sadoldgit

You don't believe that guilty people have walked away from court then? That UJ is bull****. Do you have a view on whether OJ Simpson killed his wife and her friend or do you just think that he must be innocent because a jury said so? Bringing this back to the subject matter, if Green is charged he will face a trial at which he will be either found guilty or innocent of those charges. If it were a normal person our names would already be in the media. He has lots of money and power and was able to gag the press. There are reasons why alleged offenders can be named pre trial and victims names cannot. One is to protect the victims and encourage them to go through a legal process (which by the way, can be very arduous). Another is to possibly prompt others who feel that they have a case against the same person to come forward. As we know from recent history, many abused people do not say anything. The #metoo unit shows that all too clearly (unless you think they are all lying - which is a possibility although unlikely). Green is clearly an odious individual but he is not being accused of being odious, he is being accused of being a bully and of sexual harassment. Privilege and power should not prevent him going through the same procedure as the rest of us. If you believe that it is okay to gag the press, then perhaps you should be campaigning for us all to have the same rights, not just the wealthy and the privileged?

Even by your low standards Duckie this is a very crass statement. Too much weed yesterday? Perhaps I should throw the OJ Simpson v Nicola Brown Simpson and Ron Goldman back at you? Still, at least you are prepared to accept that there are miscarriages of justice, which brings us back to Evans and his mate. The definition of a victim is someone who has been taken advantage of. CCTV footage shows that this woman could barely walk that night. She awoke the next day not knowing where she was or who she had been with the night before. Fair game? Maybe to you she was and clearly to Evans and his buddy. With the evidence they had the jury found Evans guilty of rape in the initial trial. They let his mate walk which surprised me as if she wasnt considered fit enough to consent to Evans how was she in a state to consent to his mate? Still, guilty he was found and he served his time after several attempts at appeal were over ruled. He then gets his retrial after two new witnesses come forward. Where were they either during or just after the first trial you ask yourself and why did their evidence sound so similar? The CPS believe that the Evans camp paid these witnesses, but the judge in the retrial didnt accept this. Fair enough, but the CPS just dont just pluck this stuff out of thin air and they and the police would have reasons to make their claim, even if they couldnt prove it to a judge. The Evans camp released the name of the victim on social media and I believe, continue to do so (illegal by the way). From the beginning they have been working hard to trash the name of the victim (who, by the way, did not bring this case to court). In the second trial he was found not guilty of rape and acquitted. All this means is that in the eyes of the law he did not rape the women. In the eyes of the law OJ Simpson did not kill his ex wife and her friend. In the eyes of the law the Birmingham Six were initially guilty. Everyone is entitled to have a point of view on these cases and their verdicts. Apparently, according to the usual suspects on here, I am not. Perhaps women who are off their heads on drink and or drugs are still fair game according to some. Personally I think it is good that the CJS is seeking to protect people who are in no fit state to make rational decisions. Still if you think that what Evans and his mate did does not constitute a violation and were perfectly entitled to do what they wanted with someone off their head, fair play to you. Anyway, you dragged Ched Evans onto a Philip Green thread so if you want to continue, perhaps you should take your defence of Evans back to his thread along with your buddies and let us get back to debating the rights and wrongs of Parliamentary privilege?

That is not what the first jury decided so it was clearly not as clear cut as you would like to think. Also it is entirely possible to be a victim of crime if the alleged perpetrator is found not guilty. If the woman in the Evans case had consensual sex, how come she had absolutely no idea of what happened to her? Perhaps you are the type who like your women unconscious or drunk or drugged out of their brains?

Why am I not surprised that you posted this. What do you think the percentage of false accusations are against non false accusations? Over the years do you think that “birds” and “chicks” have just been asking for it and rapists have been hard done by? Of course there have been some false accusations over the years, but perhaps you ought to get your Stone Age brain around the fact that countless rapes and sexual assaults have gone unpunished for centuries. I am guessing that you don’t have any daughters?

