halfcenturyup
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 12 Oct 2009
- Messages
- 9,461
Some guy posted a month or so ago (apologies if it was you, I can't remember who it was) something that went through each of the (groups of) allegations and came to the conclusion that there would be no proof of any of them.
I didn't agree with some of his thought processes and I found it hard to believe we would be fine on everything, but I am increasingly coming to the conclusion that his final assessment was right.
I just don't see how the PL can realistically prove any of (what we assume to be) the allegations with (what we assume to be) the evidence available to them. Including non-cooperation.
Anyone else?
I didn't agree with some of his thought processes and I found it hard to believe we would be fine on everything, but I am increasingly coming to the conclusion that his final assessment was right.
I just don't see how the PL can realistically prove any of (what we assume to be) the allegations with (what we assume to be) the evidence available to them. Including non-cooperation.
Anyone else?
Last edited: