Unfeckingbelievable.

[Koolpc]

No, no "obviously" at all.

Neither of us were present at the event, neither of us were on the juries or present in court.

You can't have a society where people refuse to accept trial verdicts because they don't like them, or because they've come up with their their own, necessarily uninformed, verdict

Are you for real? Have you got 2 eyes? Did you not see the videos?

This proves how you are such a massive Britishophobic....

 

[Koolpc]

Tricky to have when my posts get taken down when they break no rules.

You observed that that is happening, and said so (now taken down, of course, and I hope you got no stick for it).

This is another example - people, including me, are disagreeing over something, and airing that disagreement on a forum billed as "Discuss or debate topical issues here".

Crucially, that's happening without insults, or rancour, or bad language etc. But I predict that my contributions will be removed and my participation curtailed despite there being no justifiable reason.

So please forgive me if I don't see the funny side of "reported" - there's nothing funny about what happens when people report my posts when there's nothing wrong with them.

Reported

 

[fillyboy]

Are you for real? Have you got 2 eyes? Did you not see the videos?

This proves how you are such a massive Britishophobic....

The fact that one was convicted for assaulting the WPC and is awaiting sentencing, the jury had no problem convicting him, I think there must be some detail we're not being told that led to the jury not reaching a verdict on the other assault.
But look, their lawyer says that because of the media attention their 'lives have been ruined' anyway, so let's take some small consolation in that.

 

[MNW67]

This seems to be the crucial quote from the CPS:

He said the law was clear in that there would be a "presumption and expectation" that there are no third trials save for "exceptional circumstances".

 

[yorksbuilder]

But look, their lawyer says that because of the media attention their 'lives have been ruined' anyway, so let's take some small consolation in that

Using that level of violence on armed cops that they did, they are lucky to still have their lives intact. In more advanced countries like the US they would have shot the attackers

 

[MNW67]

One of them broke the nose of a female police officer. Obviously you are okay with that. Shame on you.

I think he was convicted for that. But I've not followed it closely.

 

[fillyboy]

I think he was convicted for that. But I've not followed it closely.

That's the impression I got from the OP link, it would be interesting to know why it wasn't so clearcut for the other charges.

 

[SPLINE]

There is no point having a third trial, as the same thing will happen again. These scum are so obviously guilty that the only reason any jurer would find them not guilty is if that jurer was muslim. Therefore, there were muslims on the jury. This is what happens when people from a low-trust society live in a high-trust one.

It comes down to immigration again. These people should not be in the country, and if they are, they should not be allowed to hold any position in law, politics or anything in authority over others.

Lammy and Co want to end trial by jury, which would be very wrong. However, as the country is at present, trial by jury cannot possibly work.

Blame Blair for this unholy mess.

 

[King Billy]

. .., and if they are, they should not be allowed to hold any position in law, politics or anything in authority over others.

So any immigrant or descendant of an immigrant can only do certain jobs, that do not entail any kind of supervision.
Institutionalised racism in other words.
I bet you'd still not be satisfied.

...These people should not be in the country, ...

Your hate must be consuming you at a great rate.

 

[morqthana]

The video footage is clear. They started it, so it was an unprovoked attack on emergency service workers. No trial needed. Send them down

Obviously the video footage together with other evidence or testimony was not clear enough for two separate juries. Once you might dismiss as perverse, but twice shows that there really wasn't sufficient evidence to substantiate the charges.

I'm sure that some people are frustrated by this.

I'm also sure that some people who have only seen the video refuse to accept the outcome of two separate trials.

I think there must be some detail we're not being told that led to the jury not reaching a verdict on the other assault.

And of course we have to have trials. Beset though it may be with problems caused by inadequate funding, our system of open justice is a British value of which to be proud.

 

[pete01]

Obviously the video footage together with other evidence or testimony was not clear enough for two separate juries. Once you might dismiss as perverse, but twice shows that there really wasn't sufficient evidence to substantiate the charges.

I'm sure that some people are frustrated by this.

I'm also sure that some people who have only seen the video refuse to accept the outcome of two separate trials.



And of course we have to have trials. Beset though it may be with problems caused by inadequate funding, our system of open justice is a British value of which to be proud.

Who is But as fillyboy?