Colston 4 not guilty

[i8hibsh]

9 minutes ago, Ked said:

I didnt single whites out.

 

 

 

I see your negatives and ill feeling go only one way.

[i8hibsh]

And why does society 100% of the time class someone of mixed race as black? Does their white parent not count?

 

Barack Obama and Bob Marley the two most prominent cases. Barack Obama is as much white as he is black but 100% of the time he gets referred to as a "Black President". Is being white so shameful?

[Dennis Denuto]

2 minutes ago, i8hibsh said:

And why does society 100% of the time class someone of mixed race as black? Does their white parent not count?

 

Barack Obama and Bob Marley the two most prominent cases. Barack Obama is as much white as he is black but 100% of the time he gets referred to as a "Black President". Is being white so shameful?

Some of you are, yes.

[i8hibsh]

15 minutes ago, Dennis Denuto said:

Some of you are, yes.

 

 

Of course, as individuals based on character and actions. As many Chinese, black etc are also. What is your point? Are you inferring that they are shameful because they are white? 

 

Yes, there are many horrible people who just so happen to have white skin. Is this a 'stop press' moment for you?

Edited January 7, 2022 by i8hibsh

[Ked]

44 minutes ago, i8hibsh said:

 

 

I see your negatives and ill feeling go only one way.

You are arguing against what you imagine I'm saying.

 

[John Findlay]

I wonder how pulling down statues of people who existed over 200 years ago will put an end to this?

 

[JudyJudyJudy]

3 hours ago, i8hibsh said:

I find it staggering how one sided the world view on race is. The entire whitey bad, rest good is so repugnant to me. 

 

Why does no one ever mention the amount of wealthy black people there are in Africa right now who are living on the wealth made from the slave trade? Or that black people owned slaves? Or that slavery pre dates the British empire by thousands of years? Or that white people have been slaves? Or that most wars throughout time have not been caused by 'whitey'?

 

Why not mention that white people ended slavery, were the first to have laws against it. The most tolerant places on earth today are not in China, Africa, the Middle East, Arab countries, South East Asia or Central or Southern America. We all seem to enjoy all the great things inherited from white people but cherry picK the bad parts as we go on some kind of self loathing crusade.

 

We seem to be the only race on the planet that it is just not ok to be.

Why not mention that white people ended slavery,  you said. This is true . However they were the ones in power so could end it. Black people had no power to end it. 

3 hours ago, i8hibsh said:

When a black person is killed by a black person today the world gives zero ****s. If a black person is killed by a white person it is full on rage.

 

A white person is killed by a cop (which happens a lot) in America the world gives no ****s. A black person is killed by a cop then it is full on rage.

 

Any attack (be verbal or physical) on a non white on a white person is just an attack. But any attack (be verbal or physical) by a white person on a non white person always seems to be a 'racist' one.

 

Anyone of colour (because white seemingly is not a colour) can be loud and proud to be who they are but anyone white who has the nerve to be proud they are full on white supremacist. 

 

Why not be balanced instead of always seeing the bad in anything white? It seems to all conveniently coincide with the rise of social media which gave a global platform for one to continually advertise their own morality and virtue 24/7.

I think when a black person or white person is killed by another colour it might tend to have underlying racist issues. 

1 hour ago, i8hibsh said:

And why does society 100% of the time class someone of mixed race as black? Does their white parent not count?

 

Barack Obama and Bob Marley the two most prominent cases. Barack Obama is as much white as he is black but 100% of the time he gets referred to as a "Black President". Is being white so shameful?

One of my nephews is mixed heritage. I've never thought of him  as black. I don't think he thinks of himself  as black. I've actually never asked him   It hasn't bothered me at all. . Its completely irrelevant . But I do see your point though . 

[JudyJudyJudy]

4 hours ago, ri Alban said:

And white people on either side should really not comment on how Black people see the world and how history forms their mindset.

How do you know im not black ?

[Nookie Bear]

4 hours ago, ri Alban said:

The biggest thing to be torn down will be GB itself.

Tick Tock!!!

 

Is that so you can live in your 96% white Scotland?

 

No English or Blacks allowed, right?

[Ron Burgundy]

13 minutes ago, John Findlay said:

I wonder how pulling down statues of people who existed over 200 years ago will put an end to this?

