An orse is a typing error. See post 86 :p :
Printable View
An orse is a typing error. See post 86 :p :
D'oh typo - I normally notice them and edit the post. :uhoh:
I don't know how the first guy arrested can be expected to go back to his life after that, if he had any secrets before this he hasn't now.
What's an antipodean? Is it someone without legs like a centipede is someone with hundred or so legs?Quote:
Originally Posted by Daniel
The first guy, Tom Stephens, was arrested and taken away to prison for interrogation. Meanwhile, his house was searched in excruciating detail, his computers, phone, and private papers were all seized, and during the three days that he was held prisoner by the Crown, any last vestige of privacy that the man had ever had was completely destroyed.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ian McC
You may find this acceptable, given that Mr. Stephens was suspected of a very serious crime, but do you still find it acceptable when you realise that at the time of his arrest and subsequent public humiliation, the police did not even believe that Tom Stephens was probably their man. They thought he might be, that there was a chance that he was in fact the murderer, and that, for them, and for the British legal system, was enough to deprive Tom Stephens of all his civil rights.
This is what we have come to in Britain. In the US, which Brits like to claim is less civilised than Britain, Tom Stephens, being innocent, would have been protected against the dreaded knock on the door in the middle of the night, protected against being dragged away for interrogation. He would have been secure from having his home searched, and his possessions seized. He would have had rights. But not here. This, under Blair, has nearly become a police state.
I don't agree with Arrows and others that we should all assume, when discussing the case, that Stephen Wright is innocent. Juries have to do that; forum members don't.
In most cases, if police and prosecutors are doing their job properly, the assumption of innocence is totally false; most people charged with murder are charged with it because they did it. There aren't that many completely bungled murder investigations, and even fewer where there are cameras and reporters and hordes of CPS lawyers watching the police's every move. This investigation is, in my opinion, an unlikely candidate for the 2006 Police Screw-Up Of The Year.
That is why, having seen no evidence to the contary, I presume for the time being that Stephen Wright is guilty. I certainly hope he is.
Now while I am fully in accordance with you on your presumption of innocence theory I am still rigid in my assertion that they should burn him face down in his cell just to be on the safe side and then if he is subsequenly found to be innocent The Queen can give him a Royal Pardon upon which his blackened remains can be transferred from the prison graveyard to consecrated ground at a location of his choice.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gannex
You can't say fairer than that can you?
Yours Leniantly
The Reverend Damien Cumblast
Church
Let's hope you're not called up for jury service on this case then...Quote:
Originally Posted by Gannex
Two words - Colin StaggQuote:
Originally Posted by Gannex
I bought one of his red hot chilli con carnes from Tescos last week.Quote:
Originally Posted by BeansBeansBeans
Christ it was a real ring stinger :(