The argument/complete nonsense thread...

  • Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
  • Log in now to remove adverts - no adverts at all to registered members!
Mckechnie Orange said:
They do to a point, they're just generally more affluent or larger cities. Or with no competing cultural challenge from RL as an alternative, traditionally working class sport.

And you still don't answer the f*cking question.

Why is it that you instinctively deflect every everything that you are ever asked?

You're just whataboutery personified.

Why use multiple usernames?

You wanna be part of a discussion but you want to control it without giving anything of yourself to a community.

A wannabe dictator. How wrong am I ?

Quid pro quo.

Just answer a simple question, or just continue to face the contempt and ridicule you currently do.
Click to expand...

Multiple user names? Which are those then? More affluent cities? Which are those then? Surprised you don’t say it is because Hull was bombed in the war.
 
Cityzen said:
Yes. If it is just up to a judge you can see certain people being guilty automatically and others walking free going by some recent events.
Click to expand...

You're statistically more likely to get found not guilty via a jury outcome.
 
Heimdallr said:
Works pretty well in most other countries. A jury just seems antiquated to me - ppl who dont want to be there, potential bias, lack of education in legalese, getting bored and open to manipulation. Plus the cost and time savings of not having them.
Click to expand...

I did jury service once, years ago, and without wanting to be unkind, most of the jury I served with weren't capable.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Phinius T Bookbinder, dennisboothstash, Chesh1recat and 1 other person
Cityzen said:
Yes, but if just up to a judge certain groups are more likely to get a heavier punishment.
Click to expand...

This wouldn't change would it as the jury just decides guilt, not the punishment.

But, yes, f you are referring to the issue of one person's bias relatively unchecked - I agree, it is an issue
 
  • Like
Reactions: Cityzen
Plum said:
It wouldn't have to be just be one judge though.
Click to expand...

Here, it's between three to five depending on the severity and complexity of the case, and which court the trial is in (the higher the court, the more judges as a general rule).

Leon_ said:
I did jury service once, years ago, and without wanting to be unkind, most of the jury I served with weren't capable.
Click to expand...

I have no knowledge of UK courts or juries, but I was reading about the trial of several financial traders for manipulation back in 2011-2013 and both prosecution and defence lawyer teams noted that the jury 'switched off' for most of the day over the three week trial due to the tedium of financial regulations and complexity of the instruments. It's clearly not a fair trial and effectively coming down to a coin toss decision.
 
Leon_ said:
This wouldn't change would it as the jury just decides guilt, not the punishment.

But, yes, f you are referring to the issue of one person's bias relatively unchecked - I agree, it is an issue
Click to expand...
A friend of mine did jury service a few years ago .
He mentioned one particular female juror.
He said she had zero interest and spent most of her time engaging in sexual innuendo.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back