City 7 shots on target 6 goals. Saints 6 shots on target 1 goal. Says it all.

Depends how you define victim though doesnt it. The CPS obviously though a women who was so drunk that she had no recollection of what happened to her was a victim. Just a normal night out for you though eh?

I am struggling to understand why you think that anyone would name a victim? Surely what Hain is trying to do in this instance is to try and ensure there are no more victims in the first place. If there is no bullying and no sexual harassment there is no need for what follows. If Green is guilty of doing such things and now stops doing them because of Hain, isnt that a good thing? If he does get pulled up on charges and is found guilty, isn't that a good thing? If it stops others trying to do what the Weinstein's of this world have been doing for years, isn't that a good thing? Or do you have such a low opinion of "birds" and "chicks" that you think they are fair game?

I am not missing the point at all. Hain has done nothing wrong. You might not agree with the whole Parliamentary privilege thing or the use of it in the case, but it is not illegal and is part of the checks and balances that we employ in our democracy. I am more concerned over the practice of using money to buy victims silence and avoiding justice to be honest. If Parliamentary privilidge was used all the time I might agree with you, but it is used very sparingly. If Hain helps to bring about the end of NDAs through his actions then fair play. No one should avoid justice through buying silence.

Completely different situations. The CPS decided to prosecute Evans based on the evidence they had. No one is prosecuting Green at the momemt and if they do it will be because of the evidence against him. Again, why are you getting so upset?

I wonder if you would be so defensive of Green if you had a BHS pension duckie? This has got nothing to do with justice or whether he is guilty or not. It has everything to do with people with power and money gagging the press. Why should they be allowed to do that when the likes of you and I can’t? It should be the same for all.

Bottom line. You may well not agree with Hain’s actions (many do by the way) but has he done anything illegal? No. Has Green? Possibly. If he hasn’t it either will not go to court or it will and he could well be found innocent. I think your problem here is that Hain, in your eyes, is a leftie pinko who is fighting a class war. Frankly the more people who stand up against bullying and the abuse of power the better. If that means the power of NDAs is reduced I think that can only be a good thing. We read more and more about people who have had their silence bought only for it to affect their mental well being for years to come. The whole point of the #metoo movement is that people want to be heard. That point seems to have slipped the likes of you and Trump by. Do you really still think it is ok to call women chicks?

Apart from the fact that we actually finished higher after he left.

I have shoe horned Yaxley-Lennon (his real name not his assumed name) into this because you shoe horn "lefties" and "pinkos" into most of your non football related posts Duckie. What about the principle of all of being treated equally? Is it ok with you that those with money and power can effectively gag the press? From what I can see he is hardly in the Harvey Weinstein category anyway and it seems really odd that he is handing out seven figure sums to shut people up for a bit of "banter!" Hain is a seasoned politician who, I would imagine, gave this matter serious consideration and probably took legal advice before making his announcement. You would prefer to think he is just having a pop at a rich bloke who has rubbed the "lefties" up the wrong way. You may well think that it is not in the public interest to name someone in a position of power and privilege who has been accused of sexual harassment and racial abuse. Would you say the same of the likes of Jimmy Saville (who by the way did not ever stand trial for his alleged crimes)? Wealth, privilege and power should never, ever, stand in the way of justice. As I said before, if he is as innocent as he says, he has nothing to worry about does he? I'll ask you again, would you kick off as much if a right wing Lord had outed an alleged Asian or Muslim offender?

No surprise to see you going into bat for the odious Philip Green. No doubt if his name was Mohammad you wouldnt have an issue with it. I dont recall you getting all upset when Stephen Yaxley-Lennon was filming Asians entering court before they had been found guilty. Still you righties need to stick together in the face of all these pinkos eh? Why exactly should Green not be subject to the same conditions as everyone else just because he has money and status? If it really is just all "banter" then he will have nothing to worry about will he? You lot dont go in much for equality do you? Hain has not cheapened Parliamentary privilege in the least. Those with money or in power should not be able to gag the press - that is the real privilege. They should be treated like everybody else. It will no more compromise his possible future trial (if it comes to that) any more than it does every other individual who has been named before their trials. Oh, and it wasn't the "chick" who accused Ched Evans of rape. It was the CPS who decided that he should be prosecuted on the grounds that the woman involve was in no condition to consent. She says she had no recollection of what happened.

I don’t agree with you. What does it matter if you don’t know someone personally? These people gave millions of people pleasure. Anyone with an ounce of empathy would wish someone they only knew by their celebrity status but admired what they did would be concerned if the fell seriously ill or upset if they passed away. I never knew Markus but was very sad at his passing. Is that wrong? We all love football. Glenn Hoddle was one of the most skilful to play the game. It is only natural to be interested and concerned about his well being if you follow the game. It isn’t a recent thing. It has been going on forever.

WTF?

When we wish the worst on people running our football club hopefully this dreadful accident will put things into perspective. Shankley’s words about football being more important than life or death were pithy but in the real world were absolute ********. Absolutely dreadful news.

A report by the Child Exploitation and Online Protection Command in 2013 states that of 52 cases in 2012 where the police provided ethnicity data, half of them concerned all Asian groups. 21% were "all white" groups and 17% were groups containing multiple ethnicities. These were identified as Type 1 groups meaning that they chose to sexually abuse teenagers and young women because of their vulnerability. Type 2 groups are those who solely assault children because that is what they are interested in i.e. paedophiles. Whilst Asians are more likely to form these gangs than "whites", "whites" are more likely to commit lone sexual assaults. There are more recorded lone sexual assaults than there are gang assaults. A small sample but these figures show that it isnt just Asian men who form these sex gangs.

Then you would lose your bet. Mess. How many people do you know that call women birds and chicks?

Who exactly is making excuses for rapists ducky? Blaming rape on ethnicity is moving into Yaxley-Lennon territory. And as for calling women birds and chicks in the 21st century? The world has moved on but you seem to be stuck in the Stone Age!

I don’t know where they were born but they certainly live here and didn’t just pitch up for a weekend for a spot of rape. There have been groups of home grown sexual abusers. There is allegedly a group in Westminster but is yet to be proven. Does it really matter where people come from? Rapists are prevalent through the world, not just from Asia.

You are a very odd person. Why would I find them not guilty? Crime is crime. There is no special category for Asian rape. The people are rapists. They don’t get a longer sentence for being Asian.

If it had been a group of white English people would they have been called a gang of English rapists? The great shame here is that we are talking about race when we should be talking about sexual abuse by males.

Where to start re being an international disaster? We will park his total lack of diplomacy and knowledge and understanding of international matters. This whole thing about America First plays well with the rednecks and hard nationalists in his country, but does nothing for the rest of planet at a time where we really all need to be pulling together. Trump's ignorance and denial of the issues surrounding global warming will hit us all and pulling the US out of the Paris Accord is a major problem for the future of the planet. By doing what is best for himself first and his country second, he encourages the same mindset that resulted in major conflict in the last century. We can spend hours going through the countless of incidents where his total lack of understanding about foreign affairs and inability to see anything beyond what is good for his public image doesn't bode well when you have far cleverer and clued up opponents in equally strong countries in the east. Why do you think Putin was so keen to see Trump in the White House. It is the equivalent of us having Mr Bean as PM. The people who voted for Trump need to see that this isolationist stance does not just fail for them in the long term, it fails for us all. Building walls and imposing swingeing trade tariffs will only take us back to the 19th century at a time where we really need forward thinking leaders who can see past small minded nationalism. As for the alt right having a better sense of humour? It is easy to laugh at the likes of Trump and our own Stephen Yaxley-Lennon, but I would be very worried for anyone laughing with them.

Read the thread and work it out for yourself. It really isn’t that difficult.