Sweet Pete Posted April 30, 2021 Share Posted April 30, 2021 4 minutes ago, The Moonster said: Are you trolling this thread here or are you just ignoring everything that's being said? He's been blinded by a tribal loyalty to his football team, so in his desperation to stick up for them he's come out swinging and made himself look a bit daft. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Falcor Roar Posted April 30, 2021 Share Posted April 30, 2021 (edited) "Can you list any protected characteristics you have under the equalities act?" "Certainly. Sex offender for a start..." Is this genuinely not a skit from Brasseye? Seem to remember the paedo episode the bloke was claiming racism. Edited April 30, 2021 by Falcor Roar 7 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlanCamelonfan Posted April 30, 2021 Share Posted April 30, 2021 1 minute ago, 19QOS19 said: Comfortably the best post on the thread and exactly my thinking but wouldn't be able to articulate it this well. Much like what Tiffoney is doing, it's quite shocking to see folk on here (though in a round about way) effectively giving it the 'aye but he called me a sex offender though'. Noone condones what tiffoney done though. But they want to ignore the other half of it. Which is why the daily mail cut the last 20 seconds of his video. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlanCamelonfan Posted April 30, 2021 Share Posted April 30, 2021 3 minutes ago, Sweet Pete said: He's been blinded by a tribal loyalty to his football team, so in his desperation to stick up for them he's come out swinging and made himself look a bit daft. I dont support stenhousemuir? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neilly Posted April 30, 2021 Share Posted April 30, 2021 3 minutes ago, Sweet Pete said: He's been blinded by a tribal loyalty to his football team, so in his desperation to stick up for them he's come out swinging and made himself look a bit daft. He's not a Stenhousemuir fan in fairness. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sweet Pete Posted April 30, 2021 Share Posted April 30, 2021 1 minute ago, AlanCamelonfan said: I dont support stenhousemuir? That's the part of my post you want to defend? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Falcor Roar Posted April 30, 2021 Share Posted April 30, 2021 3 minutes ago, Sweet Pete said: That's the part of my post you want to defend? It's the only defensible part to be fair. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Raith Against The Machine Posted April 30, 2021 Share Posted April 30, 2021 What a hill to die on. One of the core elements of protected characteristics is that an individual cannot control them. You can't discriminate someone on the basis of the colour of their skin, their gender identity or their physical or mental health, because there's nothing that anyone can do to change or control those. With recognition that you can't change the past, Tiffoney could have absolutely controlled his status as a sex offender, by not committing sexual offences. In a perfect world, once someone had served their time for a crime and been rehabilitated, it would never be mentioned again. But you absolutely cannot equate any discussion of someone's criminal past with someone else's history of traumatic mental health. To suggest otherwise is simple-minded, belligerent idiocy. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlanCamelonfan Posted April 30, 2021 Share Posted April 30, 2021 3 minutes ago, Sweet Pete said: That's the part of my post you want to defend? Well why would I stick up for tiffoney I dont know him. It's the way I view it. I call a spade a spade. If something was said first then that should be looked onto aswell but still absolutely no excuse for tiffoney response 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Moonster Posted April 30, 2021 Share Posted April 30, 2021 1 minute ago, AlanCamelonfan said: I call a spade a spade. 9 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moonglum25 Posted April 30, 2021 Share Posted April 30, 2021 1 hour ago, AlanCamelonfan said: Yes it is. Noone deserves to be harassed or bullied at work. So youd be quite happy for tiffoney to have mental health problems. He did something stupidni could understand the case if he had raped her without consent but that wasnt what happened. Mental health is an illness not a crime. Cox suffered badly from it and it took him to the brink before he made a recovery. It may return, he may be on medication we do not know but we do know it was an illness and he is trying to get on with his life. What Tiffoney, Lithgow, Thomson etc did was pre-meditated. They have done these acts for self gratification or revenge. In one case this was not an isolated act but one of multiple offences. A woman pushing a pram with her baby in it was subjected to one of these acts. You are saying forgive and forget they have been punished - would you say this if the victim had been a relative and would you have one of them babysit for you? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian Carrigan Posted April 30, 2021 Share Posted April 30, 2021 6 minutes ago, AlanCamelonfan said: Well why would I stick up for tiffoney I dont know him. It's the way I view it. I call a spade a spade. If something was said first then that should be looked onto aswell but still absolutely no excuse for tiffoney response Why are you still going on? No one here agrees with you, you're not going to change anyones mind and your attitude stinks. Just save yourself some hassle and stop posting. There are some good, important points being discussed and yours fall into neither category. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlanCamelonfan Posted April 30, 2021 Share Posted April 30, 2021 3 minutes ago, Moonglum25 said: Mental health is an illness not a crime. Cox suffered badly from it and it took him to the brink before he made a recovery. It may return, he may be on medication we do not know but we do know it was an illness and he is trying to get on with his life. What Tiffoney, Lithgow, Thomson etc did was pre-meditated. They have done these acts for self gratification or revenge. In one case this was not an isolated act but one of multiple offences. A woman pushing a pram with her baby in it was subjected to one of these acts. You are saying forgive and forget they have been punished - would you say this if the victim had been a relative and would you have one of them babysit for you? I agree completely with ur first part. On your second part I'm not saying we should let them become babysitters what I'm getting at is if they get abused then it's likely they will more likely return to a crime. If tiffoney hadn't said what he said and made a claim against someone would it be taken seriously. Probably not. Noone should be victimised at work. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sweet Pete Posted April 30, 2021 Share Posted April 30, 2021 1 minute ago, AlanCamelonfan said: I agree completely with ur first part. On your second part I'm not saying we should let them become babysitters what I'm getting at is if they get abused then it's likely they will more likely return to a crime. If tiffoney hadn't said what he said and made a claim against someone would it be taken seriously. Probably not. Noone should be victimised at work. Are you saying calling someone previously convicted of a sex offense a sex criminal makes them more likely to become a sex criminal again in the future? Or that they're likely to take up arson, bank robbery, shoplifting or some other crime as a result of being called a sex offender? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlanCamelonfan Posted April 30, 2021 Share Posted April 30, 2021 You will actually find i have been agreed with but people seem to think I'm accepting tiffoneys crime because of the other. Others have said we shouldnt be victimising offenders. So we are going round in circles. Tiffoney should be punished no qualms their and everyone agrees we shouldnt be vicitimising ex offenders. So the only conclusion is people think I'm making it an excuse for him which I am not. I just dont think it should be ignored 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlanCamelonfan Posted April 30, 2021 Share Posted April 30, 2021 1 minute ago, Sweet Pete said: Are you saying calling someone previously convicted of a sex offense a sex criminal makes them more likely to become a sex criminal again in the future? Or that they're likely to take up arson, bank robbery, shoplifting or some other crime as a result of being called a sex offender? Either is possible. If he cant work he may resort to shoplifting -2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
19QOS19 Posted April 30, 2021 Share Posted April 30, 2021 Noone condones what tiffoney done though. But they want to ignore the other half of it. Which is why the daily mail cut the last 20 seconds of his video.I've not said anyone is condoning Tiffoney's actions. But the posts along the lines of 'two sides to every story' doesn't look good. It should be a firm 'that's appalling behaviour' stance, regardless of what Cox has said beforehand. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sweet Pete Posted April 30, 2021 Share Posted April 30, 2021 Just now, AlanCamelonfan said: Either is possible. If he cant work he may resort to shoplifting There you have it then, folks. Don't call Jonathan Tiffoney a sex criminal, or he may steal from Asda. 18 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlanCamelonfan Posted April 30, 2021 Share Posted April 30, 2021 1 minute ago, 19QOS19 said: 25 minutes ago, AlanCamelonfan said: Noone condones what tiffoney done though. But they want to ignore the other half of it. Which is why the daily mail cut the last 20 seconds of his video. I've not said anyone is condoning Tiffoney's actions. But the posts along the lines of 'two sides to every story' doesn't look good. It should be a firm 'that's appalling behaviour' stance, regardless of what Cox has said beforehand. That's what I have said. I'm not meaning two sides to every story in that tiffoneys innocent. Let's be honest its highly unlikely he is innocent. But everyone seems to want to ignore the possibility cox had said anything to him. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sweet Pete Posted April 30, 2021 Share Posted April 30, 2021 The Asda is actually very close to Stenhousemuir's ground, so it was probably a close call. 19 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.