|
|
Post by Pedropotter on Jun 19, 2013 15:34:23 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by Okie Stokie. on Jun 19, 2013 15:41:27 GMT
It just shows what an absolute disgrace that sentence is for that fucker Hall. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 19, 2013 16:00:34 GMT
completely unrelated though as Hall by law had to be judged based on the legislation that was around when the offences were committed. if anything it shows how far we've come as if we WERE judging Hall on current legislation then he would have got far longer.
having said that, i do appreciate there is the obvious logical and definite argument that something needs to be done about this legislation that makes us use historical rulings and sentence structuring to decide on cases that come to trial now.
|
|
|
|
Post by bayernoatcake on Jun 19, 2013 16:20:25 GMT
I think it just shows how shit the justice system is in this country.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 19, 2013 16:44:14 GMT
I think it just shows how shit the justice system is in this country. Why? The sentence reflects the offence he committed. A flagrant breach of a court order, cost to the public purse by pursuing the matter to trial but not offering any defence, numerous previous convictions etc... Just because you perceive Hall's crime to be morally worse than the ramblers doesn't mean he should receive a longer sentence.......even though he did. Remember the rambler would have got circa a significantly reduced sentenced had he pleaded...Halls would have been greater had he not. |
|
|
|
Post by bayernoatcake on Jun 19, 2013 16:48:04 GMT
Because it is and always has been!  11 months for doing nowt really wrong, 15 months for doing something he should have his nob cut off for but I wasn't really judging it on those two cases. It's case after case where You hear the sentence and think wtf? It's a joke but it is what it is. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 19, 2013 17:20:43 GMT
Because it is and always has been! 11 months for doing nowt really wrong, 15 months for doing something he should have his nob cut off for but I wasn't really judging it on those two cases. It's case after case where You hear the sentence and think wtf? It's a joke but it is what it is. So showing your genitals to everyone....including young children is not really wrong? Breaching a court order within seconds of receiving it is not really wrong? Wasting the taxpayer's money for no reason is not really wrong? I'm surprised by your lack of intelligence on this one |
|
|
|
Post by paulinespens on Jun 19, 2013 17:26:43 GMT
I saw a big fat woman once walking down the street with the back of her skirt stuck in the top of her knickers.
Now that wanted locking up.
|
|
|
|
Post by bayernoatcake on Jun 19, 2013 17:27:19 GMT
Because it is and always has been! 11 months for doing nowt really wrong, 15 months for doing something he should have his nob cut off for but I wasn't really judging it on those two cases. It's case after case where You hear the sentence and think wtf? It's a joke but it is what it is. So showing your genitals to everyone....including young children is not really wrong? Breaching a court order within seconds of receiving it is not really wrong? Wasting the taxpayer's money for no reason is not really wrong? I'm surprised by your lack of intelligence on this one It's impolite not necessarily wrong I think. We've all got 'em in one form or another and if he's just walking about letting it all hang out there's nothing too wrong. He's stupid don't get me wrong but I don't think it deserves a prison sentence or anything or even a court order. It's all a bit ott for my liking. We did field work on a nudist beach once, we had to wear hard helmets...there's a pun there somewhere. |
|
|
|
Post by RichieBarkerOut! on Jun 19, 2013 19:01:50 GMT
So showing your genitals to everyone....including young children is not really wrong? Breaching a court order within seconds of receiving it is not really wrong? Wasting the taxpayer's money for no reason is not really wrong? I'm surprised by your lack of intelligence on this one It's impolite not necessarily wrong I think. We've all got 'em in one form or another and if he's just walking about letting it all hang out there's nothing too wrong. He's stupid don't get me wrong but I don't think it deserves a prison sentence or anything or even a court order. It's all a bit ott for my liking. We did field work on a nudist beach once, we had to wear hard helmets...there's a pun there somewhere. Loony's still right though, he's disrespecting the jurisdiction of a court, and whatever you think of justice in this country, the rule of law needs to be upheld, otherwise it will ultimately lead to anarchy. |
|
|
|
Post by bayernoatcake on Jun 19, 2013 19:08:18 GMT
It's impolite not necessarily wrong I think. We've all got 'em in one form or another and if he's just walking about letting it all hang out there's nothing too wrong. He's stupid don't get me wrong but I don't think it deserves a prison sentence or anything or even a court order. It's all a bit ott for my liking. We did field work on a nudist beach once, we had to wear hard helmets...there's a pun there somewhere. Loony's still right though, he's disrespecting the jurisdiction of a court, and whatever you think of justice in this country, the rule of law needs to be upheld, otherwise it will ultimately lead to anarchy. That's my point though, I think the justice system (which includes the law) is shit. This fella shouldn't even have been bought before a court. I just find the whole system a load of old bollocks. Pardon the pun. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 19, 2013 19:17:11 GMT
