sadoldgit Posted 14 August, 2018 Share Posted 14 August, 2018 Felt certain he would be found guilty. The video evidence looked to back up what the doorman said. They are all lucky to walk away from this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shurlock Posted 14 August, 2018 Share Posted 14 August, 2018 Bet the jury was from Maidstone where that stuff is considered horseplay. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Duckhunter Posted 14 August, 2018 Share Posted 14 August, 2018 **** a jury of our peers, who needs a court hearing, let’s just get a silly old sod to watch the cctv. It’ll certainly save a lot of money. Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jawillwill Posted 14 August, 2018 Share Posted 14 August, 2018 **** a jury of our peers, who needs a court hearing, let’s just get a silly old sod to watch the cctv. It’ll certainly save a lot of money. Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Do you think the CCTV footage was misleading? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whelk Posted 14 August, 2018 Share Posted 14 August, 2018 The pious BBC news piece about cricket recovering from the shame. Will it’s reputation recover? Fck me Stokes seems a hard bastard if he sparked two people out cold. Surprised he wasn’t done though Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whelk Posted 14 August, 2018 Share Posted 14 August, 2018 Bet the jury was from Maidstone where that stuff is considered horseplay. Lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sadoldgit Posted 14 August, 2018 Author Share Posted 14 August, 2018 Do you think the CCTV footage was misleading? Clearly he does. And that the doorman was lying and the two gay guys (who he had only just met and flicked a fag butt at) really were his “friends.” Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pamplemousse Posted 14 August, 2018 Share Posted 14 August, 2018 The pious BBC news piece about cricket recovering from the shame. Will it’s reputation recover? Fck me Stokes seems a hard bastard if he sparked two people out cold. Surprised he wasn’t done though Dan Roan has always been sensationalist, dreadful reporter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sadoldgit Posted 14 August, 2018 Author Share Posted 14 August, 2018 Just read that the two gay guys have praised Stokes for protecting them. Strangely the defence did not use them as witnesses nor did they submit statements from them. Given how crucial their evidence was in substantiating Stokes’ story you would have thought their submissions would have been gold dust. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jonnyboy Posted 14 August, 2018 Share Posted 14 August, 2018 **** a jury of our peers, who needs a court hearing, let’s just get a silly old sod to watch the cctv. It’ll certainly save a lot of money. Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Like a Daily Mail smear of Corbyn you mean? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Duckhunter Posted 14 August, 2018 Share Posted 14 August, 2018 Do you think the CCTV footage was misleading? Clearly he does. And that the doorman was lying and the two gay guys (who he had only just met and flicked a fag butt at) really were his “friends.” Just read that the two gay guys have praised Stokes for protecting them. I rest my case. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sadoldgit Posted 15 August, 2018 Author Share Posted 15 August, 2018 I rest my case. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk If only the reviewing lawyer who dealt with the case for the CPS and the barrister who prosecuted the case had your nous eh Duckie? I still think he was lucky to walk away from this (and Hales who was filmed stamping on the head of one of them). Neither of the gay guys supported him in court despite what was said after the verdict. He said he had drunk two or three pints and at least six vodkas but says he wasnt drunk. Seriously? He says that the gay guys were his friends yet he had only met them minutes earlier. Witness evidence says the he was "out of control" and the video evidence backed that up. As I say, lucky man. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Duckhunter Posted 15 August, 2018 Share Posted 15 August, 2018 A jury sat and listened to every single minute of the case, heard the judges summing up in full & deliberated. What on earth makes you think you know more about the case than them? Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hypochondriac Posted 15 August, 2018 Share Posted 15 August, 2018 A jury sat and listened to every single minute of the case, heard the judges summing up in full & deliberated. What on earth makes you think you know more about the case than them? Sent from my iPhone using TapatalkI wonder if soggy would be so quick to suggest the verdict was wrong if it had been Moeen Ali. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Batman Posted 15 August, 2018 Share Posted 15 August, 2018 (edited) I wonder if soggy would be so quick to suggest the verdict was wrong if it had been Moeen Ali. its weird, when Ched Evans was originally convicted and many questioned it, Sog was going on about the 'system' found him guilty and that was good enough, along with anyone questioning the original conviction 'rape apologists'. Edited 15 August, 2018 by Batman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sadoldgit Posted 15 August, 2018 Author Share Posted 15 August, 2018 A jury sat and listened to every single minute of the case, heard the judges summing up in full & deliberated. What on earth makes you think you know more about the case than them? Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk I don’t. I was just expressing an opinion that, from what I read and saw, I thought he was lucky to walk away from what occurred that night scot free. It appears you disagree. Fair enough. It’s no big deal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jonnyboy Posted 15 August, 2018 Share Posted 15 August, 2018 I wonder if soggy would be so quick to suggest the verdict was wrong if it had been Moeen Ali. We know you would've. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hypochondriac Posted 15 August, 2018 Share Posted 15 August, 2018 We know you would've.Absolutely not. Moeen Ali is a legend. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sadoldgit Posted 16 August, 2018 Author Share Posted 16 August, 2018 So then Duckster, I suggest that you and your alt right buddies read Stephen Glover’s article in the rabid right wing Dail Mail this morning regarding the trial. It would seem that one of your own agrees with me. It’s headline is “I can’t be the only person baffled by the court case that saw a violent and drunken England cricket start walk free...” No Stephen it appears that there are at least two of us. As for the alt right Chuckle Brothers, we all know that they both would have been falling over each other to make a comment about this on the terrorist thread had any of the accused been Muslim. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hypochondriac Posted 16 August, 2018 Share Posted 16 August, 2018 (edited) So then Duckster, I suggest that you and your alt right buddies read Stephen Glover’s article in the rabid right wing Dail Mail this morning regarding the trial. It would seem that one of your own agrees with me. It’s headline is “I can’t be the only person baffled by the court case that saw a violent and drunken England cricket start walk free...” No Stephen it appears that there are at least two of us. As for the alt right Chuckle Brothers, we all know that they both would have been falling over each other to make a comment about this on the terrorist thread had any of the accused been Muslim.That's odd because there were quite a few articles around the Ched Evans case at the time with similar views. Imagine what your response would have been had someone cited an article and then called the verdict strange because of it. In fact here is one of my posts at the time and one you'd do well to remember considering you were one of the ones going round labelling everyone as a rape apologist. Just as a reminder, questioning a verdict is fine but being inconsistent based on the identity of the person on trial is not: Some people read up on the details of the case and came to the conclusion that there appeared to be some inconsistencies about this particular case. When this was pointed out they were accused of being rape apologists both on here and in the media. If an appeal is now successful then hopefully those people will reflect on jumping on the bandwagon so soon and labelling people simply for questioning the judgement of the court (which everyone agrees is not infallible.) Edited 16 August, 2018 by hypochondriac Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cabbage_Face Posted 16 August, 2018 Share Posted 16 August, 2018 Fair play to him, defending a couple of nice lads being bullied. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now