trying to provoke the police so his mates could film it and make it look like the arrest was completely out of order. 

Posted
4 hours ago, buctootim said:

No idea. It's a real problem very smart lawyers and civil servants have tinkered with for years. Everybody knows too many rapists are getting away with it, but reducing the burden of proof isnt the answer either.  I do think there might be a problem with sentencing though. Date rape where both had been intimate before and were pissed should be treated very differently to stranger attacks   

Rape is rape. Please don’t let’s try and pretend there is a lesser rape. Either there is consent or there is not. If there is not, it is rape.

  • Confused 1
Posted
1 minute ago, Lighthouse said:

Normally incidents like that follow a sustained period of someone pushing their luck off camera.

Pushing their luck? They were the weaker sex holding a vigil for a young woman who was murdered, allegedly, by a male Met police officer. Nothing, but nothing, justified the Met's response. I didn't see any female officers handling the situation, as would have made sense to anyone before the vigil was held. This is not going to end well for Dick and the Met. She will be told to resign and the Met will take years to regain the trust of any female living in London. We only have to see how the Met. dealt with Leon Brittan and his poor widow to realise they have an institutional problem, just like they did in the seventies when a lot of their officers were as bent as a corkscrew.

Posted
13 minutes ago, Lighthouse said:

The problem with these Police confrontations is that it’s only the crescendo that gets filmed and posted on social media.  There were numerous videos posted on Twitter during the BLM marches, with captions like, "look, he was stood still doing nothing wrong for 3 whole seconds before the Cops jumped on him!"

 

Normally incidents like that follow a sustained period of someone pushing their luck off camera.

According to the met police statement today a minority started chanting, pushing and throwing objects, after several warnings the police waded in

https://news.met.police.uk/news/statement-from-ac-helen-ball-following-events-in-clapham-common-423210
 

 

Posted
11 minutes ago, sadoldgit said:

Rape is rape. Please don’t let’s try and pretend there is a lesser rape. Either there is consent or there is not. If there is not, it is rape.

You’ve changed your tune. 

Posted
8 minutes ago, Turkish said:

According to the met police statement today a minority started chanting, pushing and throwing objects, after several warnings the police waded in.

 

Contrast the response to the BLM protests:

 

Police.jpg

Posted
13 minutes ago, sadoldgit said:

Rape is rape. Please don’t let’s try and pretend there is a lesser rape. Either there is consent or there is not. If there is not, it is rape.

There is no degree of gravity in any crime? No exacerbating factors? Wow that must be why every murder attracts exactly the same sentence. Every assault is exactly the same. 

Its that attitude that prevents more successful prosecutions. Most women probably wouldnt want their ex partner of 20 years and father of her two children to get 10 years in prison - which is why they don't testify. She might want him to get official censure, convicted and serve six months. But I'm sure you know best.      

Posted
18 minutes ago, Guided Missile said:

...................We only have to see how the Met. dealt with Leon Brittan and his poor widow...............

Before CD became Commissioner;

"In March last year, Met Commissioner Dame Cressida Dick said: "Operation Midland had a terrible impact on those who were falsely accused by Carl Beech.

"The previous commissioner and I have apologised to them and I repeat that apology again today."

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-56008355

 

Posted
2 hours ago, Weston Super Saint said:

Isn't that a standard response for those that resist arrest

There are 3 core questions that should be considered before using force to effect an arrest.

You could argue they haven't all been reached in this situation, especially shoving a woman around who was trying to pick up her glasses!

Screenshot_20210314-191735.jpg

Posted
3 hours ago, aintforever said:

Now thousands are gathering in Parliament Square in response to the police shit-show in Clapham- way to go plod.

And Police are protecting the Churchill statue. Certainly nothing to do with the left wing lunatics though. 

Posted
1 hour ago, The Cat said:

There are 3 core questions that should be considered before using force to effect an arrest.

You could argue they haven't all been reached in this situation, especially shoving a woman around who was trying to pick up her glasses!

Screenshot_20210314-191735.jpg

To be fair, I'd expect that if anyone was wrestled to the floor and handcuffed by the police because they were picking up their glasses, then there would be serious consequences for the police officer enacting the 'assualt' with no justifiable reason.

Posted
9 minutes ago, Weston Super Saint said:

To be fair, I'd expect that if anyone was wrestled to the floor and handcuffed by the police because they were picking up their glasses, then there would be serious consequences for the police officer enacting the 'assualt' with no justifiable reason.

PSD will be busy this week in the Met sifting through hundreds of hours of BWV footage that's for sure.

Posted
17 minutes ago, SKD said:

And Police are protecting the Churchill statue. Certainly nothing to do with the left wing lunatics though. 

Protest organised by sisters uncut, a feminist group and appear to be more interested in the Bill to give police more power than the vigil for the poor girl who was murdered. I’ve used the guardian link as I know this paper resonates with many on here

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2021/mar/14/parliament-square-crowd-protest-policing-sarah-everard-vigil

 

Posted (edited)

The raised clenched fist and anti police chants, very much linked with BLM and Antifa being banded about. 

All about this poor girl and nothing to do with political activism though, of course. Just “soppy Londoners and feminists”.
 

I’m excited to see aintforever digging deep into the book of excuses for this one.

 

Edited by SKD
  • Like 1
Posted (edited)

The section of looney element of the left’s logic, which sums these idiots up: 

PROTECT OUR WOMEN. DEFUND THE POLICE. 
 

 

Edited by SKD
  • Like 1
Posted
13 hours ago, egg said:

Nonsense. There's no "left wing agenda" here. This is just a tragic case, in the aftermath of which women carried out a vigil that was never going to achieve anything positive, and the police fucked up their handling of it. Politicising it is daft. 

Yes, daft and insensitive. However, it’s not me doing it... as shown in a more obvious light today. It’s the BLM/Antifa mob once again. Scum. 

Posted
17 minutes ago, SKD said:

The lefts logic, which sums these idiots up: 

PROTECT OUR WOMEN. DEFUND THE POLICE. 
 

 

"The left" is a sweeping and hugely inaccurate representation, and insults those of us who are left leaning by nature and conviction ( sic ), but don't support such activities and protestations.

Posted
26 minutes ago, SKD said:

The raised clenched fist and anti police chants, very much linked with BLM and Antifa being banded about. 

All about this poor girl and nothing to do with political activism though, of course. Just “soppy Londoners and feminists”.
 

I’m excited to see aintforever digging deep into the book of excuses for this one.

 

Nothing to do with this girl is it.

just another excuse for the freaks to protest. It’s morally reprehensible that they’re attaching themselves to the poor girl to push their own warped agenda.

 

 

 

Posted
3 minutes ago, badgerx16 said:

"The left" is a sweeping and hugely inaccurate representation, and insults those of us who are left leaning by nature and conviction ( sic ), but don't support such activities and protestations.

Yep, fair comment. I’ve amended. 

I’m a right leaning centralist I’d say. Probably a nazi to the hard left. I don’t support the actions and narrative of the British first, EDL fools, so it’s the same situation 👍🏻

 

Posted

Political extremists, both left and right wing wing attach themselves to mainstream events in order to hijack the news. Why? because they would never get that publicity on their own. Its been around for at least 100 years so I'm amazed so many on here cant recognise it for what it is. 

 

    

  • Like 2

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...