Turkish

Saint andy666

So what are your thoughts on their guilt?

he thinks everyone is racist, or at least implies it in amoungst his patronising drivel. He accused me of being racist once because i had papa lazarou from the league of gentlemen as my avatar. Apparantly this was conclusive evidence. He has suggested Griffo is this week and now yourself. I wouldn't worry yourself to much about what he thinks. It'll probably come as no surprise to you that he needs to see therapists to cope with just surviving day to day. You're not dealing with someone of a sane and right mind individual, incase that much wasn't already obvious already.

Are you sure? usually you are very good at telling people what they are thinking.

FFS here we go again. *puts on white pointy hat and waits for Verbal to accuse the world of being racist again*

I'm taking the fact that everybody on this thread thinks they are guilty, based on what they've read in the papers. Everyone i work with thinks they are guilty based on this same "evidence" You said yourself you think they are based on a much publicised police enquiry. So why would a jury be any different? I'm 34 and Jackanory is around 30 from memory and we remember the original trial and all that's followed it so so much for your "the jury wont remember the original trial" nonsense. IF we want to get the views of a couple of younger people then Super Mikey and Saintandy666 would be welcome to give their views as an example of what younger people think and how they have come to this opinion.

Dont be so harsh on yourself.

Verbal Super Mikey [video=youtube;N_wQOiy-fhU]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N_wQOiy-fhU

I think anyone that doent need proffesional assistance to get through the day can see that I am not talking about a John Grisham style jury. unless they've been living on Mars for the last 20 years they would know about this case and potentially be influenced by the media coverage. Afterall, we all have been. If you can't understand that then you might want to up the dose.

Do us all a favour and stop being naive. Unless they've been living on mars for the last 20 hrs they'd know about this case, everyone has a view on it. They can't help be influenced even if they haven't made up their minds 100% most of us have.

So if you were on the jury you would think they are guilty. Which proves my point originally that the jury will be unlikely to unbiased. Remember oh great one, i wasn't asked if i thought they were guilty or not, or if they deserve to be hung or not. I was asked what i thought of the trial and if I would be an unbiased jury member, It seems none of us would be. Maybe you should have a word with you therapist to help you deal with jumping to conclusions and making accusations without reading & understanding things properly.

What is your view on their guilt? How have you reached such a view? I know what my view is and if i was on the jury what i would be thinking and what most people on this thread think. We weren't there, we didn't see it, we haven't seen all the evidence. So how have we reached our conclusions? Why would a jury member be any different? Even if it is only subconciously? Come on, you love telling peole what they think.

I think they are guilty as f*ck and deserve to hang. But i wasnt asked that, i was asked what i though of the trial and if i would be a biased jury member.

Course not. But i was asked my opinion on the trial ad if i was on the jury would i be biased at the top of the thread, so i gave my reply. Not on if i thought they were guilty or not.

and that's the point. The prosecution have to prove that they DID do it. In this case you get the impression due to the media that the defendants have to prove that they DIDN'T. That isn't how the justice system in this country works. 99.9% of the country think they are guilty because what they've read in the papers and seen on TV. You've just got to look at this thread to realise that. Which means that it is highly likely any jury will be biased, even if it is only subconciously.

No, i'm not saying that and i dont know what the answer is. Does the fact that they have been in the dock twice and not convicted also mean that there isn't enough evidence for conviction? The new forensic evidence is flimsey to say the least. This is what i mean it's a minefield and any jury will be influcenced one way or another, they've already been warned to ignore the publicity the case has had for the last 17 years. The whole point of a trial by jury is that it's fair and for an impartical group of people to reach a verdict based on the evidence in front of them. When for god knows how long it's been all over the media "they are guilty, they are guilty!!" then it's impossible not to be influenced. The media are demanding a guilty verdict, which is wrong. And dont for one minute think i am trying to defend them. A lad has lost his life and those that did it deserve to be punished, but not through the press demanding it because it's been in the public eye so long.

Given your history of telling me what i think then it's quite reasonable to think it was aimed at me. Did you smoke too much weed as a teenager? SOmething is playing havoc with your warped mind. BTW to answer your question i think there should be a media ban on all high profile cases to avoid influencing the jury and the indenties of all accused kept from the public until conviction, regardless of the offence. Unless they are black of course.

I wondered how long it would take.

You should be flattered we think of you that way. You are the Helen Mirren of TSW.

Surely the fantasy of Verbal and BTF on the job is adequate compensation and masterbation fuel for months though?

I got a written warning from a job i had in about 1997 for calling club call about 5 times a day for a couple of weeks.

It's impossible to do that though. Everyone in the country has a view on it, people on here are convinced they are guilty having seen the media coverage. As you say, they may feel under pressure to find them guilty because of the issues around it. On the flip side some might find them innocent because of the media frenzy around it, either way, they are highly likely to be influcenced one way or another.

Well as i wasn't "making a fuss" i wouldn't "make a fuss" about that either. But if i was asked a question as to what my view on a trial by media for peadophiles, then i'd answer it. It's not like you to slip subtle accusations of racism into a thread though, you need to get your therapist to work a bit harder on your paranoia.

Clubcall is quality. I remember years ago they announced we had signed Alan Armstrong from Stockport on for him to join Middlesborough the next day.

I was answering a question put to me, not "making a fuss".