|
|
Post by Steve on Mar 10, 2023 21:00:04 GMT
And you don't realise that those comments in sentencing are strongly indicative of what had been said in evidence? Really? And since we know that the quote in sentencing of William Walter's evidence is a false statement the whole thing becomes sus. Are you by any chance a leading member of the Cyclists can do what the fuck they like party? Duh, Steve! Of course, Walker's comments were part of the evidence. Incorrect statements of fact are given in evidence all the time. It's the jury's job to sift through the evidence and find the facts. They are likely to have given exactly zero credence to Walker's claim if, as you say, it is obvious that she hadn't stopped. They will have reached their decision based on what we all saw on the video footage. Duh again! So you're guessing. And despite clear evidence of false evidence you think this is a safe conviction to be celebrated. I note you don't deny your Cyclists are to be allowed to do what the fuck they like allegiances |
|
|
|
Post by Einhorn on Mar 10, 2023 21:00:29 GMT
Are you by any chance a leading member of the Cyclists can do what the fuck they like party? Are you by any chance anally retentive about rules to the point that you think a death sentence is an appropriate punishment for a minor breach of the law? If this case demonstrates anything, it demonstrates that there is no vigilantes’ charter. Suck it up, Vicar. |
|
|
|
Post by Einhorn on Mar 10, 2023 21:01:21 GMT
So you're guessing. And despite clear evidence of false evidence you think this is a safe conviction to be celebrated. I note you don't deny your Cyclists are to be allowed to do what the fuck they like allegiances Once again, there is no vilgilantes' charter. That's gotta be hard for someone as obsessed by rules as you, but you should try to come to terms with it. |
|
|
|
Post by Steve on Mar 10, 2023 21:02:23 GMT
Are you by any chance a leading member of the Cyclists can do what the fuck they like party? Are you by any chance anally retentive about rules to the point that you think a death sentence is an appropriate punishment for a minor breach of the law? If this case demonstrates anything, it demonstrates that there is no vigilantes’ charter. Suck it up, Vicar. Still making up false stories about me because you've been shown up again. Go on Darling show us where I have ever said anything about death to rule breakers. |
|
|
|
Post by Einhorn on Mar 10, 2023 21:03:51 GMT
Are you by any chance anally retentive about rules to the point that you think a death sentence is an appropriate punishment for a minor breach of the law? If this case demonstrates anything, it demonstrates that there is no vigilantes’ charter. Suck it up, Vicar. Still making up false stories about me because you've been shown up again. Go on Darling show us where I have ever said anything about death to rule breakers. Your bullshit about the width of the path and the highway code. As if any sane person gives a shit about those. The only relevant question was: could this death have been avoided if Grey had acted reasonably? Instead, you obsessed about trivial rules. |
|
|
|
Post by Steve on Mar 10, 2023 21:08:52 GMT
You really can't do debate can you
|
|
|
|
Post by Einhorn on Mar 10, 2023 21:12:30 GMT
You really can't do debate can you There's no vigilantes' charter, Vicar. Learn to live with that. |
|
|
|
Post by The Squeezed Middle on Mar 10, 2023 21:12:40 GMT
Grey was walking in the centre of the footpath. Seeing the cyclist, she veered her trajectory towards her. When the cyclist was abreast, there is movement of Grey's elbow and shoulder, and there is as much to suggest she pushed that lady as there is to suggest she merely made contact with her...There is absolutely no evidence to suggest either, you utterly disingenuous tool.  |
|
|
|
Post by Toreador on Mar 10, 2023 21:13:37 GMT
Still making up false stories about me because you've been shown up again. Go on Darling show us where I have ever said anything about death to rule breakers. Your bullshit about the width of the path and the highway code. As if any sane person gives a shit about those. The only relevant question was: could this death have been avoided if Grey had acted reasonably? Instead, you obsessed about trivial rules. It would certainly have been avoided had the woman not been illegally cycling on the footpath. |
|
|
|
Post by Einhorn on Mar 10, 2023 21:13:52 GMT
Grey was walking in the centre of the footpath. Seeing the cyclist, she veered her trajectory towards her. When the cyclist was abreast, there is movement of Grey's elbow and shoulder, and there is as much to suggest she pushed that lady as there is to suggest she merely made contact with her...There is absolutely no evidence to suggest either, you utterly disingenuous tool. Well, I'm satisfied with the outcome, Squeaky. Meanwhile, you've shown yet again that you don't have the first understanding of how the law works. Well done on that law degree you don't have. |
|
|
|
Post by Einhorn on Mar 10, 2023 21:15:30 GMT
Your bullshit about the width of the path and the highway code. As if any sane person gives a shit about those. The only relevant question was: could this death have been avoided if Grey had acted reasonably? Instead, you obsessed about trivial rules. It would certainly have been avoided had the woman not been illegally cycling on the footpath. Another red-faced gammon adds his view that it's appropriate to endanger a life for a minor breach of the rules. Sorry your side lost, Sal. |
|
|
|
Post by The Squeezed Middle on Mar 10, 2023 21:16:43 GMT
There is absolutely no evidence to suggest either, you utterly disingenuous tool. Well, I'm satisfied with the outcome, Squeaky. Meanwhile, you've shown yet again that you don't have the first understanding of how the law works. Well done on that law degree you don't have. And well done on lying about the video evidence.
Are you Judge Fudge, darling? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 10, 2023 21:17:51 GMT
There's two things that strike me from the discussion here.
1. There is far too much being read into a video where the action is partly on and partly off the screen frame. Yes, it is evidence, but it could be much clearer if the camera angle had been different. To decide a case on the strength of that video alone would be unsafe.
2. The diverse points made by various forum members shows there is a reasonable case for appeal against sentence.
I would like to see an appeal against conviction, too.
|
|
|
|
Post by Einhorn on Mar 10, 2023 21:18:08 GMT
Well, I'm satisfied with the outcome, Squeaky. Meanwhile, you've shown yet again that you don't have the first understanding of how the law works. Well done on that law degree you don't have. And well done on lying about the video evidence.
Are you Judge Fudge, darling? Sincerely sorry your side lost, Squeaky. There's a chance with the appeal. You can't be a two-time loser, Squeaky. |
|
|
|
Post by The Squeezed Middle on Mar 10, 2023 21:22:35 GMT
And well done on lying about the video evidence.
Are you Judge Fudge, darling? Sincerely sorry your side lost, Squeaky. There's a chance with the appeal. You can't be a two-time loser, Squeaky. You're right, I'll never beat your record Whoiney. But good to see you magnanimous, as ever, in defeat. See you in the Court of Appeal.
|
|
