US Presidential Election 2024

[Archery1969]

He's not guilty because he's charged, he's guilty of what he's said. The thing about Trump is that everything he says, including much of what he says in private behind closed doors when he doesn't know he's being recorded, is in the public domain, so the evidence is plain to see.

Nobody has a problem accusing a footballer of a red card offence on video evidence prior to a formal FA hearing.

You didn't think there was any chance of Lucy Letby being cleared, did you?

Well as I have said before Derek I'm sure you are right as always. Though our standards for someone being guilty are worlds apart ... I'm a bit old fashioned, I believe in innocent until PROVEN guilty clearly you believe in guilty without the opportunity to defend yourself! You have no idea how glad I am that you are not and thankfully will never be our Minister for Justice, god knows how many people will be declared guilty before trial ... you know just as Harriet Harman found Boris so guilty!

Article 6 of the ECHR and the presumption of innocence refers to being found guilty before the application of punishment or incarceration. As I'm not about to beat Trump up and incarcerate him I'm allowed to accuse him of guilt. If he doesn't like it he can sue me for deflamation.

After all, if the prosecution can't call somebody guilty before trial, than noboby could be tried, could they? The prosecution can't presume innocence.

Audio tape of Trump asking to "find 11,780 votes" together with video of him telling armed thugs to march on the Capitol is 100% proof of guilt.

What about Mason Greenwood ?

Most women say he his guilty even though the CPS dropped the charges.

[Derek27]

What about Mason Greenwood ?

Most women say he his guilty even though the CPS dropped the charges.

I don't know anything about that case (lost count of footballers charged with rape) or why the CPS dropped charges.

[Archery1969]

What about Mason Greenwood ?

Most women say he his guilty even though the CPS dropped the charges.

I don't know anything about that case (lost count of footballers charged with rape) or why the CPS dropped charges.

I believe the woman refused to testify in court even though Police and CPS had her recorded statement plus recording of the incident. Which is now all over the internet.

[Derek27]

What about Mason Greenwood ?

Most women say he his guilty even though the CPS dropped the charges.

I don't know anything about that case (lost count of footballers charged with rape) or why the CPS dropped charges.

I believe the woman refused to testify in court even though Police and CPS had her recorded statement plus recording of the incident. Which is now all over the internet.

Can't really comment as I haven't seen it, but when you see overwhelming evidence with your own eyes you can call someone guilty, as with Trump and the buffoon.

[Kai]

What about Mason Greenwood ?

Most women say he his guilty even though the CPS dropped the charges.

I don't know anything about that case (lost count of footballers charged with rape) or why the CPS dropped charges.

Like Archery said the leaked audio is easy to find online, but be warned, it's enough to make your stomach turn

[Archery1969]

What about Mason Greenwood ?

Most women say he his guilty even though the CPS dropped the charges.

I don't know anything about that case (lost count of footballers charged with rape) or why the CPS dropped charges.

Like Archery said the leaked audio is easy to find online, but be warned, it's enough to make your stomach turn

That’s the thing I don’t understand about the CPS decision. Before it was all over the internet, which could damage the case, they had it, didn’t need the woman in court. So why did they drop the charges.

I understand if not attending then defence could argue they can’t cross examine. But come on, everyone and their dog knows it was him in the recording, he hasn’t even denied it.

This is where the UK so called justice system is all wrong. He has got off with seriously expensive lawyers which weren’t paid for by himself.

And why suddenly the woman refused to testify is either because she was scared too or is getting several hundred thousands of pounds to basically shut up.

Rumour has it that a deal has been done to ship him off to the super Arab league with an 8 figure deal.

Manchester United should hold their heads in shame and the public and TV broadcasters should boycott their games.

Utterly disgusting and that says allot coming from me.

[jamesedwards]

I don't know anything about that case (lost count of footballers charged with rape) or why the CPS dropped charges.

Like Archery said the leaked audio is easy to find online, but be warned, it's enough to make your stomach turn

That’s the thing I don’t understand about the CPS decision. Before it was all over the internet, which could damage the case, they had it, didn’t need the woman in court. So why did they drop the charges.

I understand if not attending then defence could argue they can’t cross examine. But come on, everyone and their dog knows it was him in the recording, he hasn’t even denied it.

This is where the UK so called justice system is all wrong. He has got off with seriously expensive lawyers which weren’t paid for by himself.

