Jump to content
RadgerTheBadger

Nipper Salmond

Recommended Posts

Legal process must be followed. The ducking stool first, if they drown their innocent. If they survive, feel free to burn them.


If they drown, they were an SNP member. If they float, they must be Tories.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, BawWatchin said:

Problem is, we'll never know whether he truly is or not, regardless of the verdict.

He really is a marmite figure. I do wonder if it’s possible for a public figure who is quite so popular with one side of a political debate and unpopular with another to get a fair trial from members of the general public. Everyone has bias. I suppose that works both ways. Maybe the women who have come forward could claim the same thing if it doesn’t go in their favour.

The defence seem to be taking the ‘your name wasn’t in the sign-in book / there was no dinner that night’ approach, but Eck doesn’t seem the type to be signing books. So, that defence wouldn’t stand up with me. I think it’ll come down to a who do you believe and if there are multiple women  he’s up against it unless the building staff provide alternative evidence.

Edited by Scary Bear

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I quite like the BBC headline debate. Maybe worth looking at each and scoring whether they are in favour of prosecution or defence given that they could be written either way. 

Day 1 - Woman 'humiliated' after Alex Salmond 'lay on her naked'  is a definite goal for the prosecution.

Day 2 - 'Alex Salmond trial witness denies making up allegations' I would suggest this favours prosecution too. If written the same way as Day 1 it could've said something like "Alex Salmond trial witness "made up" allegations and "wasn't in Bute House" on night of the incident.

Prosecution 2-0 Defence. Granny's on!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wonder if Swiss Tony will mention the trial at tomorrow's FMQ's, no doubt he will be in a gloat over it and still hurting from Nicola's jibe of him being a failed used car salesman . 

Edited by SandyCromarty

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I quite like the BBC headline debate. Maybe worth looking at each and scoring whether they are in favour of prosecution or defence given that they could be written either way. 
Day 1 - Woman 'humiliated' after Alex Salmond 'lay on her naked'  is a definite goal for the prosecution.
Day 2 - 'Alex Salmond trial witness denies making up allegations' I would suggest this favours prosecution too. If written the same way as Day 1 it could've said something like "Alex Salmond trial witness "made up" allegations and "wasn't in Bute House" on night of the incident.
Prosecution 2-0 Defence. Granny's on!


If the first implies bias in favour of the prosecution (and it doesn’t to anyone who can read inverted commas), the second is surely in favour of the defence, as it implies the possibility that the woman in question is lying.

Of course, as somebody pointed out earlier, it may just be the ebb and flow of a court case.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Double Jack D said:

I quite like the BBC headline debate. Maybe worth looking at each and scoring whether they are in favour of prosecution or defence given that they could be written either way. 

Day 1 - Woman 'humiliated' after Alex Salmond 'lay on her naked'  is a definite goal for the prosecution.

Day 2 - 'Alex Salmond trial witness denies making up allegations' I would suggest this favours prosecution too. If written the same way as Day 1 it could've said something like "Alex Salmond trial witness "made up" allegations and "wasn't in Bute House" on night of the incident.

Prosecution 2-0 Defence. Granny's on!

Scottish edition of Indy...

DSC_0272.thumb.JPG.540614700bbe30cb837207bf91577d14.JPG

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Savage Henry said:

 


If the first implies bias in favour of the prosecution (and it doesn’t to anyone who can read inverted commas), the second is surely in favour of the defence, as it implies the possibility that the woman in question is lying.

Of course, as somebody pointed out earlier, it may just be the ebb and flow of a court case.

 

Disagree. 2nd headline emphasises that it has been denied. Happy with the goal for the prosecution.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, welshbairn said:

Scottish edition of Indy...

DSC_0272.thumb.JPG.540614700bbe30cb837207bf91577d14.JPG

 

 

Thats a better headline. 

Surely it's a matter of fact whether she was there or not.... Surely Bute House is a secure enough place that the presence of an individual is easily proved?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Double Jack D said:

Thats a better headline. 

Surely it's a matter of fact whether she was there or not.... Surely Bute House is a secure enough place that the presence of an individual is easily proved?

I'd have thought so too, CCTV by the doors at least. Maybe it's regularly scrubbed. Think she said you don't have to sign in if security recognises you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the real question is if any of these headlines were written by women. Only then will we know if this is part of a feminist conspiracy or not...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'd have thought so too, CCTV by the doors at least. Maybe it's regularly scrubbed. Think she said you don't have to sign in if security recognises you.

If we’re talking years back then theres next to no chance of it being retained.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wouldn't read too much in to the headlines just yet. The prosecution is still making its case so the headlines will all have this slant. Then it'll be the defence's go and the headlines will reflect that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bit of a weird defence strategy, switching from she wasn't there to she was gagging for it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, BawWatchin said:

Problem is, we'll never know whether he truly is or not, regardless of the verdict.

Jesus fucking Christ. 

 

There's been some amount of shite written on this site in the last few days, from DAFC on the Coronavirus thread to this absolute walloper here. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, NewBornBairn said:

Jesus fucking Christ. 

 

There's been some amount of shite written on this site in the last few days, from DAFC on the Coronavirus thread to this absolute walloper here. 

Yeah, because verdicts are indisputable right enough. They can't prove it definitively. But if they say it did or didn't happen, it should just be blindly accepted by everyone.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, SweeperDee said:

 


Could it be...a certain QC?

 

Wouldn't like to speculate. Just didn't expect to see that!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Double Jack D said:

I quite like the BBC headline debate. Maybe worth looking at each and scoring whether they are in favour of prosecution or defence given that they could be written either way. 

Day 1 - Woman 'humiliated' after Alex Salmond 'lay on her naked'  is a definite goal for the prosecution.

Day 2 - 'Alex Salmond trial witness denies making up allegations' I would suggest this favours prosecution too. If written the same way as Day 1 it could've said something like "Alex Salmond trial witness "made up" allegations and "wasn't in Bute House" on night of the incident.

Prosecution 2-0 Defence. Granny's on!

Day 3 - Alex Salmond trial: Woman claims former first minister gave her 'very sloppy' kisses

3-0.

To be fair, I'm not sure how this could be written differently 😄.

Perhaps 'Woman claims Salmond would always greet her with a kiss' doesn't a headline make....

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...