 

That's not important or relevant slavery. Important and relevant slavery happened hundreds of years ago exclusively by white people against black people.

 

 

 

 

 

[JudyJudyJudy]

10 minutes ago, Nookie Bear said:

 

Is that so you can live in your 96% white Scotland?

 

No English or Blacks allowed, right?

aye we are such and inclusive and welcoming country aren't we..? as long as we " dont get like London" 

[i8hibsh]

30 minutes ago, JamesM48 said:

Why not mention that white people ended slavery,  you said. This is true . However they were the ones in power so could end it. Black people had no power to end it. 

 

Black people were part of the trade process.  They could have said no to the trading at any time - but it was such a high commodity.  They were sold over to the whites by black people.

 

 

30 minutes ago, JamesM48 said:

I think when a black person or white person is killed by another colour it might tend to have underlying racist issues. 

 

Why?  There are a million, infact endless reasons for murder other than race.

 

[Taffin]

I hadn't been following this so apologies if it's already been covered.

 

What were they charged with? Vandalism? If so, surely they are guilty, regardless of whether they were morally right or wrong to do it. I'm guessing they charge was something more complex though maybe.

 

The statue should have been removed or amended years ago though imo.

[i8hibsh]

39 minutes ago, John Findlay said:

I wonder how pulling down statues of people who existed over 200 years ago will put an end to this?

 

 

 

It is a known horror in today's world but sadly too many are too fixated in the past that can't be fixed.

[The Real Maroonblood]

Just now, Taffin said:

I hadn't been following this so apologies if it's already been covered.

 

What were they charged with? Vandalism? If so, surely they are guilty, regardless of whether they were morally right or wrong to do it. I'm guessing they charge was something more complex though maybe.

 

The statue should have been removed or amended years ago though imo.

The trial was a sham.

[i8hibsh]

1 minute ago, Taffin said:

I hadn't been following this so apologies if it's already been covered.

 

What were they charged with? Vandalism? If so, surely they are guilty, regardless of whether they were morally right or wrong to do it. I'm guessing they charge was something more complex though maybe.

 

The statue should have been removed or amended years ago though imo.

 

Clearly don't have a job where you can sit on your arse and post on kickback all day.

 

[i8hibsh]

Love Candace Owens - she really does nail it.  Black people can go two ways....be a victim or be a victor.  Glad to say that as a regular watcher of her - many black people take the latter.

[Taffin]

Just now, i8hibsh said:

 

Clearly don't have a job where you can sit on your arse and post on kickback all day.

 

 

Too busy on the Covid ones 😂😂

 

I caught the end of a debate on this in the car yesterday though whilst travelling so thought I'd have a look in on here.

 

[ri Alban]

[The Mighty Thor]

Here's where the Tories are going with their police and crime bill.

 

This is the Attorney General's view on the process of trial by jury.

 

 

[Cade]

"We respect and uphold the Rule of Law, except when we don't like the verdicts, in which case they must be overturned"

 

[NANOJAMBO]

I'm confused, are  judges still "the enemy of the people" or is it juries who are "the enemy of the people". 

 

The sun also struggling with the trial by jury system that's not dleivering the verdict it wants. 

Edited January 7, 2022 by NANOJAMBO

[The Mighty Thor]

35 minutes ago, NANOJAMBO said:

I'm confused, are  judges still "the enemy of the people" or is it juries who are "the enemy of the people". 

 

The sun also struggling with the trial by jury system that's not dleivering the verdict it wants. 

 

No it's the people that are the enemy of the people.

 

They're following Bannon's playbook to the letter. 

 

 

[NANOJAMBO]

48 minutes ago, The Mighty Thor said:

 

No it's the people that are the enemy of the people.

 

They're following Bannon's playbook to the letter. 

 

 

Cheers. I feel much better now. 

PS Agree on Bannon 100%. 

[Malinga the Swinga]

On 06/01/2022 at 13:44, NANOJAMBO said:

The majority white population then win the day ?

How is that listening to victims of slavery ? 

You still calling the white population racist then? Shouldn't you be apologising for your remark above from yesterday, which is blatantly racist and false.

The petition that was raised would have been signed by large number of white people and yet you state that majority of white people wouldn't want statue removed. That is at best unknown and more than likely, total bollocks.