Loony's still right though, he's disrespecting the jurisdiction of a court, and whatever you think of justice in this country, the rule of law needs to be upheld, otherwise it will ultimately lead to anarchy. That's my point though, I think the justice system (which includes the law) is shit. This fella shouldn't even have been bought before a court. I just find the whole system a load of old bollocks. Pardon the pun. Right ok.....so showing your knob to a four year old is ok...whether she wants to see it or not....but kissing a 17 year old without consent is not ok? Really? It's anti social behaviour plain and simple. Getting drunk and acting like an idiot is anti social behaviour....its not the worse crime but it doesbt have to be. |
|
|
|
Post by bayernoatcake on Jun 19, 2013 19:24:41 GMT
That's my point though, I think the justice system (which includes the law) is shit. This fella shouldn't even have been bought before a court. I just find the whole system a load of old bollocks. Pardon the pun. Right ok.....so showing your knob to a four year old is ok...whether she wants to see it or not....but kissing a 17 year old without consent is not ok? Really? It's anti social behaviour plain and simple. Getting drunk and acting like an idiot is anti social behaviour....its not the worse crime but it doesbt have to be. I don't think it's a crime, it's just impolite like I said and I don't think it deserves an 11 month prison sentence and it's a massive waste of money but on the court's behalf for taking it this far. And it's the stuff with a 9 year old that doesn't sit well with me regarding Hall. But as I've said it's a long standing belief I have and more and more stuff happens that makes me think the law in this country is a joke and the sentences that go along with it are too. I don't think that opinion of mine will ever change. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 19, 2013 20:21:03 GMT
Not saying please and thank you is impolite. Constantly having your knob out is a bit more than impolite.
|
|
|
|
Post by RichieBarkerOut! on Jun 19, 2013 21:37:20 GMT
He's a repeat offender, his sentence is more about his attitude to the court than it is for the "crime".
Sent from my Nexus 4 using proboards
|
|
|
|
Post by elsidibe on Jun 20, 2013 11:50:07 GMT
Not saying please and thank you is impolite. Constantly having your knob out is a bit more than impolite. I entered the world screaming the house down, covered in goo, and with my cock and arse very much on display – in front of women too. Presumably that's also a bit more than impolite and I should therefore be given a retrospective court order. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 20, 2013 13:38:18 GMT
Because it is and always has been! 11 months for doing nowt really wrong, 15 months for doing something he should have his nob cut off for but I wasn't really judging it on those two cases. It's case after case where You hear the sentence and think wtf? It's a joke but it is what it is. So showing your genitals to everyone....including young children is not really wrong? Breaching a court order within seconds of receiving it is not really wrong? Wasting the taxpayer's money for no reason is not really wrong? I'm surprised by your lack of intelligence on this one wow twentieth centuary and were going backwards,"showing off your genitals" not really the case, he was walking around naked true but he wasnt exactly waving his hard cock at anyone was he?if he were then he should be banged up but he wasnt so he shouldnt. if you find the naked body offensive then i suggest you need counselling |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 20, 2013 14:12:42 GMT
Not saying please and thank you is impolite. Constantly having your knob out is a bit more than impolite. I entered the world screaming the house down, covered in goo, and with my cock and arse very much on display – in front of women too. Presumably that's also a bit more than impolite and I should therefore be given a retrospective court order. award for the most Massively irrelevant post of the year goes to..... |
|
|
|
Post by elsidibe on Jun 20, 2013 15:46:10 GMT
I entered the world screaming the house down, covered in goo, and with my cock and arse very much on display – in front of women too. Presumably that's also a bit more than impolite and I should therefore be given a retrospective court order. award for the most Massively irrelevant post of the year goes to..... Not really boss. The point is that we're born naked. It's our natural state. Personally I prefer to cover up when I'm out and about but why on earth shouldn't the guy be allowed to go naked if he wants? At what age does it become suddenly unlawful? |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 20, 2013 15:57:08 GMT
award for the most Massively irrelevant post of the year goes to..... Not really boss. The point is that we're born naked. It's our natural state. Personally I prefer to cover up when I'm out and about but why on earth shouldn't the guy be allowed to go naked if he wants? At what age does it become suddenly unlawful? it's not about age though is it? purely using common sense..if you're an adult male and in public then whipping your cock out where there could be lots of little kiddies about would be something that most would deem unacceptable.if you're saying it's fine and the law should allow it then you;re giving a brilliant excuse to any would be paedos/flashers out there; "Well your honour, i've done nothing wrong, i was born naked so thought it was ok..yeah there were kids around but before the police came along and told me to get dressed i wasn't really going to do anything honest guv" personal morality ("We're all born anked so who cares") is completely irrelevant, it's about the LAW and the law states he can't go around doing this and then completely ignore subsequent court orders put in place against him also.if you break the law and are punished and ignore that punishment and carry on doing it then you deserve what you get, really is that simple. if personal belief and morality come into it then we're all completely buggered as a society given that it is completely subjective and different for virtually every individual out there what is or isn't acceptable.people can't just decide themselves on a whim what they think is or isn't ok to do and if they do want to carry on in that way then they can fully expect punishment for it if it breaks any laws. as has been said, the sentence for Hall and this sentence are 2 entirely separate matters and based on legislation that are decades apart from each other so it's stupid to compare the 2 sentences. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 20, 2013 18:41:17 GMT
