Off Topic Ched Evans Part 2

Don't get that, Stumpy.

 

Well, that's proof positive you're full of sh*t mate. 'Ex member of the bar'? my arse, you'd absolutely understand what I was saying if true.

Here's another you'd absolutely know if you were a 'member of the bar' as you clumsily proclaimed, 'cab rank' yes/no? easy answer for wikipaedo

Tick Tock

 

Er....you on the booze again Stumpy? What have I said to upset you today?

Look, it doesn't bother me whether people here accept what I've said or not. I don't know you and you don't know me (Bigkidderz is the only exception as far as I'm aware though I did meet LoughorJack years ago at the Wembley Final - no idea what happened to him). BK is a respected poster here and will no doubt 'out' me if I'm "full of ****" as you so proudly proclaim. Hey, if you're that concerned PM the guy. Then again he's known me since he was a little kid so may be a bit biased.

But there are certain things we all have knowledge about through our experience or work and that puts them ahead of the rest of us on certain subjects, even if you disagree with their opinions. Asking me questions about the profession (well, a test really) is a bit daft isn't it? Anyone could easily look it up in 10 seconds on Google so I'm not rising to that particular bait (it's the Cab Rank Rule btw). Why you have to be quite so aggressive I really don't know but there you go. I'll still sleep tonight.

Oh, by the way, using word like 'wikipaedo' can be taken the wrong way. Tread carefully.

Anyway....great article on the Ched Evans issue. Dai....take note of the opening 9 words:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...-mob-never-forgive-Ched-Evans-successful.html

 

Nothing to 'upset' Kiff, but if you feel you have a right to bullshit then I have a rite to shout bollox mate, as loud as I want. Simple as that really, dude

Anyway, for the sake of the forum, I'll ignore you from now.

 

I'm broken hearted that an inconsequential nobody on a football forum is now ignoring me . Oh and listen, 'mate' it's a shame you couldn't contribute to the Ched Evans debate instead of shouting.

 

This is where you are confused..the verdict has not been overturned at all. if it had there would be no reason for another hearing. He has only been granted an appeal and that is normal if requested and as far as his record shows he has a guilty mark on it and that wont be removed if he don't win his appeal.....He is still regarded as guilty. how you don't understand that is beyond belief....The appeal tells you that his verdict still stands and if it was overturned he could walk free and that would be it.....he has only been granted an appeal and that does not change anything until the appeal takes place where the judge after hearing all the evidence will either say The guilty charge stands or the guilty charge is overruled and quashed and chad is pronounced innocent.....Why you cant comprehend that i don't know...

 

Dai - the Appeal has been heard and the original verdict quashed as it was deemed unsafe. The Prosecution said before the result that they would demand a retrial - and that is what is happening.

 

There would be no need of a retrial if he was deemed innocent, so there is a case to answer and he has a chance to clear his name and if he dont then the guilty charge stands......

 

"This is where you are confused" The King of Irony strikes again.

The conviction has been quashed. this means it's as if it never happened. The current state of play is that the man is innocent until the Crown proves him guilty. They may succeed, they may not.

These are legal realities, Dai no matter what you, Stumpy or any other idiot on here thinks. Look.... you morons clearly have a low opinion of me and my experience and I get that - because you're morons that should be ridiculed and pitied in equal measure. But if you don't accept it from me.....

This is from an established, respected, online legal dictionary:
http://www.duhaime.org/LegalDictionary/Q/Quash.aspx

"To Quash - To set aside; to rescind; to vacate; to render null and void.

To quash a conviction means to set it aside as if it never existed."

Got it? Jeesh! Daft as a brush doesn't begin to describe you. Honestly.

 

I dont know what Bar you practiced in but you need to sharpen those points on your darts...

 

I actually think I may have hit the bullseye. I thought I could hear a loud clanging sound from North Gower as the ****ing penny dropped in your empty skull.

 

Dai, his appeal to have the verdict overturned was successful hence the re trial

 

Valley, the guy is either on a big wind-up (yes he may be that sad) or he's genuinely thick as a brick. I'm leaning towards the latter.

 

Why would he need a re trial ? he should be a free man.......he is guilty as sin...,ok.

 

The re-trial will determine his guilt - when all the evidence, including that new evidence presented at his successful appeal, will be put before the Court & Jury.

 

Clearly a wind up Taff. Nobody could be that stupid. I wouldn't bother.

 

There's no doubt it's the latter. He'd be happy with Pulis as our manager. Just sit back and let Taff deal with him

 

Where's my red wine.....

 

Shoved down Dais throat

 

Maybe we should work out a rota?