XPost: alt.home.repair, alt.politics.scorched-earth, uk.politics.misc   
   XPost: uk.legal, alt.politics.uk   
   From: burfordTjustice@tues.uk   
      
   On Sun, 12 Mar 2017 16:58:24 -0000   
   "tim..."  wrote:   
      
   >   
   >   
   > "Ophelia"  wrote in message   
   > news:eil9vnFdp2cU1@mid.individual.net...   
   > > "tim..."  wrote in message news:oa3qpv$iek$1@dont-email.me...   
   > >   
   > >   
   > >   
   > > "Ophelia"  wrote in message   
   > > news:eil5ltFctcvU2@mid.individual.net...   
   > >> "tim..."  wrote in message news:oa3mb6$33v$1@dont-email.me...   
   > >>   
   > >>   
   > >> "burfordTjustice"  wrote in message   
   > >> news:oa3lt0$u4l$6@dont-email.me...   
   > >>> On Sat, 11 Mar 2017 11:28:31 -0000   
   > >>> "tim..."  wrote:   
   > >>>   
   > >>>>   
   > >>>>   
   >   
   >   
   > >>> What evidence do you have it was coming "straight towards" you?   
   > >>   
   > >> that seems to be the claim made by the farmer   
   > >>   
   > >> I have no evidence that he was telling the truth   
   > >>   
   > >> tim   
   > >>   
   > >> ==   
   > >>   
   > >> And we have no evidence he was lying either.   
   > >   
   > > hopefully there was some forensic evidence to show how the shot   
   > > entered the   
   > > vehicle   
   > >   
   > > unfortunately, the press didn't report that (simply focusing on the   
   > > evidence   
   > > that supported their campaign)   
   > >   
   > > tim   
   > >   
   > > ===   
   > >   
   > > So why must we assume that man was guilty when he was acquitted?   
   >   
   > I am not saying that I assumed he was guilty   
   >   
   > I am saying that there was a case to be heard and it is wrong to   
   > complain about the fact that people are put under stress whilst that   
   > happens.   
   >   
   > we would never bring anyone to trial if that were the consideration   
   >   
   > I am also suggesting, that on the basis of what appears to be a   
   > biased newspaper report, none of us have enough information to   
   > conclude that this was one of those "weak" cases that should never   
   > have been brought - this conclusion seems to have been made purely on   
   > the basis of "this was an old man defending his property", nothing   
   > more.   
   >   
   > tim   
   >   
   as someone who needs fat government bureaucrats to run all   
   aspects of your life, you do dance fairly well.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)