Not really booss. The point is that we're born naked. It's our natural state. Personally I prefer to cover up when I'm out and about but why on earth shouldn't the guy be allowed to go naked if he wants? At what age does it become suddenly unlawful? it's not about age though is it? purely using common sense..if you're an adult male and in public then whipping your cock out where there could be lots of little kiddies about would be something that most would deem unacceptable.if you're saying it's fine and the law should allow it then you;re giving a brilliant excuse to any would be paedos/flashers out there; "Well your honour, i've done nothing wrong, i was born naked so thought it was ok..yeah there were kids around but before the police came along and told me to get dressed i wasn't really going to do anything honest guv" personal morality ("We're all born anked so who cares") is completely irrelevant, it's about the LAW and the law states he can't go around doing this and then completely ignore subsequent court orders put in place against him also.if you break the law and are punished and ignore that punishment and carry on doing it then you deserve what you get, really is that simple. if personal belief and morality come into it then we're all completely buggered as a society given that it is completely subjective and different for virtually every individual out there what is or isn't acceptable.people can't just decide themselves on a whim what they think is or isn't ok to do and if they do want to carry on in that way then they can fully expect punishment for it if it breaks any laws. as has been said, the sentence for Hall and this sentence are 2 entirely separate matters and based on legislation that are decades apart from each other so it's stupid to compare the 2 sentences. I couldnt have put it better. There are lots of things that children do that are not crimes because they lack the necessary mens rea. There are numerous things that are deemed arguably morally acceptable but unlawful. 33 in a 30 for example. A starving man stealing food to live etc... Morality has some part to play it law, but lines have to be drawn and they were many years ago. |
|
|
|
Post by RichieBarkerOut! on Jun 20, 2013 19:17:57 GMT
I blame Kitson
Sent from my Nexus 4 using proboards
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 20, 2013 19:34:39 GMT
Not really boss. The point is that we're born naked. It's our natural state. Personally I prefer to cover up when I'm out and about but why on earth shouldn't the guy be allowed to go naked if he wants? At what age does it become suddenly unlawful? it's not about age though is it? purely using common sense..if you're an adult male and in public then whipping your cock out where there could be lots of little kiddies about would be something that most would deem unacceptable.if you're saying it's fine and the law should allow it then you;re giving a brilliant excuse to any would be paedos/flashers out there; "Well your honour, i've done nothing wrong, i was born naked so thought it was ok..yeah there were kids around but before the police came along and told me to get dressed i wasn't really going to do anything honest guv" personal morality ("We're all born anked so who cares") is completely irrelevant, it's about the LAW and the law states he can't go around doing this and then completely ignore subsequent court orders put in place against him also.if you break the law and are punished and ignore that punishment and carry on doing it then you deserve what you get, really is that simple. if personal belief and morality come into it then we're all completely buggered as a society given that it is completely subjective and different for virtually every individual out there what is or isn't acceptable.people can't just decide themselves on a whim what they think is or isn't ok to do and if they do want to carry on in that way then they can fully expect punishment for it if it breaks any laws. as has been said, the sentence for Hall and this sentence are 2 entirely separate matters and based on legislation that are decades apart from each other so it's stupid to compare the 2 sentences. hear here. well put. TEST |
|
|
|
Post by bayernoatcake on Jun 20, 2013 20:26:42 GMT
Anyone for a naked ramble? |
|
|
|
Post by bayernoatcake on Jun 20, 2013 20:32:14 GMT
Not really boss. The point is that we're born naked. It's our natural state. Personally I prefer to cover up when I'm out and about but why on earth shouldn't the guy be allowed to go naked if he wants? At what age does it become suddenly unlawful? it's not about age though is it? purely using common sense..if you're an adult male and in public then whipping your cock out where there could be lots of little kiddies about would be something that most would deem unacceptable.if you're saying it's fine and the law should allow it then you;re giving a brilliant excuse to any would be paedos/flashers out there; "Well your honour, i've done nothing wrong, i was born naked so thought it was ok..yeah there were kids around but before the police came along and told me to get dressed i wasn't really going to do anything honest guv" personal morality ("We're all born anked so who cares") is completely irrelevant, it's about the LAW and the law states he can't go around doing this and then completely ignore