Casino Posted March 2, 2017 Posted March 2, 2017 how this happens 14 months of legalities, jury sworn in and then they decide its all a load of bollocks http://www.theboltonnews.co.uk/news/15126023.Taxi_driver_cleared_of_New_Year_Day_rape/?ref=mr&lp=11 and we've got an innocent bloke named and shamed Quote
mannyroad58 Posted March 2, 2017 Posted March 2, 2017 Returned to work 10 minutes later?? Fucking hell no wonder she accused him after her total disappointment Quote
Casino Posted March 2, 2017 Author Posted March 2, 2017 not everybody can be the world fingering champion Quote
Sweep Posted March 2, 2017 Posted March 2, 2017 (edited) how this happens 14 months of legalities, jury sworn in and then they decide its all a load of bollocks http://www.theboltonnews.co.uk/news/15126023.Taxi_driver_cleared_of_New_Year_Day_rape/?ref=mr&lp=11 and we've got an innocent bloke named and shamed No matter if he did it or not, he's now tarred with the rapist brush. Presumably, as the Judge instructed them to give a not guilty verdict, she must have been found out to be talking shit, or even worse, somebody somewhere has fucked up with the evidence edit: it's a shame the comments section is closed, as I'm sure that would have been fun Edited March 2, 2017 by Sweep Quote
deane koontz Posted March 2, 2017 Posted March 2, 2017 Ridiculous they name people for this type of shit when they have been found innocent. Quote
bgoefc Posted March 2, 2017 Posted March 2, 2017 No matter if he did it or not, he's now tarred with the rapist brush. Presumably, as the Judge instructed them to give a not guilty verdict, she must have been found out to be talking shit, or even worse, somebody somewhere has fucked up with the evidence edit: it's a shame the comments section is closed, as I'm sure that would have been fun Could be one of many things. Perhaps a crucial witness changed their mind and refused to testify or as you say crucial evidence was lost. Agree though that its scandalous that the accused is named before the trial. Quote
Zico Posted March 2, 2017 Posted March 2, 2017 Same goes for anyone who gets accused of anything and is then found not guilty Especially noncing or bumming dogs Quote
Casino Posted March 2, 2017 Author Posted March 2, 2017 Could be one of many things. Perhaps a crucial witness changed their mind and refused to testify or as you say crucial evidence was lost. Agree though that its scandalous that the accused is named before the trial. In this case, it's not one of many things Its the prosecutor saying 'our evidence is shit, let's not bother' Quote
Sweep Posted March 2, 2017 Posted March 2, 2017 Bumming dogs is illegal? Not if the dog is of legal ages and consents Quote
Whites man Posted March 2, 2017 Posted March 2, 2017 Not if the dog is of legal ages and consents One woof for yes, two for no. Quote
Zico Posted March 2, 2017 Posted March 2, 2017 Not if the dog is of legal ages and consents and more importantly if they make the first move, which more often than not, they do Quote
no balls Posted March 2, 2017 Posted March 2, 2017 and more importantly if they make the first move, which more often than not, they do My little angel is a fucker for lying on her back legs akimbo when there's a bloke about. It's embarrassing & she doesn't get it off me, the filthy slut! Quote
Sweep Posted March 2, 2017 Posted March 2, 2017 My little angel is a fucker for lying on her back legs akimbo when there's a bloke about. It's embarrassing & she doesn't get it off me, the filthy slut! Them Jack Russell type mongrels are a bit like that, if you'd got a pedigree, I reckon she would be a lot more refined Quote
MalcolmW Posted March 2, 2017 Posted March 2, 2017 Them Jack Russell type mongrels are a bit like that, if you'd got a pedigree, I reckon she would be a lot more refined Quote
bgoefc Posted March 2, 2017 Posted March 2, 2017 In this case, it's not one of many things Its the prosecutor saying 'our evidence is shit, let's not bother' No, its the prosecutor deciding they did not have the evidence they had at the point the prosecutor decided to prosecute the case or the defence disclosed evidence just before the trial that meant it wasnt worth going to trial. Quote
Tonge moor green jacket Posted March 2, 2017 Posted March 2, 2017 Evidence too 'generalised'. Not sure what that means exactly, but presumably if evidence was so bad the cps wouldn't have bothered in the first place. There may be more mileage in the case yet, but it is a bit rough putting a name out in public. Quote
Zico Posted March 2, 2017 Posted March 2, 2017 One woof for yes, two for no. "And what was it's response when you slipped you're finger in?" "Yes, yes" Quote
Sweep Posted March 2, 2017 Posted March 2, 2017 "And what was it's response when you slipped you're finger in?" "Yes, yes" Slipping a finger in? He's not a pervert Quote
bgoefc Posted March 2, 2017 Posted March 2, 2017 Evidence too 'generalised'. Not sure what that means exactly, but presumably if evidence was so bad the cps wouldn't have bothered in the first place. There may be more mileage in the case yet, but it is a bit rough putting a name out in public. Exactly! Quote
Whites man Posted March 2, 2017 Posted March 2, 2017 My little angel is a fucker for lying on her back legs akimbo when there's a bloke about. It's embarrassing & she doesn't get it off me, the filthy slut! Well known around Horwich as a one woofer that one. Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.