Really? You going to defend him in court then Chapper? You fancy he's innocent? ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- It was claimed that he was among the "most prolific" offenders at violent standoff on the Woodvale Road. Opposing bail, a police officer said CCTV footage showed Rodgers attacking police lines. "The defendant is also seen striking police with a baton taken from riot police, standing on a police Landrover and attempting to break the wing mirrors," he told the court. Following his arrest Rodgers admitted being the person on the footage but claimed to have no recollection of the incident. http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/n...aton-in-twelfth-riot-court-told-29424326.html
Oops, nearly forgot: Dressed in a Glasgow Rangers football shirt, Rodgers nodded when the alleged offences were put to him.
has he been convicted? alleged then. ps. two posts, a link and a quote from said link? cracking wee bite there like!
There's simply no need for this. I know he's chucked football now, but does a middle aged man really need to continue ingratiating himself with the fans after his career is over? Shame on you Henke Larsson
You really are a simpleton Alleged: An alleged burglar is someone who has been accused of being a burglar but against whom no charges have been proved. An alleged incident is an event that is said to have taken place but has not yet been verified. In their zeal to protect the rights of the accused, newspapers and law enforcement officials (And Chapper)sometimes misuse alleged. Someone arrested for murder may be only an alleged murderer, for example, but is a real, not an alleged, suspect in that his or her status as a suspect is not in doubt. Similarly, if the money from a safe is known to have been stolen and not merely mislaid, then we may safely speak of a theft without having to qualify our description with alleged.
So chapper is right then? The only simpleton here is you. What the **** do you know about court procedure fanny features. Until the judge declares a verdict it is alleged. In fact, don't answer that, no one cares.
Two accounts Chapper, or are you just his personal secretary? It's very very simple if you care to read what the definition of Alleged actually says rather than embarking on a knee jerk rant of a point which was not addressed to you. Maybe you should trawl back to what I said and what Chapper said and it is even simpler. I can see i'm going to have to spell this out for you aren't I? He has been remanded or has he been remanded Allegedly? He has admitted it was he who had the baton, so it has been established that he did have a baton and attacked the Police with it, so it is no longer an allegation it is a fact. He may of course try and change his defence and say it was not him after all but until he does it is no longer an allegation. It is alleged he was one of the "most prolific" offenders at the riot as that has yet to be established. allege (verb) to state that someone has done something illegal or wrong without giving proof: Cambridge Dictionary
I won't argue with you dev. You know **** all about the inner workings of a court room, this much is clear.
plus... a bit of google bashing two dictionary quotes a multi-quote post an accusation of multiple accounts (again) and the ever so familiar sight of Bold and Italic fonts (you know he's proper wound up when the Underline comes out!) quite a bite indeed, think we're gonna need bigger boat...
I know enough about the workings of a Court (and this is not a court) to know they don't use the word allegedly when talking about the accused. That's why he's called the Accused and not the Alleged.
You ever wonder why no one has any time for you, why no one bothers with your garbage? And oh aye, I was deadly serious when I said MD was you
Well see anybody who appears in court charged with an offence is known as the accused . Even before any evidence has been seen they are known as the accused . Even when they are found innocent of any wrong doing they are still known as the accused . So the accused can be allegedly guilty of a crime . It is up to the jury to consider if the allegations against the accused have been proven or not . Off course that is all academic if the accused admits his guilt .
and how many posts is that now? quick call me stupid and we'll have heard your whole repertoire. why don't you just listen to your wee phantom PM-er and stop wasting your time with me?
