• Help Support The Rugby Forum :

A Political Thread pt. 2

Reiser99 said:
J

In fairness, he is right.
Click to expand...
Every new government requires bedding in time. Remember what Blair said? They are new to Government and that is the worst time to Govern.

Tories have run out of excuses after 14 years.
 
Reiser99 said:
J

In fairness, he is right.
Click to expand...
He is, but the whole we inherited this mess won't see out 8/10 years in power. If the Tories run out of excuses, Labour will as well if they roll that excuse out for two terms.

He could also just do what he did when he got elected the Labour leader and sack off his pledges when he's in power.
 
I see Spacey is in the news again C4 documentary and his friends going out to bat for him.

I find interesting what the director Edgar Wright said in an interview I heard once, this was post him directing Baby Driver and post Spacey as it was during lockdown. It was essentially loads of people in Hollywood are known shits but they make money so people turn a blind eye to it. Yet when it comes out nobody works with them anymore. You can tell the ones who aren't shits because they keep working.
 
While I personally believe there is no smoke without fire, he hasn't been convicted, so should be free to work again. Unfortunately, due to the burden of proof a conviction was always unlikely. However, his reputation is in tatters and it's doubtful he'll get any major work soon and many people will boycott his future work anyway.
 
Reiser99 said:
While I personally believe there is no smoke without fire, he hasn't been convicted, so should be free to work again. Unfortunately, due to the burden of proof a conviction was always unlikely. However, his reputation is in tatters and it's doubtful he'll get any major work soon and many people will boycott his future work anyway.
Click to expand...
I don't agree with the phrase no smoke without fire. Mainly because people use it for when there a singular allegation against one person. That has the wrong smell as there are vindictive and spiteful people out there. Allegations should always treated fairly and victims treated as they are telling the truth and believed.

A pattern of abuse however with multiple claims from diffrent sources. That's an entirely diffrent matter. If wafts of people come out the woodwork telling stories like Weinstein or Trump then it highly likely that a percentage are true.
 
ncurd said:
I don't agree with the phrase no smoke without fire. Mainly because people use it for when there a singular allegation against one person. That has the wrong smell as there are vindictive and spiteful people out there. Allegations should always treated fairly and victims treated as they are telling the truth and believed.

A pattern of abuse however with multiple claims from diffrent sources. That's an entirely diffrent matter. If wafts of people come out the woodwork telling stories like Weinstein or Trump then it highly likely that a percentage are true.
Click to expand...

In the post office case the victim was the Post Office and part of the problem was they were treated as telling the truth and must be believed.
 
Saintjay said:
In the post office case the victim was the Post Office and part of the problem was they were treated as telling the truth and must be believed.
Click to expand...
That's a nonsense argument. That issue is complete opposite there was systemic issues perpetuated on victims (the postmasters) that were so huge nobody spoke up and went hey how are 100's of people getting this wrong?

I also dislike equivalent a corporation with a sexual assault victim it's crass and shitty in a political discussion.
 
ncurd said:
That's a nonsense argument. That issue is complete opposite there was systemic issues perpetuated on victims (the postmasters) that were so huge nobody spoke up and went hey how are 100's of people getting this wrong?

I also dislike equivalent a corporation with a sexual assault victim it's crass and shitty in a political discussion.
Click to expand...
People did speak up and were ignored, silenced etc. At the point of trial individual postmasters were the accused not the victims. Both in court and out, in the court of public opinion they were shunned, ostracised, ignored partly because the misguided belief Post Office must be telling the truth. The post office did know but pursued people any way. Bates and co were ignored for years.

This is a political discussion about justice, being innocencet until proven guilty, and the court of public opinion. It's a fine balance to support a victim whilst also maintaining that a person is innocent until proven other wise.

If you'd have said every victim of crime must be taken seriously and given a prompt and effective investigation until the evidence proves different I'd have agreed with you. Justice is blind and based on facts and evidence not oh well so many people said it so it must be true. I'll accept that doesn't always happen but still in the majority of cases where all the facts and evidence are available justice prevails.
 
Last edited:
Balance of probabilities (>50%) vs Beyond a reasonable doubt (>75%, although I have been told by police reality is >80% or as high as 99%) that the evidence shows a criminal act(s) have taken place for the justice system to apply to criminals. CPS and public money to prosecute etc.

I am of the opinion Spacey "probably" did sexually assault his victims. But he's such a fine actor that his testimonies likely persuaded the juries not to find him guilty beyond a reasonable doubt threshold.

The system isn't perfect but that is how we have set it vs other injustices such as Guildford 4/ B'ing 6.

That's why we get such big scandals of injustice like the Post office, the blood scandal, Hillsborough, Grenfell, Manchester Arena bombing….. but justice delayed is justice denied.
 
McTallshort said:
How was the Post Office the victim?
Click to expand...
Now they are definitely not the victim but at the time of trial most people were charged with theft and false accounting from what i can tell. Theft someone dishonesty appropriated property belonging to 'another', false accounting caused harm or loss to 'another'. The 'another' being the post office. I can't see the exact wording of the charges but i doubt it was x amount from John Smiths savings etc. You could argue that it was allegedly public money stolen and not the post office's.

Personaly i don't feel any public body should also be allowed to bring criminal prosecutions and circumvent the CPS. Which is what the post office did by being the 'another' and the prosecution.
 
Saintjay said:
Now they are definitely not the victim but at the time of trial most people were charged with theft and false accounting from what i can tell. Theft someone dishonesty appropriated property belonging to 'another', false accounting caused harm or loss to 'another'. The 'another' being the post office. I can't see the exact wording of the charges but i doubt it was x amount from John Smiths savings etc. You could argue that it was allegedly public money stolen and not the post office's.

Personaly i don't feel any public body should also be allowed to bring criminal prosecutions and circumvent the CPS. Which is what the post office did by being the 'another' and the prosecution.
Click to expand...
That's a good point. As it stood they were being robbed but the truth was obviously different
 

Similar threads

Bada-Bing!
Antisocial, societal issues thread
3 4 5
Replies
93
Views
2K
Bada-Bing!
Bada-Bing!
Bada-Bing!
The Biking thread
2 3 4
Replies
72
Views
2K
die_mole
die_mole
Bada-Bing!
The Ukraine War thread
22 23 24
Replies
479
Views
17K
McTallshort
McTallshort
T
Is anyone using a club management system for their local club?
Replies
0
Views
611
Try-Hard Tackler
T
M
Had to stare someone down at a red light
Replies
6
Views
956
Al Bangor
Al Bangor

Latest posts

Top