Pet Jeden Posted March 19, 2020 Share Posted March 19, 2020 (edited) 19 minutes ago, lichtgilphead said: It's an old running joke on the politics forum. Alex Salmond is wrong about <<any topic>> because he's fat and has an old barren wife. But you knew that, didn't you. I didn't. But, as I don't like the idea of her being collateral in a joke about Salmond, I don't feel too bad about being snippy with John. Edited March 19, 2020 by Pet Jeden 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lichtgilphead Posted March 20, 2020 Share Posted March 20, 2020 47 minutes ago, Pet Jeden said: I didn't. But, as I don't like the idea of her being collateral in a joke about Salmond, I don't feel too bad about being snippy with John. Ok, fair enough. But I still maintain that it's been a common enough joke on P'n'B over the years. "Well Mr Mankyjacket, can you expand on your economic reasons why we should all vote No?" "Of çourse! Firstly, Alex Salmond is fat and has an old wife. Secondly we Scots are incapable of governing ourselves. Thirdly, we are too wee, too poor and too stupid. Thank you for that incisive question, Sarah Smith" "Thank you, Mankyjacket. See you soon." 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loondave1 Posted March 20, 2020 Share Posted March 20, 2020 "Having a go at his wife" is an unfortunate turn of phrase surely ? 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
welshbairn Posted March 20, 2020 Share Posted March 20, 2020 Could be the last day today and the jury sent out to decide. Prosecution tactics made clear yesterday in the summing up. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bairn Necessities Posted March 20, 2020 Share Posted March 20, 2020 12 hours ago, Geez a Braco said: Reading through the Craig Murray case you have to presume all of this is absolute bullshit. It's a whatsapp group of social climbers, and liars. Credit to the defence witnesses who are interested in justice. Craig Murray is far from impartial here. And an absolute crazy person. Going to be an interesting verdict. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
welshbairn Posted March 20, 2020 Share Posted March 20, 2020 11 minutes ago, Bairn Necessities said: Craig Murray is far from impartial here. And an absolute crazy person. Going to be an interesting verdict. It's impossible to tell from twitter reporting how convincing the witness were, but think it could be close, maybe even not proven. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Savage Henry Posted March 20, 2020 Share Posted March 20, 2020 It's impossible to tell from twitter reporting how convincing the witness were, but think it could be close, maybe even not proven.The Alt Nats are going to be insufferable either way. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
welshbairn Posted March 20, 2020 Share Posted March 20, 2020 Jury's out. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
supermik Posted March 20, 2020 Share Posted March 20, 2020 If he’s found guilty, will wee jimmy krankie say that he would never have done it in an independent Scotland? -6 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DublinMagyar Posted March 20, 2020 Share Posted March 20, 2020 "Not Proven" seems likely to me 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alta-pete Posted March 20, 2020 Share Posted March 20, 2020 Aye. Not proven NAP. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derry Alli Posted March 20, 2020 Share Posted March 20, 2020 If a decision hasn't been reached by half four, do they get sent home for the weekend? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GordonS Posted March 20, 2020 Share Posted March 20, 2020 3 hours ago, Bairn Necessities said: Craig Murray is far from impartial here. And an absolute crazy person. Going to be an interesting verdict. Craig Murray is the patron saint of the honey-crusted nut bar wing of the indy side. I read his blog this week for the first time in ages, he showed that he doesn't understand Moorov, corroboration, witnesses, evidence, law, thinking or words. He's their equivalent of that terrible history lady for unionists. I'm sure everyone on all sides will accept the jury's decision as they were in the room throughout and we only got our information through reports that were often carefully curated to ensure identification of witnesses wasn't possible. Right? 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrewDon Posted March 20, 2020 Share Posted March 20, 2020 I previously thought he was screwed, but having read reports over the last few days I'll now be surprised if he is convicted. They are only reports and I haven't been in the courtroom, mind. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GordonS Posted March 20, 2020 Share Posted March 20, 2020 6 minutes ago, DrewDon said: I previously thought he was screwed, but having read reports over the last few days I'll now be surprised if he is convicted. They are only reports and I haven't been in the courtroom, mind. My guess is he'll be convicted on at least some of the charges, if not all. But juries are unpredictable and none of us really know what it was like to be there. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jacksgranda Posted March 20, 2020 Share Posted March 20, 2020 39 minutes ago, DrewDon said: I previously thought he was screwed, but having read reports over the last few days I'll now be surprised if he is convicted. They are only reports and I haven't been in the courtroom, mind. I thought that was what he was accused of trying to do? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derry Alli Posted March 20, 2020 Share Posted March 20, 2020 Adjourned until Monday. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bairn Necessities Posted March 20, 2020 Share Posted March 20, 2020 1 hour ago, GordonS said: Craig Murray is the patron saint of the honey-crusted nut bar wing of the indy side. I read his blog this week for the first time in ages, he showed that he doesn't understand Moorov, corroboration, witnesses, evidence, law, thinking or words. He's their equivalent of that terrible history lady for unionists. I'm sure everyone on all sides will accept the jury's decision as they were in the room throughout and we only got our information through reports that were often carefully curated to ensure identification of witnesses wasn't possible. Right? I probably harshly assume all British government civil servants are fucking useless based on this absolute loonball ever reaching a minor ambassadorial role -1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Detournement Posted March 20, 2020 Share Posted March 20, 2020 2 hours ago, GordonS said: Craig Murray is the patron saint of the honey-crusted nut bar wing of the indy side. I read his blog this week for the first time in ages, he showed that he doesn't understand Moorov, corroboration, witnesses, evidence, law, thinking or words. He's their equivalent of that terrible history lady for unionists. I'm sure everyone on all sides will accept the jury's decision as they were in the room throughout and we only got our information through reports that were often carefully curated to ensure identification of witnesses wasn't possible. Right? Surely his point that the accusers colluded prior to making statements hence Moorov can't apply is a good one? -1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GordonS Posted March 20, 2020 Share Posted March 20, 2020 2 hours ago, Detournement said: Surely his point that the accusers colluded prior to making statements hence Moorov can't apply is a good one? No, it's complete bollocks. The jury are entitled to conclude that they did not collude, in which case Moorov applies. The fact that some of them contacted each other is not evidence of collusion. And not all of them were in contact with each other before describing their experience to someone else. If Craig Murray had an interest in accuracy he could have asked any experienced criminal defence lawyer who would have told him that. 4 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.