[nodisharmony]

Originally posted by Ruth

Goodness me, you are exhausting.

I really don't care about your reasons for debating whatever you're debating. Although GiRTh is right - you are not actually debating, you are just spouting a load of waffle.

erm...that wasn't a compliment. I don't know why you're so pleased about it, but hey, whatever floats your boat...

Forgive me, but those words are a bit rich coming from you. You have been debating about all manner of rubbish, but as soon as someone makes a point against you, you dismiss their point as hardly worth debating about.

If you go back and read what I wrote, instead of what you think I wrote, you will see that I did not say I worked for the CPS; I said I worked closely with them. That's true. I also work closely with the police and various solicitors, because I am a director of a legal agency, which handles all manner of criminal offences and matrimonial matters.

Don't put words into my mouth. I did not say they were corrupt. I said that just because the CPS choose not to prosecute does not mean that a crime has not been committed. I could give examples I have encountered myself in my line of work where they openly agree that crimes have been committed, but decide that it is not in the public interest to prosecute. In this case, as Shilpa has not made an official complaint, they decided that it was not worth pursuing the matter. Also, Jade and her mother refused to talk to the police (which is their perogative - I'd have done the same thing). But let me get this straight with you - the police said that Shilpa has not made an official complaint. There is no complainant. That does not mean that the CPS wold have to drop the case, but in most cases where somebody does not wish to press charges, the case will not be pursued. Is that clear enough to you, or would you like me to use words of one syllable?

Given the circumstances which I have explained above, they reached the only possible conclusion - which is not the same as saying that they do not think anything criminal took place.

No. did I say I could?

As I have already stated, I can't prove it.

If I wanted to contact them, I'd do it myself thanks. I never said I was important, and I never said that I know more than they do.

Now - I have explained my position. I notice you have still to explain yours. So before you get all high and mighty, why don't you stop waffling, make a valid point, and explain how you appear to know all of this stuff about Jade Goody. Hmm?

Thanks for replying to my responses.

I did get angry for a second, as I am still facing accustions about me personally on another topic.

There are personal attacks and assumptions of a few forum users flying about all over at the minute. But things are calming down, so.

I appologise for a few of my comments to you

____________________________________________

The word, "Waffle" is usually given to politicians. (you know what I mean?)

I debate Jade Goody in depth and it is the (depth) part which is where the apparent waffling takes place.

Just ignore that part and accept it too.
____________________________________________

Nobody made a complaint! That is true. Shilpa Shetty could have made a complaint and could have won or lost?

We can only assume whether she would or not. That is also true.

However, if the Crown Prosecution Service only had the edited evidence to work from, as Endemol refused to hand over the full un-cut tapes, as there maybe material that could bounce back and hit them too! So, it kind of says that there was corruption, but we can only assume this.

Maybe Shilpa did or said something to spark this whole thing off?

Still, on the edited evidence, which we all looked at and many did assume was racism, it actually was just offensive and NOT racial.

Point out to me, anything which I actually say "I know", which forum users don't know, or can only assume and I shall explain all points of that question.