sadoldgit

You sound more like the people you constantly vote for everyday Duckie. Go back and read what I actually posted and engage your brain. If you can actually read you will see my conclusion that you were older than I was based on a number of things, not just Leon Russell. You are right about one thing, if someone fits the stereotype of being thick, I stereotype them as being thick. 😎 Oh and I said that I thought that you sounded like you were born in the 1940’s, not the 1950’s!!

When I first started reading Duckie’s posts I assumed that he was older than me. He used an avatar of Leon Russell, used the language of someone born in the mid 1940’s and liked the music that people slightly older than me liked. I was born in the mid 1950’s and it came as something of a shock to find out that I was actually several years older than him!

“When war comes the first casualty is truth”. Hiram W Johnson

Their readers unfortunately…and Duckie. They will still turn out in their hundreds of thousands to vote for them at the next election, sadly. Maybe it is time to have some kind of psychiatric test before you can stand for Parliament that excludes the narcissists, deluded fantasists, the terminally thick and bullies? It would be great if these people could be excluded from voting too 😉

It is a shame that he didn’t have the backbone to strike off the whole dishonourable honours list. Michael Howard was on the radio earlier calling Johnson a liar. No shit Sherlock. Johnson’s latest antics are doing him no favours and more and more of his colleagues are distancing themselves from him. At this rate his only buddy might end up being Farage.

I didn’t say that I wasn’t very bright, I said I was not an intellectual. Anyone with an ounce of intelligence will know the difference between the two. Given that you say I am the brightest stupid person on here I thank you for your self awareness as you then clearly understand that you are much more stupid than I am. Thank you for pointing out the error, I shall correct it now. 😘 Back to Johnson. It has been very entertaining watching the latest Tory psychodrama and sitting back whilst the different factions tear each other to bits. The right wing media are tying themselves in knots too, the front page of the Mail today even signed up for Braverman’s smoke screen deflection against Starmer when the clear major story is the cat fight between Sunak and Johnson. Johnson’s resignation letter was pure Trump; lies, bullshit, deflection and playing the victim. It was some strange alignments of the planets that these two pathetic charlatans should appear on the world stage at the same time (we can probably throw Putin into this mix too). Joining them on the stage unsurprisingly, none other than serial opportunity grabber, Nigel Farage, pitching for an unholy alliance with the Greased Piglet. 😂 If it wasn’t doing so much damage to the standing of this country I would be happy to see this play out until next year, but it is so bad now that we really need a General Election sooner rather than later.

Iron Lady? She was more like a rusty hatchet faced harridan. Her standing was at a low but thanks to the Falklands conflict her approval ratings shot up and she went on to do untold damage to the country. She heralded the end of the UK’s manufacturing industries, sold of council houses without replacing the stock and ushered in future generations to believe that greed and selfishness was good. Her famous mantra, “the lady’s not for turning” doesn’t demonstrate strength, it shows her to be boneheaded, blinkered and unwilling to admit that she may be wrong.The only things I can think to thank her for are launching the career of Ben Elton and giving as a huge laugh on Spitting Image. Proper and decent Prime Ministers work to brink people together for the betterment of society as a whole. Thatcher was divisive and as much as she still gives Duckie and the Gammons a stiffy, will always be widely hated by many.

An interesting comment from a barrister about the acquittal and an article from The Independent at the time. So Ched Evans has been proved innocent, right? Wrong. You’d be forgiven for thinking this, given that it was in the prepared statement read out by his solicitor, but Ched Evans has not “demonstrated his innocence”. That is not how our criminal justice system operates. It is not a means by which the truth of a situation or event is conclusively and fully determined. Rather the jury are asked one simple question – are you sure that the prosecution has proved its case beyond reasonable doubt (or, as juries are commonly instructed, so that you are sure)? “Not guilty” means just that. The jury were not sure that he was guilty. They may have decided that he was totally, utterly innocent, but we don’t know. All we know is that they considered the evidence, and were less than sure of his guilt. As I tell juries in every closing speech – if you think the defendant probably did it, he’s still not guilty. https://www.independent.co.uk/sport/football/news/ched-evans-rape-case-not-guilty-verdict-no-winners-compensation-a7362306.html

In an ideal world he would scroll on by every thread. He can’t help himself from having a pop at minority groups or anyone who speaks out in support of them. Little wonder you support him so much as you seem to be his mate.

