Off Topic OLOF's political thread

I know. I was just rambling

 

Right I'm off to the pub. Drunk talk suits me better

 

Really……..

 

except that the prise witness said under oath that he didn't shoot until he put the gun in Kyles face then was shot in the arm

 

You said you didn’t believe me and said I was talking like a politician.
So you can **** off with the victim narrative you’re so adept at wheeling out.

 

There was also the prosecutions lying and fail to disclose the name on the coloured guy who flying kicked the young guy when he was down , they did know who it was yet again another known felon with a string of convictions

 

now now Tobes it was you who brought up that chestnut, it was Shako who was showing moral fortitude

 

What old chestnut? WTF are you on about now? You’re all over the place.

 

I know you do Roger but I’d rather you direct your homo-erotic fantasies elsewhere.

 

I would but its only you who loves them enough to reply

 

well maybe if you kept on track and answered the points raised, instead of changing the subject to deflect the answers you don't have , we may be able to proceed

 

Go back to bed Roge, you’re making no sense fella.

 

You’re confusing Marcus with Roger.

 

If that's there system then maybe his counsel went for broke and misjudged what the jury would make of the evidence, bad call when you have 12 people who maybe don't believe your assessment of the case

 

I think that’s what happened and the very least he was guilty of was manslaughter imo, but conviction on that charge wasn’t possible as the system doesn’t allow it. Can’t be right that.

 

He still hasn't really answered your question. His answer that if someone is accused of murder but they can't prove it beyond reasonable doubt they should just try and get him on what they can.
Getting past everything else the legal system works exactly as it did for Kyle Rittenhouse and Derek Chauvin. I see the problem is that he agrees with one but not the other.
The prosecution rushed to charge him before getting all the facts, that's not his fault.

 

So what would you prefer? Let Joy Reid interview him on MSNBC and get the audience to vote?

 

Come back when you’ve got something sensible to ask, that's of relevance to what I actually wrote.

 

A scouser taking offence about his integrity being questioned, surely this should be in the joke thread.

 

If you don't agree with the way justice is decided what would you do?
The jury system is trusted in every civilised country so I have faith in it. You need to offer an alternative if you don't.