And why suddenly the woman refused to testify is either because she was scared too or is getting several hundred thousands of pounds to basically shut up.

Rumour has it that a deal has been done to ship him off to the super Arab league with an 8 figure deal.

Manchester United should hold their heads in shame and the public and TV broadcasters should boycott their games.

Utterly disgusting and that says allot coming from me.

The victim and perp are engaged and had a baby together last month.

[Archery1969]

Like Archery said the leaked audio is easy to find online, but be warned, it's enough to make your stomach turn

That’s the thing I don’t understand about the CPS decision. Before it was all over the internet, which could damage the case, they had it, didn’t need the woman in court. So why did they drop the charges.

I understand if not attending then defence could argue they can’t cross examine. But come on, everyone and their dog knows it was him in the recording, he hasn’t even denied it.

This is where the UK so called justice system is all wrong. He has got off with seriously expensive lawyers which weren’t paid for by himself.

And why suddenly the woman refused to testify is either because she was scared too or is getting several hundred thousands of pounds to basically shut up.

Rumour has it that a deal has been done to ship him off to the super Arab league with an 8 figure deal.

Manchester United should hold their heads in shame and the public and TV broadcasters should boycott their games.

Utterly disgusting and that says allot coming from me.

The victim and perp are engaged and had a baby together last month.

Well, how many man/woman hours were wasted on that by the Police and CPS.

I’m sure the Arab super league will embrace them and make them even richer.

Feel very sorry for the baby/child.

[Derek27]

From my own experience as a juror on a domestic rape case, I'm not entirely sure that would be sufficient to convict him without the testomy of the victim. I can't see how he could convince a jury that that wasn't attempted rape if she gave evidence and countered any alternative situations his defence comes up with, but without her the defense would go unchallenged.

What do you think firlandfarms? Can you call him guilty or is he innocent (until proven guilty)?

[Kai]

It's unbelievable but there seems to be another shitstorm brewing this evening around Greenwood's replacement signing Antony. His ex-wife is filing a police report for domestic violence.

[Derek27]

It's unbelievable but there seems to be another shitstorm brewing this evening around Greenwood's replacement signing Antony. His ex-wife is filing a police report for domestic violence.

What's that got to do with the US Presidental Election 2024?

[firlandsfarm]

Article 6 of the ECHR and the presumption of innocence refers to being found guilty before the application of punishment or incarceration. As I'm not about to beat Trump up and incarcerate him I'm allowed to accuse him of guilt. If he doesn't like it he can sue me for deflamation.

After all, if the prosecution can't call somebody guilty before trial, than noboby could be tried, could they? The prosecution can't presume innocence.

Audio tape of Trump asking to "find 11,780 votes" together with video of him telling armed thugs to march on the Capitol is 100% proof of guilt.

Yes, I'm sure you are right Derek as always.

[firlandsfarm]

Can't really comment as I haven't seen it, but when you see overwhelming evidence with your own eyes you can call someone guilty, as with Trump and the buffoon.

Well there is plenty of evidence in this forum to enable me to say you, Derek, are guilty of excessively biased interpretation of events based on just one side of a position.

BTW if you say to a partner "I need you to find another £10,000 to enable me to buy that house" should you be charged with incitement to commit robbery (and therefore be guilty)?

[firlandsfarm]

Can't really comment as I haven't seen it, but when you see overwhelming evidence with your own eyes you can call someone guilty, as with Trump and the buffoon.

So in those circumstances there is no need for a trial and no need to hear what the defence will say?

[firlandsfarm]

From my own experience as a juror on a domestic rape case, I'm not entirely sure that would be sufficient to convict him without the testomy of the victim. I can't see how he could convince a jury that that wasn't attempted rape if she gave evidence and countered any alternative situations his defence comes up with, but without her the defense would go unchallenged.

What do you think firlandfarms? Can you call him guilty or is he innocent (until proven guilty)?

I have no detailed knowledge of the case, I hear of such cases in the news but don't really take an interest. I trust my 12 peers to have the patience and ability to come up with a true decision having heard the full presentation from both sides. I expect you will be surprised to hear that likewise I don't claim Boris or Trump are innocent (other than not being proven guilty), I'm a don't knower. I recommend everyone watches the film "12 Angry Men" (the 1957 version with Henry Fonda, can't comment on the 1997 version, never seen it) ... although staged fiction it's quite an eyeopener!