- Joined
- 31 May 2016
- Messages
- 24,811
- Reaction score
- 5,354
- Country

Don't be daft.. An insult based on the colour of a person's skin.Not racist![]()

Don't be daft.. An insult based on the colour of a person's skin.Not racist![]()
Like lobster. Correct, stop being daft.Don't be daft.. An insult based on the colour of a person's skin.

It would appear she had several. The first a female who is currently unnamed who advised her (allegedly) to explain herself to the police, it is this advice that is questionable, given the burden of proof needed and that this explanation would greatly assist the case building. She also alleges that Mr Liam Muir, did not properly explain the guilty plea to her. Her Advocate Adam King blamed Muir in the appeal.Duty solicitor for a serious charge at Crown Court? Maybe her and hubby should have spent a bit of money and paid for a proper consultation.
It’s no more or less of an insult than gammon.You’ve obviously chosen to miss the point. Or it’s a poor attempt to undermine it.
Snowflakes not really an insult.
As in, if you plead guilty you may go to prison. Wise after the event words trying to magic the past away.She also alleges that Mr Liam Muir, did not properly explain the guilty plea to her.
In your opinion.It’s no more or less of an insult than gammon.

its not about skin colour. Once an insult isn't about skin colour its just an insult.It’s no more or less of an insult than gammon.
No, I’m asking you to admit it ?
Borderline racist remarks are fair trade for the left.
It seems you’re on the back foot, pay MBK his rent and get some sleep.

If someone has gone on record and explained what they meant, on the advice of a solicitor, its difficult to go in a different direction.As in, if you plead guilty you may go to prison. Wise after the event words trying to magic the past away.
Like ‘lobster’.its not about skin colour. Once an insult isn't about skin colour its just an insult
Offence is in the eye of the beholder, that’s why the right are so keen to protect the right to offend. Unless of course it’s directed at them. So it’s not purely opinionIn your opinion.
I’ve put up articles/links that say otherwise.

Nonsense.Offence is in the eye of the beholder
Completely different facts and plea. Conoly can’t un say what was tweeted. The only possible issue is the length of the sentence. But we are obsessed as a country with lengthening all prison sentences at every opportunity to achieve “justice”.If someone has gone on record and explained what they meant, on the advice of a solicitor, its difficult to go in a different direction.
Her KC made some comment about this in another case that he won. There is also an allegation of political interference.
It’s why people are told they do not have the right not go be offendedNonsense.

Its not the point being brought to attention.Completely different facts and plea. Conoly can’t un say what was tweeted. The only possible issue is the length of the sentence. But we are obsessed as a country with lengthening all prison sentences at every opportunity to achieve “justice”.