Anyone Want To Predict What This Savage Will Get?

[ToraToraTora]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-sussex-33596562

[andy-hughes]

Naomi - // What a silly argument. The fact is someone brutally stabbed an elderly man to death and that someone, whoever he may be, is without doubt guilty. That is not speculation. //

I think its actually an important argument.

As far as the stabbing itself goes, all indications are that the man in custody is 'guilty'.

Myself and others are merely putting forward the point that he is not as yet guilty in law because he has not been tried.

It may be that in the course of the court case that evidence comes to light that he is not guilty through reason of insanity, or a number of other legal conclusions which remain un-debated as we are writing.

So I don't think it is as foregone as some AB'ers are ready to believe, and the debate about views, and their reasons, is always interesting in my view.

[-Talbot-]

That's vitriol, andy?

Gosh!

[andy-hughes]

OK fair point - referring to it as 'vitriol' is probably a bit OTT - let's go with 'sniping' shall we?

[-Talbot-]

Sniping sounds more like it.

not guilty through reason of insanity


I have never understood that term, surely it should be Guilty but insane?

[naomi24]

andy-hughes, //Myself and others are merely putting forward the point that he is not as yet guilty in law because he has not been tried. //

I think the rest of us are aware of that. Nevertheless, if he did it he’s guilty, so I still think it’s a daft argument.

[andy-hughes]

Naomi - //Nevertheless, if he did it he’s guilty, so I still think it’s a daft argument. //

If he did it, he deserves full legal process, all the evidence heard, and a proper verdict.

I have issues with people who are ready to leap to 'tried, guilty and imprisoned' based only on media reporting.

[andy-hughes]

Talbot - //Sniping sounds more like it.//

Agreed.

// not guilty through reason of insanity


I have never understood that term, surely it should be Guilty but insane? //

No, because in law, if someone is deemed to be clinically insane, then they are deemed not responsible for their actions, and it is only knowledge of actions that can lead to a Guilty verdict.

If someone is clinically insane, and therefore unable to make cogent decisions based on sound reasoning, then they cannot be tried under normal legal process, and must therefore be found Not Guilty, and the reason for that verdict is their insanity.

It sounds pedantic, but it is an important legal distinction.

[ummmm]

Sometimes it's better to be found insane. You could end up locked up forever. Nicer surroundings...but locked up nonetheless.

[naomi24]

andy-hughes, //I have issues with people who are ready to leap to 'tried, guilty and imprisoned' based only on media reporting.//

If he’s the bloke who did it I don’t have a problem with that. I hope he gets all he deserves.

[agchristie]

Andy, I was just challenging your assertion that he must have placed the knife in the car which is not a fact.

We don't know the answers to a lot of questions and as you have rightly acknowledged the full facts will be examined at the Trial.

[andy-hughes]

agchristie - //Andy, I was just challenging your assertion that he must have placed the knife in the car which is not a fact.

We don't know the answers to a lot of questions and as you have rightly acknowledged the full facts will be examined at the Trial. //

You are absolutely right.

I have spent almost every post on this thread banging on about assumptions and deciding guilt before it is proven, and as you correctly point out, we do not know how or why the knife came to be in the car - he could be a keen chef in his spare time - but assumptions are not appropriate.

Thank you for pointing out my assumption - I am happy to withdraw it.

[-Talbot-]

Thanks for getting me to read back the thread, agchristie.


Double standards yet again andy?

[agchristie]

No problems Andy and thank you.

There have been cases hinging on DNA evidence where the chances of blood samples belonging to anyone else was over a billion to one and they still got acquitted! We should not presume anything.....

[andy-hughes]

Talbot - //Thanks for getting me to read back the thread, agchristie.


Double standards yet again andy? //

No - an innocent slip - everyone makes them, that's why the put rubbers on the end of pencils.

I will always own up and retract, and if appropriate, apologise for anything I get wrong - I would never consider myself beyond error, or reproach, that would be insufferable.

(I know that some people think that I do see myself that way, but honestly - I don't!)

[-Talbot-]

It's not just getting something wrong though andy is it?

__________How you can possibly post this_____________

andy-hughes
Talbot - I assume you mean this post - //Because the cause, the catalyst, the event that provoked the attack was without doubt the crash.//

At the risk of sounding like a broken record, it is not 'without doubt' - it is absolutely with doubt until the court case, and evidence is heard.

Until than your observation is speculation - nothing more - and that is my response to what you have said.

_____________after posting this_____________

andy-hughes
The circumstances indicate that at some predetermined time, this man must have put a knife in his car – why would anyone do that? It indicates a predisposition towards violence.

Then, after what police describe as a minor collision, he gets out of his car, with this knife – again a predetermined act indicating a propensity for violence, and then he kills a complete stranger in a frenzied attack.


________is imo somewhat smacking of double stands__________
(and my info was from the police, no idea where you got yours)

[douglas9401]

"(I know that some people think that I do see myself that way, but honestly - I don't!)"

Which one, beyond error, reproach or insufferable?

[Ellipsis]

> Anyone Want To Predict What This Savage Will Get?

This was a simple enough question. The answer is either "No, I don't want to predict" or "Yes, I do want to predict. My prediction is [...]"

Possible predictions are:
* Guilty - gets life
* Insanity - gets detained at Her Majesty's Pleasure
* Not Guilty or doesn't proceed to trial - no sentence, the arrested will probably "get" a lawyer since his innocent name and address have been plastered all over the media.
* Other ...

No real need for a lesson in due process ...

[andy-hughes]

douglas - //"(I know that some people think that I do see myself that way, but honestly - I don't!)"

Which one, beyond error, reproach or insufferable? //

Any ... all ... none ... you are confusing me with someone who cares!

[andy-hughes]

Talbot - I am intrigued that you analyse my posts in such minute detail in order to point out my errors.

I don't - obviously - or I would not have made the error you have spent so much time and effort tracking down.

So what do you need? An apology - borrow agchristie's - it is fit for purpose, and I am sure she won't mind sharing?

A resolve to do better? Tick.

Anything else - feel free, I am here until tea-time.

[-Talbot-]

I don't - obviously - or I would not have made the error you have spent so much time and effort tracking down.

Much time? about 18 seconds.....lol.

andy...at least you have the balls to return to your slip ups, you can't say that about some other ABers, so credit where credit is due.