Jump to content

Ad Lib

Gold Members
  • Content Count

    12,364
  • Joined

  • Days Won

    9

Ad Lib last won the day on October 7 2015

Ad Lib had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

2,418 Excellent

5 Followers

About Ad Lib

  • Rank
    Watch out Simon Stainrod
  • Birthday 27/05/1991

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
    http://www.predictableparadox.co.uk

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    London

Recent Profile Visitors

36,398 profile views
  1. Zac Rudden is Sean Welsh on stilts and I claim my £100.
  2. Just one question: If Clyde is such a big club and the top flight and major cups are so important how come Clyde hasn’t even been eligible to win the top flight since before James Callaghan became Prime Minister and they haven’t won a major domestic trophy since shortly after rationing was discontinued? If your criteria suggests Dumbarton is a bigger club than St Johnstone, or that Queen’s Park is a comparable team to Kilmarnock or Dundee United, the problem is probably with your criteria.
  3. It’s really unnecessary to use the derogatory G epithet to describe Clyde fans when “She Was Asking for It FC” would do.
  4. The balance of probabilities *is* a burden of proof you walloper. It’s just a less demanding burden of proof than for criminal trials. A criminal trial also requires corroboration in Scotland: a standard not required in other countries and which is notoriously difficult to secure in sexual offences cases. Let’s just remember what the judge said: “Having carefully examined and scrutinised the whole evidence in the case, I find the evidence of the pursuer to be cogent, persuasive and compelling.” “I find that in the early hours of Sunday 2 January 2011, at the flat in Greig Crescent, Armadale, both defenders took advantage of the pursuer when she was vulnerable through an excessive intake of alcohol and, because her cognitive functioning and decision-making processes were so impaired, was incapable of giving meaningful consent; and that they each raped her.” ”My general impression of the first defender was that, particularly in relation to his assessment of the pursuer’s condition, his evidence was given with a view to his own interests rather than in accordance with the oath which he had taken. I did not find his evidence to be persuasive.” Bear in mind that the two men admitted that they carried out sexual acts on the woman in question. Their defence was that the acts were consented to. That they were merely total creeps. They were complete and utter beasts, and the judge was in no doubt whatsoever about that. In all probability but for the archaic corroboration requirement, the reasonable doubt as to consent threshold would have been met for a criminal conviction and a jury would have found as such. But still, if it makes you feel any better about funding the rapers of intoxicated women, by all means cling to the fact that it’s merely a judge in a civil court’s conclusion that the lying shits did it.
  5. I'm not giving Clyde a penny because it pays a court-confirmed rapist money. Nothing to do with what you did or didn't vote for.
  6. Here's how this works: 1. A court finds that David Goodwillie is a rapist. 2. All non scummy clubs don't touch him with a barge pole. 3. A scummy club touches him. 4. Its fans fail to boycott their club until he's off the payroll. 5. Clyde fans therefore fund a rapist.
  7. You could avoid tedious arguments about whether you should hire rapists to play football if you didn’t hire any rapists to play football.
×
×
  • Create New...