Wandering Off Topic

[faithlilly]

I think you have a morbid fascination with me too, sweetie xx

If I had followed you from board to board, even when you were ignored I’d agree….but i didn’t, did I?
.

[Vertigo Swirl]

If I had followed you from board to board, even when you were ignored I’d agree….but i didn’t, did I?
.

It seems you’re paranoid as well as desperate for my attention.  Enough now. 

[faithlilly]

Alex Tiffin has tweeted that a certain Tory MP has been arrested on multiple sexual abuse charges. This was a tweet in reply.

‘Hi Alex,
Please can I ask you politely to delete this tweet?
Giving this accused person the possible argument that they cannot expect a fair trial because they were named on social media is undesirable.
Many thanks.’

Now tell me that Brueckner won’t have a similar argument if he ever comes to trial?

[Vertigo Swirl]

Alex Tiffin has tweeted that a certain Tory MP has been arrested on multiple sexual abuse charges. This was a tweet in reply.

‘Hi Alex,
Please can I ask you politely to delete this tweet?
Giving this accused person the possible argument that they cannot expect a fair trial because they were named on social media is undesirable.
Many thanks.’

Now tell me that Brueckner won’t have a similar argument if he ever comes to trial?

Who is Alex Tiffin and who asked him to withdraw the tweet?  Actually I’m more interested to know who the Tory MP is….anyone we’ve heard of? One wink for yes, two for no, three if it’s a blonde with silly hair. 

 Personally I don’t see how naming him now if he goes on to be charged would affect his right to a fair trial, however I can see how naming him now would affect his reputation and lifestyle were charges never to be brought. 

[sadie]

Alex Tiffin has tweeted that a certain Tory MP has been arrested on multiple sexual abuse charges. This was a tweet in reply.

‘Hi Alex,
Please can I ask you politely to delete this tweet?
Giving this accused person the possible argument that they cannot expect a fair trial because they were named on social media is undesirable.
Many thanks.’

Now tell me that Brueckner won’t have a similar argument if he ever comes to trial?

I think that you may be right.  Even if guilty, Brueckner may get off very lightly, even scot free, because of things said about him on the internet and in newspapers, IMO.
Accusations etc.

And who started it all?   Our dear friend Goncalo de Sousa Amaral.  Cunning devil (IMO).   I wonder, was he paid to expose Brueckner?   If so, by whom?

[G-Unit]

I think that you may be right.  Even if guilty, Brueckner may get off very lightly, even scot free, because of things said about him on the internet and in newspapers, IMO.
Accusations etc.

And who started it all?   Our dear friend Goncalo de Sousa Amaral.  Cunning devil (IMO).   I wonder, was he paid to expose Brueckner?   If so, by whom?

Who told the world Brueckner was guilty of murder? That's what will affect his trial, if it ever happens, not anything Amaral said.

[Mr Gray]

Who told the world Brueckner was guilty of murder? That's what will affect his trial, if it ever happens, not anything Amaral said.

In your opinion... Which is worthless imo.
It will all depend on the evidence

[sadie]

Who told the world Brueckner was guilty of murder? That's what will affect his trial, if it ever happens, not anything Amaral said.

Amaral went out of his way to start the whole thing which thanks to some jiggery-pokery (disinformation somewhere) appears to have created a cloud hiding what is actually going on from the watchful ones.  The watchful ones being us and any detectives working on the case.


We all knew that Amaral was virtually always up to something anti-Mccann.  Why didn't we think of this?

[G-Unit]

In your opinion... Which is worthless imo.
It will all depend on the evidence

The evidence is clear.

[Vertigo Swirl]

The evidence is clear.

No it isn’t unless you believe that HCW has told us everything he has.  Do you believe that?

[G-Unit]

Amaral went out of his way to start the whole thing which thanks to some jiggery-pokery (disinformation somewhere) appears to have created a cloud hiding what is actually going on from the watchful ones.  The watchful ones being us and any detectives working on the case.


We all knew that Amaral was virtually always up to something anti-Mccann.  Why didn't we think of this?

It still doesn't have any effect on Brueckner's right to the presumption of innocence, just as Amaral's book didn't affect the McCanns' right to the presumption of innocence. (according to Portugal's Supreme Court)

[G-Unit]

No it isn’t unless you believe that HCW has told us everything he has.  Do you believe that?

It's not about what Wolters has, it's about who can pronounce guilt.

[Wonderfulspam]

No it isn’t unless you believe that HCW has told us everything he has.  Do you believe that?

Does he actually have anything?

It doesn't appear so.

[Vertigo Swirl]

It's not about what Wolters has, it's about who can pronounce guilt.

So when you say "the evidence is clear" what do you mean exactly?

[Wonderfulspam]

So when you say "the evidence is clear" what do you mean exactly?

That there isn't any.