Technology3 mins ago
A Man Of Good Character
https:/
‘You’re a man of sixty-two and of good character,’ the judge said. ‘You have got to sixty-two without committing an offence.’
Give the vid 2 minutes of your time.
If I had clobbered a copper with a heavy weapon would I be still walking the streets...I doubt it!
‘You’re a man of sixty-two and of good character,’ the judge said. ‘You have got to sixty-two without committing an offence.’
Give the vid 2 minutes of your time.
If I had clobbered a copper with a heavy weapon would I be still walking the streets...I doubt it!
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by -Talbot-. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
-- answer removed --
Bainbrig, //With ALL due respect, try sticking your heads down the toilet. //
The constant objections to criticism of this culture evidence the increasing acceptance of moral bankruptcy within our own society. I wrote this elsewhere a few days ago. It applies here too.
//In their efforts to embrace tolerance – and moreover to be seen to embrace tolerance, the disingenuous liberals of the west are wilfully abandoning the fundamental concept of right and wrong. This civilised society that we claim to hold so dear is rapidly deteriorating into something far from civilised.//
The constant objections to criticism of this culture evidence the increasing acceptance of moral bankruptcy within our own society. I wrote this elsewhere a few days ago. It applies here too.
//In their efforts to embrace tolerance – and moreover to be seen to embrace tolerance, the disingenuous liberals of the west are wilfully abandoning the fundamental concept of right and wrong. This civilised society that we claim to hold so dear is rapidly deteriorating into something far from civilised.//
It does indeed sound lenient. I suspect there is more to the story than is reported in the Metro. The report in the Mail hints at that, but that too is scant on detail.
// City of London Magistrate Richard Blake... said I
have had the advantage of seeing what took place...
The question is whether you are acting in self-defence. //
It appears there was a melee, and he did use his stick (possibly in self defence). But landing on the officer was not deliberate (he was attacking The protestors). It seems the Magistrate had video so was more able to make a more informed judgement than us relying on a tabloid newpaper report.
// City of London Magistrate Richard Blake... said I
have had the advantage of seeing what took place...
The question is whether you are acting in self-defence. //
It appears there was a melee, and he did use his stick (possibly in self defence). But landing on the officer was not deliberate (he was attacking The protestors). It seems the Magistrate had video so was more able to make a more informed judgement than us relying on a tabloid newpaper report.
It is clearly a deliberate act to hit someone.
He was going after the EDL protestors to the right in front of him. The police officer comes from the left, slightly behind him. The muslim turns and wields the stick in one move, connecting with the Officer. It is plain the PC was not the intended victim, the commentary of his mate “Omar, you’ve ***ed up this time” confims the mistake.
The Magistrate sees that.
He was going after the EDL protestors to the right in front of him. The police officer comes from the left, slightly behind him. The muslim turns and wields the stick in one move, connecting with the Officer. It is plain the PC was not the intended victim, the commentary of his mate “Omar, you’ve ***ed up this time” confims the mistake.
The Magistrate sees that.
Gromit, you said.
It appears there was a melee, and he did use his stick (possibly in self defence)
No self defence at all. The fight was in front of him and nothing to do with him.
He cowardly hit the bloke from behind
He then deliberately whacked a copper with the weapon he carries (I've watched enough of his vids to know he doesn't need it, it is probably for a benefits claim)
The violent racist thug should be in jail.
It appears there was a melee, and he did use his stick (possibly in self defence)
No self defence at all. The fight was in front of him and nothing to do with him.
He cowardly hit the bloke from behind
He then deliberately whacked a copper with the weapon he carries (I've watched enough of his vids to know he doesn't need it, it is probably for a benefits claim)
The violent racist thug should be in jail.
Latest Posts
Crosswords3 mins ago
Technology3 mins ago
ChatterBank7 mins ago
ChatterBank7 mins ago
News10 mins ago