If you grouped me in as an intellectual and Guardian reader then I need to disabuse you of both notions. Anyone reading here over the years will know that I am not an intellectual (I managed to fail my A levels and never went to uni). I also haven’t read The Guardian since I left the company 23 years ago. I do however received many different newsfeeds each day in my phone from a variety of sources, one of which happens to be The Guardian. I may not be an intellectual and am no longer a Guardian reader, but I know a bullshitting charlatan when I see one ( or two in this case if you throw in Trump). We have all seen what these two characters have done and said over the last few years, we don’t need The Guardian or intellectuals to tell us what complete nightmares these people are. How anyone can still fall for the witch-hunt/hard done by guff when the all of the evidence shows otherwise is worrying. At some point soon I suspect that his only remaining supporters will be Rees-Mogg, Mad Nad and you. He is a busted flush and no one else is to blame other than himself. A PS just for Duckie - I also read articles from The Sun, Mirror, Mail, Express, Telegraph, i, Independent etc. whither you logic that makes me a “Sun Reader”. Also I don’t just post articles from The Guardian. Recently I posted something from The Spectator - you know, the magazine for people as far right as yourself but have an IQ above that of Nigel Farage and the average UK voter. Another just for you, I changed my phone a few months ago and ever since my newsfeed has been flooded with articles from the Mail, Express and GB News. How on earth do you swallow this stuff?

I beg to differ egg. I have been following this story for weeks before the news broke in the media on another (very rabid) social media platform, one that makes this place at its worse look like a teddy bear’s picnic, and on the basis of pure conjecture and heresay they decided he was a paedophile and child groomer - no sign of any proper evidence. Since then the only thing we know for a fact is that he did have a sexual affair with MM (when he was 20 according to Schofield) and lied about it, did meet him initially when he was 15 and that MM went to work at ITV when he was 18. As you know, Schofield has admitted the above but claimed that there was no grooming involved although he accepts it was a misjudgement for him at his age to have a workplace relationship with someone so much younger. As far as I know there has been no statement from MM. Meeting someone at the age of 15 and then having a sexual relationship with them, as a work colleague, when they are 20 does not mean or prove that MM was groomed. Stating the obvious, older people taking advantage of younger people happens all the time and, if the younger person is above the age of consent, it is not illegal, nor does it constitute paedophilia. I haven’t read every post here but from what I have seen and heard so far there is absolutely no proof that MM was groomed. If it happened then perhaps it will be revealed by the current investigation but, in the meantime I shall keep my pitchfork in the barn as the grooming element seems to have been formed by what people think happened without any evidence of what actually happened. Before you kick off again, if MM went to work for ITV at 18 and they didn’t actually start a sexual relationship until he was 20, if he was groomed for sex he was groomed as an adult for 2 years. I am not sure that grooming an adult who is legally able to consent qualifies as actual grooming? If I have missed it and there is anything else here that is substantial rather than pure supposition regarding grooming, please point me in its direction

https://amp.theguardian.com/politics/2023/jun/10/boris-johnson-resignation-statement-really-meant Worth a read if you were ever in any doubt that Johnson is only concerned about Johnson. Proof, if any were needed, that Johnson is a poor man’s Trump. As ever it is everyone’s fault but his own. Conspiracy theories everywhere and truth rewritten. Narcissists cannot bear to lose. Rather than stay and fight his corner, he has taken the cowards way out rather than face a humiliating by election result. If you are so sure you have been wronged Boris, why not fight your corner and let the people decide? We can only hope that this is the end for the Greased Piglet in politics and that the Tories do not find him a safe seat in future. He has been a liability for his party, for the country, for Europe and to anyone close to him, just like Donald Trump. Good riddance.

I and many thousands of people are of the opinion that OJ Simpson killed his ex wife and her friend. He could not have possibly done it though because we weren’t there and the 12 who found him not guilty were. You are as thick as Duckie if you think that a jury verdict is the sole arbiter of what actually happened. No, I wasn’t at either of the Evans’ trials but on both occasions the CPS were. They studied all of the evidence and decided that the woman was incapacitated by drink/drugs and that she was not in a fit state to consent. I guess you and the rest of your crew have to resort to drugging women in order to have sex, but guess what, it is illegal. You can dig me out all you like, but experience lawyers came to this decision and just because 12 people were not convinced in the trial, it doesn’t mean that the lawyers got it wrong.

If you are an honest man then perhaps you can give us the information that leads you to believe that Schofield groomed this person. You will doubtless have the evidence so perhaps you can share with us the number of times that Schofield was in touch with this person and the nature of their communications from the ages of 15 to 18. It should not be too difficult, you being an honest man and all and will have all the information that you base your conclusion about cast iron grooming at your finger tips. Having never groomed anybody I don’t know what it entails but suspect that it involves more than a couple of WhatsApp messages over a number of years.

