[hennessy]

informer you're beginning to sound like a snob.

[BlackOrWhite]

Originally Posted by Nemo123

3 strikes and you're out! You are aware that his past would be raised should he be convicted again, and reflected in a harsher sentence?

Yes, I am aware of that. I don't see what it has to do with anything.

[informer]

Originally Posted by Shasown

PMSL, you must have led a sheltered life. Incidentally the picture shows dried blood on the neighbours face, so doesnt really show wounds, blood is a liquid and tends to move about. the picture is for shock value.

Would you physically attack a neighbour over a fence?

[hennessy]

Originally Posted by informer

Would you be happy to see a rapist in the house on the basis that it was 'in the past'

Well Sisqo is guilty of statutory rape

[BlackOrWhite]

Originally Posted by informer

Would you physically attack a neighbour over a fence?

You're hearing one side of a misconstrued story. Who's to say the neighbor didn't instigate things?

And you can clearly see that the blood has spread/been smeared around his face.

[informer]

Originally Posted by BlackOrWhite

You're hearing one side of a misconstrued story. Who's to say the neighbor didn't instigate things?

And you can clearly see that the blood has spread/been smeared around his face.

i think the fact vinnie has and will always been known as a violent thug proves it wasnt instigated by the neighbour

[informer]

Originally Posted by hennessy

Well Sisqo is guilty of statutory rape

rape is forced, i think the girl was underage..that isnt rape if she consented..

im not happy with sisqo but its possible that he thought she was older?

[BlackOrWhite]

Originally Posted by informer

rape is forced, i think the girl was underage..that isnt rape if she consented..

I do defend Sisqo on this but rape and statutory rape are different.

[Nemo123]

Originally Posted by BlackOrWhite

Yes, I am aware of that. I don't see what it has to do with anything.

He has 2 convictions for violent assault, plus been in a brutal bar brawl and bit the nose of a Mirror journalist. That's at least 4 violent incidents tht we know of.

I reject your notion of the past, it's a license for everyone in the world to be violent and excuse themselves of their actions because some time has elapsed.

[Shasown]

Originally Posted by informer

i think the fact vinnie has and will always been known as a violent thug proves it wasnt instigated by the neighbour

How does it? Surely proof would be a statement to that effect, not just a reputation. But hey when has the truth ever bothered you Gazza?

[BlackOrWhite]

Originally Posted by Nemo123

He has 2 convictions for violent assault, plus been in a brutal bar brawl and bit the nose of a Mirror journalist. That's at least 4 violent incidents tht we know of.

I reject your notion of the past, it's a license for everyone in the world to be violent and excuse themselves of their actions because some time has elapsed.

I couldn't care if you 'reject my notion' The fact is we're not talking aboiut how the legal system works.

And Mirror journalists need more than bite on the f-ing nose!

[Shasown]

Originally Posted by informer

rape is forced, i think the girl was underage..that isnt rape if she consented..

im not happy with sisqo but its possible that he thought she was older?

Dont show your ignorance Paul.

[Nemo123]

Originally Posted by Shasown

How does it? Surely proof would be a statement to that effect, not just a reputation. But hey when has the truth ever bothered you Gazza?

He was found guilty.

[Nemo123]

Originally Posted by BlackOrWhite

I couldn't care if you 'reject my notion' The fact is we're not talking aboiut how the legal system works.
And Mirror journalists need more than bite on the f-ing nose!

You said it didn't matter, that's an opinion. In law it does matter, that's a fact.

[Shasown]

Originally Posted by Nemo123

He was found guilty.

Good to see you understand how the law works, he actually plead guilty, and his plea of guilty was accepted by the court as was his statement of mitigation.

[BlackOrWhite]

Originally Posted by Nemo123

You said it didn't matter, that's an opinion. In law it does matter, that's a fact.

When did I say his previous convictions wouldn't matter in a court of law? I didn't, don't put words in my mouth. What I did say was that we're not talking about law here.

[informer]

Originally Posted by Nemo123

He has 2 convictions for violent assault, plus been in a brutal bar brawl and bit the nose of a Mirror journalist. That's at least 4 violent incidents tht we know of.

I reject your notion of the past, it's a license for everyone in the world to be violent and excuse themselves of their actions because some time has elapsed.

Sends a chill down the spine of any decent human being hearing those incidents of violence

[Nemo123]

Originally Posted by Shasown

Good to see you understand how the law works, he actually plead guilty, and his plea of guilty was accepted by the court as was his statement of mitigation.

He plead guilty = he was found guilty. There's no distinction in law wrt guilt.

[Nemo123]

Originally Posted by BlackOrWhite

When did I say his previous convictions wouldn't matter in a court of law? I didn't, don't put words in my mouth. What I did say was that we're not talking about law here.

You said it didn't matter, do you want me to quote you?

[informer]

Originally Posted by Shasown

Good to see you understand how the law works, he actually plead guilty, and his plea of guilty was accepted by the court as was his statement of mitigation.

So he is guilty of crime? thats all we need to know..thanks

[BlackOrWhite]

Originally Posted by Nemo123

You said it didn't matter, do you want me to quote you?

Go ahead.

[Shasown]

Originally Posted by Nemo123

He plead guilty = he was found guilty. There's no distinction in law wrt guilt.

Once again incorrect, if you go to trial and then plead guilty before a decision is made as to your guilt, you will receive a lesser sentence than if you go to trial pleading innocence and then get found guilty.

I would say it may be a technicality but it is a distinction in law.

[BlackOrWhite]

Originally Posted by Nemo123

He plead guilty = he was found guilty. There's no distinction in law wrt guilt.

You can't be found guilty if you've pleaded it.

[informer]

Originally Posted by Shasown

Once again incorrect, if you go to trial and then plead guilty before a decision is made as to your guilt, you will receive a lesser sentence than if you go to trial pleading innocence and then get found guilty.

I would say it may be a technicality but it is a distinction in law.

The fact he has assaulted other human beings which makes him an animal in most peoples books

[Nemo123]

Originally Posted by Shasown

Once again incorrect, if you go to trial and then plead guilty before a decision is made as to your guilt, you will receive a lesser sentence than if you go to trial pleading innocence and then get found guilty.

I would say it may be a technicality but it is a distinction in law.

It's not, there's no distinction wrt guilt. For example you'll get a life sentence if you commit murder, whether you plead guilty or are found guilty.