subsequent court orders put in place against him also.if you break the law and are punished and ignore that punishment and carry on doing it then you deserve what you get, really is that simple. if personal belief and morality come into it then we're all completely buggered as a society given that it is completely subjective and different for virtually every individual out there what is or isn't acceptable.people can't just decide themselves on a whim what they think is or isn't ok to do and if they do want to carry on in that way then they can fully expect punishment for it if it breaks any laws. as has been said, the sentence for Hall and this sentence are 2 entirely separate matters and based on legislation that are decades apart from each other so it's stupid to compare the 2 sentences. I disagree that You're giving paedos a license, that's the sort of thing that pisses me off with modern society. We'll be frightened of our own fucking shadows soon enough. I'm off to live on a cave in Ibiza............I fucking wish. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 20, 2013 21:09:12 GMT
it's not about age though is it? purely using common sense..if you're an adult male and in public then whipping your cock out where there could be lots of little kiddies about would be something that most would deem unacceptable.if you're saying it's fine and the law should allow it then you;re giving a brilliant excuse to any would be paedos/flashers out there; "Well your honour, i've done nothing wrong, i was born naked so thought it was ok..yeah there were kids around but before the police came along and told me to get dressed i wasn't really going to do anything honest guv" personal morality ("We're all born anked so who cares") is completely irrelevant, it's about the LAW and the law states he can't go around doing this and then completely ignore subsequent court orders put in place against him also.if you break the law and are punished and ignore that punishment and carry on doing it then you deserve what you get, really is that simple. if personal belief and morality come into it then we're all completely buggered as a society given that it is completely subjective and different for virtually every individual out there what is or isn't acceptable.people can't just decide themselves on a whim what they think is or isn't ok to do and if they do want to carry on in that way then they can fully expect punishment for it if it breaks any laws. as has been said, the sentence for Hall and this sentence are 2 entirely separate matters and based on legislation that are decades apart from each other so it's stupid to compare the 2 sentences. I disagree that You're giving paedos a license, that's the sort of thing that pisses me off with modern society. We'll be frightened of our own fucking shadows soon enough. I'm off to live on a cave in Ibiza............I fucking wish. Well your wrong to disagree. A number of sex offenders get kicks out of children seeing their genitalia....aroused or not. You would be giving them free licence to satisfy their warped cravings |
|
|
|
Post by bayernoatcake on Jun 20, 2013 21:13:37 GMT
I disagree that You're giving paedos a license, that's the sort of thing that pisses me off with modern society. We'll be frightened of our own fucking shadows soon enough. I'm off to live on a cave in Ibiza............I fucking wish. Well your wrong to disagree. A number of sex offenders get kicks out of children seeing their genitalia....aroused or not. You would be giving them free licence to satisfy their warped cravings Strange people. Again, chop 'em off!  |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 20, 2013 23:00:32 GMT
it's not about age though is it? purely using common sense..if you're an adult male and in public then whipping your cock out where there could be lots of little kiddies about would be something that most would deem unacceptable.if you're saying it's fine and the law should allow it then you;re giving a brilliant excuse to any would be paedos/flashers out there; "Well your honour, i've done nothing wrong, i was born naked so thought it was ok..yeah there were kids around but before the police came along and told me to get dressed i wasn't really going to do anything honest guv" personal morality ("We're all born anked so who cares") is completely irrelevant, it's about the LAW and the law states he can't go around doing this and then completely ignore subsequent court orders put in place against him also.if you break the law and are punished and ignore that punishment and carry on doing it then you deserve what you get, really is that simple. if personal belief and morality come into it then we're all completely buggered as a society given that it is completely subjective and different for virtually every individual out there what is or isn't acceptable.people can't just decide themselves on a whim what they think is or isn't ok to do and if they do want to carry on in that way then they can fully expect punishment for it if it breaks any laws. as has been said, the sentence for Hall and this sentence are 2 entirely separate matters and based on legislation that are decades apart from each other so it's stupid to compare the 2 sentences. I disagree that You're giving paedos a license, that's the sort of thing that pisses me off with modern society. We'll be frightened of our own fucking shadows soon enough. I'm off to live on a cave in Ibiza............I fucking wish. There's not many caves I know in Ibiza with T'Internet ....you'd be fucked after 10 minutes looking at the walls.... I'm not all there ....there's something missing.! mumf |
|
|
|
Post by Staffsoatcake on Jun 21, 2013 10:42:13 GMT
Our Judicial system needs a massive overall.
|
|
|
|
Post by Caerwrangonpotter on Jun 21, 2013 20:00:33 GMT
Our Judicial system needs a massive overall. Stuart Hall gets sod all..... Graffiti artist gets 3 years.... Load of bollocks |
|