Phil’s fan boys? Seriously? This is the sort of remark we expect from Batman. You should know that there is a huge difference between being a “ fan boy” and pointing out a mob pile on based on zero evidence of child grooming. If and when evidence of child grooming actually comes to light then knock yourselves out. The only thing you, the rest of the pile on crowd and the rest of us know for a fact is that an older man had a sexual relationship with a younger man in the workplace and lied about it. I suppose we can expect now that every time work colleagues with a big age differences and lie about it to their colleagues and family’s they will be hounded by the mob and have their careers destroyed too. Just so we are absolutely clear, I don’t watch This Morning and have rarely seen anything that Schofield has been in. I am certainly not a “fan boy” and if he is found to have done anything illegal then I am more than happy for him to face justice.Nobody deserves to have this level of judgement placed upon them based on their sexuality and what some people think might have happened. As said before, if it had been a female then people would probably think good in you Phil. By the way, I used to be part of a team at The Guardian that visited schools and gave young teenagers presentations about the paper and the newspaper industry in general. Further down the line some of them would get back in touch and ask for a work experience placement. Does that make us child groomers?

I don’t recall The Guardian comment but was working for the CPS at the time and although the case was prosecuted by a different district there was concern mentioned amongst our lawyers about the £50,000 reward put up by Evans’s future father in law for “new evidence” and yes, that information about the incident may have been fed to the two people who came forward. Interesting that the same people who are wielding pitchforks about consensual sex between two male adults are perfectly comfortable when two men pick up an incapacitated 19 year old woman from a kebab shop, take her to a pre booked hotel room, use her for sexual gratification for them and their mates watching through the window and then slink out the fire escape. Classy. My question is, would they be so laid back if Schofield had picked up an incapacitated 20 year old man from a kebab shop, taken him to a pre booked hotel room, had sexual relations with him and then quietly disappeared out of the fire escape?

Under the current law you cannot legally consent to sex if you are under the legal age of consent or if you are incapacitated by drink or drugs. As far as we know at the moment, Schofield has done nothing illegal. On the other hand Evans and his mate both had sexual relations with a women who was proven in court to be incapacitated by either drink or drugs and was, therefore, not in a state to consent to what transpired. In your world it appear that the incapacitated woman was fair game, but not in the eyes of the law. Just to spell it out for you so that you fully understand. The court was shown CCTV footage of her barely being able to walk. She lost some possessions including her handbag. She had no recollection the next day of what had transpired. She believed that she might have been drugged at some point. If this is your idea of a consenting adult then God help any women in the same state that you come across. It beggars belief how you can conflate that and the Schofield relationship.

If you want to talk about Evans why don’t you do it on that thread? But as you persist, I refer you yet again to the OJ Simpson trial when he was acquitted of committing a double murder by a jury. Yes he was found to be innocent in law by a jury but it doesn’t mean to say he didn’t do it. Evans was found not guilty by a jury in the second trial but that doesn’t mean that the people who studied law, all of the evidence in forensic detail and do this daily for a living no longer think that he raped the girl because of a jury acquittal. Evans wasn’t the one who was taken to a hotel room with men that she had never met before, was sexually used despite being completely intoxicated and filmed by their friends watching through the window and then left on her own. Perhaps you need to rethink your definition of victim here but I expect that you think that incapacitated women are fair game. Evans was found guilty of rape by a jury based on what was proved to have happened on that night. He was acquitted by a jury based on evidence presented by the defence that had nothing to do with what happened to her that night and according to the CPS should not have been allowed to be presented according to the rule that a rape victim’s previous sexual history should not be used against her. You might recall that High Court judges refused him leave to appeal when he was doing his time for rape based on the evidence on what occurred on that night too. If you are going to persist on these baseless jibes about anti-semitism please provide evidence to back them up. Getting back on topic, it would appear now that a “nonce” is someone who has consensual sexual relations with a 20 year old. I guess that means many of us here are now nonces? A question for you Duckie. As you are so hung up on the Evans case and his innocence, how come you are not on here fighting Schofield’s case against him being found to be a paedophile by the mob despite no charges being brought by the police and no evidence that he has had sexual relations with an under age person? The speech read out by Holly the other day was beyond bizarre. Are you ok? FFS no one has died. We haven’t declared war on Russia. All that has happened is that a presenter on a morning TV light entertainment show lied to a few people about having a consensual sexual relationship with a younger man yet somehow this has become major news for some time now. Unless there is a lot more to this story, a man has had his life turned upside down over lying about a relationship. We have an ex PM who lied to us daily and even lied to the Queen but no witch hunt, cancellation and eternal damnation for him. We really need to sort out our priorities.

Really Duckie? Stop to think for a minute. Ched Evans was found guilty of rape by a jury. He was found guilty of having sexual relations with a woman who was intoxicated and therefore not in a position to consent. As far as we know Schofield has not raped anybody or been charged with raping anybody and in this case, again as far as we know, two adults had consensual sex. If you can’t see the difference then you really do need to give up the weed. 😵‍💫 Just to recap, I kept banging on about the case because people like you were defending his actions. The reason he got off in the retrial was because his future father in law put up a reward for more “witnesses” to come forward. Two blokes did. Neither offered any evidence that had anything to do with Evans and his mate and the CPS asked for the evidence to be excluded from the retrial on the grounds that a victim’s sexual history has nothing to do with a current case. The judge disagreed. The facts remained the same. Evans’s mate picked up an intoxicated women and took her back to a hotel that he and Evans had booked for the night. After he had sex with her he contacted Evans who joined them , performed a sex act with her whilst their mates filmed them through the window and left via the fire escape. The woman was so out of it she had no recollection of what happened. The law is there to protect people in these situations and I bet you would be unhappy if this had happened to your daughter. Trying to pretend that the Schofield situation is the same is frankly pathetic.

Another great “benefit” from the clusterfuck that is Brexit? https://www.independent.co.uk/travel/news-and-advice/eurostar-london-amsterdam-trains-cancellation-2024-b2352090.html

You don’t believe in innocent until found guilty then? That doesn’t include being found guilty by members of a witch hunt mob by the way. Just to remind you again, he has not been charged with any offence nor found guilty. It is not an offence to have a sexual relationship with a consenting adult. If things change and different information comes out to change things, so be it, but at the moment he has not done anything illegal. Not sure how many more times this needs to be pointed out to you and the mob though. Well done me for pointing out the bleeding obvious!

Did you actually listen to what Schofield said? If what he says is true there was no grooming and nothing happened until CONSENSUAL sexual encounters happened when other person was 20./21. Yes he was in his 20’s. Do you honestly think that older people and younger people never get it together? The problem here, even if you can’t see it, is that a bloke has had his life destroyed on the basis of what a bunch of people assume that happened even without a shred of actual evidence. While we are on the subject of older people taking advantage of younger people, how do you feel about the likes of Jimmy Page, Robert Plant, Bill Wyman, David Bowen and John Peel having sexual relations with 13 and 14 year old girls (by their own admission). These people were children, not 20 year olds. Why aren’t you and the pile on club calling them paedophiles and demanding that they get cancelled like Schofield? One rule for girls and another for boys??

I’d give it up if I were you mate. That is what the pile on gang do all the time. They misrepresent what you say to fit their own narrative and seem to spend their time looking for someone to jump on because that is what gets them off. The bloke has been hung drawn and quartered already when all he has been proven to have done is lied about a consensual affair. The rest is pure conjecture and assumption but that is enough for the hard of thinking to paint him as another Jimmy Savile. Even if the independent investigation clears him, they have made up their minds and he will always be the bloke that groomed a 15 year old and a “nonce”. Witch hunters gotta find a witch to hunt.

Clearly no point in having an enquiry then if it is so clear cut! Yet again, more assumptions based on no evidence. From what we know so far you are wrong on a number of counts so maybe wait and see what comes out when it is properly investigated? What we do know is if he had a consensual sexual affair with a 20 year old woman the pile on brigade wouldn’t be bothered about it. The only people who should be hanging their heads in shame are the ones conducting the witch hunt based on what they think they know rather than the facts? Perhaps we should now have a witch hunt against Cheryl Cole for her grooming of Liam Payne who she met when he was 14 years old?

So certain sections of the media and those easily led have spent this week kicking off about, what currently is, two adult men having a consensual sexual relationship. There is another juicy story developing about Roger Waters current show being pro Nazi and therefore anti-Semitic (how they come to that conclusion when he is clearly parodying a fascist dictatorship, but there you go). Meanwhile the current Government are going to court to try and prevent the inquiry into the management of Covid receiving the information they have requested. At the same time the former PM, Johnson, kicked off about a “stitch up” when being asked to provide said information but has now down a U-turn and is prepared for the inquiry to receive everything, including stuff that they hadn’t even requested. 🤔 Clearly there is a lot going on politically that we should be concerned about but our attention is being directed towards non stories. Hmmm, what to get worked up about - a gay TV personality having a sexual relationship with another gay man or this government trying to suppress information requested by a public inquiry into the management one of the biggest catastrophic events here in modern history?