m4DD0gg Posted 18 August 2015 Posted 18 August 2015 Whether he is innocent or guilty or not he is a shite footballer.
Guest Posted 18 August 2015 Posted 18 August 2015 I realise it's a different legal system, but here's a question for you. Pistorius was sentenced for culpable homicide and on August 21st will leave prison after 6 months to be placed under house arrest, for his five year sentence. The prosecution are appealing the sentence for it to be over turned for murder. Given that people are basing their comments on the initial sentence handed out by the law in Danny Simpsons case being 100% true, can I correctly presume you place the same such faith in the pistorius case and feel culpable homicide was adequate? More widely can I presume you feel that in Britain there is no need for an appeal and review system (when the person is going against the police's account) as the police are to be trusted 100% therefore regardless of the appeal Simpson is making he is a 'scumbag' based on the fact that he must have done it and Mrs ward must by lying and that he drives his Audi to fast? Your two points don't appear to sit well together. Re pistorius I think it was pretty obvious from the outset that they'd struggle to prove intent and therefore murder and that culpable homicide was the likely result. Re Simpson there should definately be an ability to appeal sentences etc but it's for the judge and jury to decide who to believe based on the facts they are given.
volpeazzurro Posted 18 August 2015 Posted 18 August 2015 Far bigger offender than Vardy. The police reporting him throttling her is surely evidence enough? If you trust them that is. The police no doubt just attended this incident following her phone call (one of many such domestic incidents they deal with I should imagine). If as she now claims, he was merely refusing to leave , then asking him or assisting him to leave would have been the easy option for them and then return to their duties. Why on earth would they want to concoct another story ie sitting astride her and strangling her and go through all the hassle of an arrest, paperwork and subsequent court case where they would get grilled in the box by a barrister? I wonder how honest a past Simpson has lived, what his previous behaviour has been like? The same applies to his girlfriend who may also have been the previous abuse. Whilst people of course for many good reasons sometimes question the actions of the police most of the time they just go about their work in a straight forward daily way. Sometimes the truth screams to be heard but falls on deaf ears.
FrankieWorthoYaggedMyWife Posted 18 August 2015 Posted 18 August 2015 "When they arrived Danny was not on top of me and he definitely did not throttle me." u wot luv? Pretty sure the police report, which was multiple accounts, said he was on top of you, and was definitely throttling you. Can I have confirmation that this happened right? because the Police have never fabricated anything have they!
Guest Col city fan Posted 18 August 2015 Posted 18 August 2015 The club should terminate his contract. He's rubbish anyway. Get rid and finally get a really good RB in.
LCCFox96 Posted 18 August 2015 Posted 18 August 2015 If he's appealing his sentence in a December hearing it looks like we will be stuck with him until then. If, at that point his conviction is upheld, I would be amazed if he wasn't sacked, especially given the nature of the refusal to disclose details of the punishment (they gave Vardy's out to the public) which makes it sound a sacking. Regardless, he's unavailable for first team duties until then so we still need another RB. Sell at the earliest opportunity and replace him with a quality RB.
Dan Posted 18 August 2015 Posted 18 August 2015 I like the Byram shout but I can't see Leeds taking small money for him. We'll need to get in before they sell any of their other prospects too as they'd be in a far better bargaining position if they took in a lot of money for one of them.
Kitchandro Posted 18 August 2015 Posted 18 August 2015 I realise it's a different legal system, but here's a question for you. Pistorius was sentenced for culpable homicide and on August 21st will leave prison after 6 months to be placed under house arrest, for his five year sentence. The prosecution are appealing the sentence for it to be over turned for murder. Given that people are basing their comments on the initial sentence handed out by the law in Danny Simpsons case being 100% true, can I correctly presume you place the same such faith in the pistorius case and feel culpable homicide was adequate? More widely can I presume you feel that in Britain there is no need for an appeal and review system (when the person is going against the police's account) as the police are to be trusted 100% therefore regardless of the appeal Simpson is making he is a 'scumbag' based on the fact that he must have done it and Mrs ward must by lying and that he drives his Audi to fast? Completely different cases, not sure what one has to do with the other. I base my view of them both on the facts I've heard from both cases.
CountesthorpeFox Posted 18 August 2015 Posted 18 August 2015 Completely different cases, not sure what one has to do with the other. I base my view of them both on the facts I've heard from both cases. Ok so it's a fact that the police say one thing and the 'victim' says another. You're choosing to believe the police account, correct? The first point is not irrelevant - it's a moral question.
CountesthorpeFox Posted 18 August 2015 Posted 18 August 2015 Your two points don't appear to sit well together. Re pistorius I think it was pretty obvious from the outset that they'd struggle to prove intent and therefore murder and that culpable homicide was the likely result. Re Simpson there should definately be an ability to appeal sentences etc but it's for the judge and jury to decide who to believe based on the facts they are given. They are not really meant to sit together - one is a moral question and one is based around the Simpson situation. Ok so in the pistorius case you believe the judge came to the correct outcome? Or you believe that they didn't but can't prove otherwise? Totally agree re Simpson point, he should be allowed to appeal and that's my point - police do a great job but many incidents through history show they are not 100% correct and therefore have to be challenged.
FireFox Posted 18 August 2015 Posted 18 August 2015 because the Police have never fabricated anything have they!So the police fabricated her original statement that said the same thing as the police? It is a classic case of domestic violence, and I want Simpson out as soon as possible.
Kitchandro Posted 20 August 2015 Posted 20 August 2015 Ok so it's a fact that the police say one thing and the 'victim' says another. You're choosing to believe the police account, correct? The first point is not irrelevant - it's a moral question. Yes I'm choosing to believe the police's account on this occasion. It's not a moral question, you're asking who's account people believe. It's just people's view on each case is different, based on what they know about it. I don't have 100% faith in the legal system at all, it's nothing to do with that.
FrankieWorthoYaggedMyWife Posted 20 August 2015 Posted 20 August 2015 So the police fabricated her original statement that said the same thing as the police? It is a classic case of domestic violence, and I want Simpson out as soon as possible. I didn't say that that had, I just implied that it wouldn't be the first time. Do I think he is an utter cretin, yes. Do I wish he wasn't in the squad, yes.
Benji Posted 20 August 2015 Posted 20 August 2015 Probably just been told to find another club - saves sacking him and the consequences of that on both the club and him personally.
Larry_LCFC Posted 20 August 2015 Posted 20 August 2015 I didn't say that that had, I just implied that it wouldn't be the first time. Do I think he is an utter cretin, yes. Do I wish he wasn't in the squad, yes. Bollocks. Why would the police create more work for themselves for no reason by fabricating a statement? More to the point, why would they risk losing their jobs? Absolutely nothing to be gained.
FrankieWorthoYaggedMyWife Posted 20 August 2015 Posted 20 August 2015 Bollocks. Why would the police create more work for themselves for no reason by fabricating a statement? More to the point, why would they risk losing their jobs? Absolutely nothing to be gained. have i really got to trawl through all the occasions where this has happened?
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.