The Colston Four

[Octavian]

Hypocrisy lads, look it up.

 

[Ric]

 

[Vic]

Who knows if they’re white or not?

All I’m saying is let’s not talk about skin colour.

Seems very difficult in 2021/2022 for some reason.

If they aren't necessarily white, where does race or skin colour come into it?

 

[Bigga]

Oh, it exists all right.

But then again, I did pay vague attention in biology so the facts are pretty clear.

Well, I've been enjoying my popcorn watching 'White on White' crime in this thread...

 

[Octavian]

If they aren't necessarily white, where does race or skin colour come into it?

I meant those using the term gammon.

I’d rather we just left skin colour at the door and dropped it.

 

[Chris in London]

So the law now allows protestors to damage things they don't like. Ok

If you read the article you’ll see why that is not the case

 

[mosssideblue]

If you read the article you’ll see why that is not the case

But they did and admitted to doing it.

Having savvy lawyers spinning to the jury doesn't change that.

what crime do you believe they were preventing, because when Jeremy Kyle asked whoever it was justifying their acquittal what he was, he never responded

edit. Jeremy Vine, not Kyle

 

[Bigga]

But they did and admitted to doing it.

Having savvy lawyers spinning to the jury doesn't change that.

what crime do you believe they were preventing, because when Jeremy Kyle asked whoever it was justifying their acquittal what he was, he never responded

Let's put it in terms you might understand then (which is not going to cover other aspects):

If you admitted you killed a serial killer/ mass murderer of women, who people knew did such a thing, have you done those women a favour, who felt like anyone could do that to them, at any point?

That's a very basic premise of the verdict, imo.

 

[mosssideblue]

Let's put it in terms you might understand then (which is not going to cover other aspects):

If you admitted you killed a serial killer/ mass murderer of women, who people knew did such a thing, have you done those women a favour, who felt like anyone could do that to them, at any point?

That's a very basic premise of the verdict, imo.

We have laws, because we are a civilised Nation. Taking the law into your own hands because you think you are helping someone isn't and shouldn't be the way things work.

If you think that Joe public should be praised for clearing the country of filth is a good thing, then that's your prerogative.

I hate the thought of killers and rapists etc still being at large, but having vigilantes get rid of them, isn't the way our country is run and, imo correctly so

 

[Chris in London]

But they did and admitted to doing it.

Having savvy lawyers spinning to the jury doesn't change that.

what crime do you believe they were preventing, because when Jeremy Kyle asked whoever it was justifying their acquittal what he was, he never responded

edit. Jeremy Vine, not Kyle

I have no idea what the precise basis of the acquittal was and neither do you. You can read about the arguments that were advanced by the defence in the secret barrister’s article. Beyond that, your guess is as good as mine.

You seem to be suggesting that in certain circumstances a jury has a duty to convict, and that hasn’t been the law since 1670.