 

[Mikey1874]

Just to be clear the verdict cannot be appealed. They are not guilty.

 

It would be only if new evidence arises and the process for a retrial isn't easy. In fact only ever happens for double jeopardy murders. 

 

An appeal can be made to clarify the law. The big mistake is the Government's war on woke or 'culture war'. Only fight the battles you can win. 

[John Findlay]

2 hours ago, Malinga the Swinga said:

You still calling the white population racist then? Shouldn't you be apologising for your remark above from yesterday, which is blatantly racist and false.

The petition that was raised would have been signed by large number of white people and yet you state that majority of white people wouldn't want statue removed. That is at best unknown and more than likely, total bollocks.

 

I would also humbly suggest that a large proportion of the white racist(allegedly) electorate of Bristol voted for their Black mayor.

[Cade]

You'd think that after losing case after case after case in the courts over the last 12 years in power, the Tory party would learn something about how democracy and the rule of law works in Britain.

 

Oh well.

 

 

[Jamstomorrow]

Strange how in the George Floyd case, all caught on camera, the accused is guilty.  The Coulson case, again all caught on camera, the accused are innocent.  Baffling!

[Jamstomorrow]

Colston.

[Hmfc1965]

15 hours ago, Mikey1874 said:

Just to be clear the verdict cannot be appealed. They are not guilty.

 

It would be only if new evidence arises and the process for a retrial isn't easy. In fact only ever happens for double jeopardy murders. 

 

An appeal can be made to clarify the law. The big mistake is the Government's war on woke or 'culture war'. Only fight the battles you can win. 

Yes it can if there is a clear error of law 

This looks like a prime candidate. 

[Hmfc1965]

12 hours ago, Cade said:

You'd think that after losing case after case after case in the courts over the last 12 years in power, the Tory party would learn something about how democracy and the rule of law works in Britain.

 

Oh well.

 

 

The rule of law does not mean juries can ignore criminal behaviour because they agree with it. 

[The Real Maroonblood]

2 minutes ago, Hmfc1965 said:

The rule of law does not mean juries can ignore criminal behaviour because they agree with it. 

Fair point.

[Cade]

Judges can direct juries to ignore certain statements and to concentrate on other aspects of the case in their deliberations.

 

The tooth gnashing from the right wing is getting extreme.

 

The law was followed. The defendants asked to be given trial by jury. The jury acquitted them.

 

The law on criminal damage is already changing due to Arsehole Patel's Police State Bill.

 

The Attorney General's plans to refer this to the Court of Appeal have absolutely nothing to do with due process or the Law.

It's purely political in nature. It's gesture politics. Another front in Boris' Culture Wars.

And it will fail.

 

[Hmfc1965]

15 minutes ago, Cade said:

Judges can direct juries to ignore certain statements and to concentrate on other aspects of the case in their deliberations.

 

The tooth gnashing from the right wing is getting extreme.

 

The law was followed. The defendants asked to be given trial by jury. The jury acquitted them.

 

The law on criminal damage is already changing due to Arsehole Patel's Police State Bill.

 

The Attorney General's plans to refer this to the Court of Appeal have absolutely nothing to do with due process or the Law.

It's purely political in nature. It's gesture politics. Another front in Boris' Culture Wars.

And it will fail.

 

I'd say the jury's decision was more gesture politics.

[Hmfc1965]

44 minutes ago, Hmfc1965 said:

Yes it can if there is a clear error of law 

This looks like a prime candidate. 

Actually I'm talking shite.

[JudyJudyJudy]

48 minutes ago, Hmfc1965 said:

The rule of law does not mean juries can ignore criminal behaviour because they agree with it. 

They can if they want. Even if they know it was illegal they can just decide the accused is not guilty and argue with each other in the jury room. Its clear that many thought from their own value base and balanced the offence from this and decided that in their views they 4 were not guilty 

[Hmfc1965]

4 minutes ago, JamesM48 said:

They can if they want. Even if they know it was illegal they can just decide the accused is not guilty and argue with each other in the jury room. Its clear that many thought from their own value base and balanced the offence from this and decided that in their views they 4 were not guilty 

They strictly can. It's not upholding the rule of law though. 

If a white jury acquitted a racist murderer would that fit too?

[JudyJudyJudy]

1 minute ago, Hmfc1965 said:

They strictly can. It's not upholding the rule of law though. 

If a white jury acquitted a racist murderer would that fit too?

Im not saying its right im just pointing out that they can. 

[Ex member of the SaS]

On 05/01/2022 at 22:51, JamesM48 said:

It’s not expunging it it’s getting  rid of symbols which honour it . 

Ok so why did they not pull down the university that slave money paid for? You can't put today's values onto the past. These people committed criminal damage and should have been fined or jailed, it's the law.

IF they felt so passionate then why not start a campaign to get it removed and done properly by the council?

To top it all they put up a statue of their own without the proper permissions.

[Cade]

So the entire jury, who were chosen at random, came together in a conspiracy to acquit four people they had never met in the face of overwhelming state evidence and against the direction of the judge?

 

You boys have gotten yourselves into some state over this.

 

 

[JudyJudyJudy]

3 minutes ago, Cade said:

So the entire jury, who were chosen at random, came together in a conspiracy to acquit four people they had never met in the face of overwhelming state evidence and against the direction of the judge?

 

You boys have gotten yourselves into some state over this.

 

 

I like the cut of that jury. Good on them. 

[redjambo]

22 minutes ago, JamesM48 said:

I like the cut of that jury. Good on them. 

 

We disagree on many points, James, so it's nice that we agree on this one.

 

The Gammonati are besides themselves with rage over this decision. So much for their ardent support for the rule of law. Aye, only where it benefits them.

[JudyJudyJudy]

43 minutes ago, redjambo said:

 

We disagree on many points, James, so it's nice that we agree on this one.

 

The Gammonati are besides themselves with rage over this decision. So much for their ardent support for the rule of law. Aye, only where it benefits them.

Yep. Imagine getting up to 90 about an inanimate object getting ripped down and dumped in the sea where it belongs. Your right they are in a rage. But the law is the law. Simple as that. Jury verdicts should be respected. 

[Hmfc1965]

1 hour ago, Cade said:

So the entire jury, who were chosen at random, came together in a conspiracy to acquit four people they had never met in the face of overwhelming state evidence and against the direction of the judge?

 

You boys have gotten yourselves into some state over this.

 

 

So can you explain why, as has been pointed out, they are clearly on camera pushing a statue over and into the water,  they were not guilty of criminal damage?

They certainly weren't applying the law to the facts.

[Cade]

Ask the jury

 

They heard all the evidence in court.

[RobboM]

This should help calm down the gammon snowflake brigade

The Secret Barrister explains

https://thesecretbarrister.com/2022/01/06/do-the-verdicts-in-the-trial-of-the-colston-4-signal-something-wrong-with-our-jury-system-10-things-you-should-know/
 

[Cade]

5 minutes ago, RobboM said:

This should help calm down the gammon snowflake brigade

The Secret Barrister explains

https://thesecretbarrister.com/2022/01/06/do-the-verdicts-in-the-trial-of-the-colston-4-signal-something-wrong-with-our-jury-system-10-things-you-should-know/
 

 

Ach, away wi yer expert legal opinions 

 

[Victorian]

Jurors are absolutely required to base their decisions on the evidence presented in court,  with direction from the judge,  and nothing else.  Opinions,  guesses,  balance of probability are not 'allowed'.  In practice it of course happens.  You're not allowed to discuss the case and share / influence opinion in the jury room until the case is completed and deliberations begin.  But it happens.

 

Jurors are completely discouraged from attempting to be lawyers and judges.  This jury clearly did not stick to the wording of the law bug it happens thousands of times every year.

Edited January 8, 2022 by Victorian

[redjambo]

8 minutes ago, RobboM said:

This should help calm down the gammon snowflake brigade

The Secret Barrister explains

https://thesecretbarrister.com/2022/01/06/do-the-verdicts-in-the-trial-of-the-colston-4-signal-something-wrong-with-our-jury-system-10-things-you-should-know/
 

 

That is an excellent article - many thanks indeed for posting it, Robbo. It's nice to see some common sense expressed here rather than the Chicken Licken "the sky is falling in" over-reactions we've been having. Please feel free to repost it in response to those sorts of posts on the thread, if you can handle the potential case of RSI you might get as a result.