It's not like me to moan about the Police but...

[S60D5-185]

Originally Posted by outnumbered

i do like your comments SPROG however i will ask you a few questions seing as your in the mood for answers. 1 how long does it take to become an officer in the RAF and what qualification are required.2 can you oblige by showing us your commission. i was under the impression that if you are intel you gathered information???.where you spec ops and did you do the commando course equal to the MARINES.I do hope that you will answer the questions put to you in a manner becoming of an ex officer.
regards.
mike

You should be so lucky!

I'm not sure whether he is Walter Mitty or Austin Powers.

Either way i feel privileged that he graces us mere mortals with his presence and undobted words of wisdom.
:notwo rthy:

[outnumbered]

Originally Posted by Darryl

You should be so lucky!

I'm not sure whether he is Walter Mitty or Austin Powers.

Either way i feel privileged that he graces us mere mortals with his presence and undobted words of wisdom.
:notwo rthy:

you never no it could happen .
mike

[Michaeleff]

Originally Posted by JimG

Roger, I see you have good reason to dislike the officers involved with this case, but I must say however that your derogatory comment towards lesbians is over the top.

A step too far I think.

Jim:

I much respect your open and refreshing perspective on this site.

However, if what Roger states is factually correct (And since he's a solicitor I would incline towards the integrity of his statement), then he touches on a worrying reality that has been effectively encouraged by the insanity of Political Correctness.

It's a fact, an unfortunate fact, that Lesbians of the more masculine variety, have tended to join such as the Army, Prison Service, Fire Service and Police Force.

It is also an unpleasant reality that they also tend to "Hunt in packs" and believe a sort of macho physicality expresses their psyche. In the USA this phenomenon is well known and the descriptor is "Diesels".

It is rampant in US prisons, housing female prisoners.

It's also a fact that police officers have increasingly let their service and the public down, by abuse of physical violence in their treatment of prisoners.

Personally, I believe we must be careful not to offend the sensibilities of any groups or groups of people: however, we must not be excessively reticent when facing facts, even when such social dynamic might, at first glance be apparently unpalatable.

I can only hope Roger's acquaintance sued the ass off those involved and their service.

[JimG]

Originally Posted by Michaeleff

Personally, I believe we must be careful not to offend the sensibilities of any groups or groups of people: however, we must not be excessively reticent when facing facts, even when such social dynamic might, at first glance be apparently unpalatable.

I can only hope Roger's acquaintance sued the ass off those involved and their service.

I agree completely. The officers involved should be strung up and should be in prison. I just felt his language would be offensive to more than just those officers he was directing at.

[S60D5-185]

Originally Posted by Michaeleff

Jim:

I much respect your open and refreshing perspective on this site.

However, if what Roger states is factually correct (And since he's a solicitor I would incline towards the integrity of his statement), then he touches on a worrying reality that has been effectively encouraged by the insanity of Political Correctness..

Whilst it may well be the case that in this instance Roger's comments are entirely factual, i would however certainly never accept the generalisation that any statement made by a Solicitor should automatically be accepted out of hand as being correct or even remotely factual.

As has been stated previously, It is clearly unsafe to tar all Police officers with the same Brush when being critical of them and by the same token naive in the extreme to believe that all Solicitors or Barristers always act with integrity.

Just remember that one of these money grabbing vermin is currently defending Levi Bellfield and giving Milly Dowlers mother a hard time in the witness box. How they sleep at night is beyond me!

As in all walks of life, some good some bad, some honest some not.

Darryl

[DWM]

Originally Posted by Darryl

Whilst it may well be the case that in this instance Roger's comments are entirely factual, i would however certainly never accept the generalisation that any statement made by a Solicitor should automatically be accepted out of hand as being correct or even remotely factual.

As has been stated previously, It is clearly unsafe to tar all Police officers with the same Brush when being critical of them and by the same token naive in the extreme to believe that all Solicitors or Barristers always act with integrity.

Just remember that one of these money grabbing vermin is currently defending Levi Bellfield and giving Milly Dowlers mother a hard time in the witness box. How they sleep at night is beyond me!

As in all walks of life, some good some bad, some honest some not.

Darryl

Couldn't agree more. I've known quite enough lawyers for one lifetime and let there be no doubt that there are just as many fools, liars and conmen in that industry as any other.

In defence of lawyers representing scumbags, though: I think it's a good aspect of a legal system that even scumbags have a right to representation and as the scumbag's lawyer you do have a professional duty to do your best for your client - which does not, however, extend to an obligation or even a entitlement to lie for them.

[S60D5-185]

Originally Posted by DWM

Couldn't agree more. I've known quite enough lawyers for one lifetime and let there be no doubt that there are just as many fools, liars and conmen in that industry as any other.

In defence of lawyers representing scumbags, though: I think it's a good aspect of a legal system that even scumbags have a right to representation and as the scumbag's lawyer you do have a professional duty to do your best for your client - which does not, however, extend to an obligation or even a entitlement to lie for them.

I cannot disagree with any of the above but in all honesty would you sleep easy in your bed at night knowing that you were being paid ( invariably at an obscene rate, by the tax payer ) to stand up and try to free the likes of:-

Ian Huntley

Kenneth Noye,

Yorkshire Ripper

Fred West ( RIP )

No, in all honesty the normal guy in the street should have their rights upheld to the very last at whatever cost BUT for Scum such as above you have to question the morality of those in the Legal Profession who accept the money to defend them. Birds of a feather stick together??????

[DWM]

I know exactly what you mean. And no, I couldn't do it myself. So on a personal level I am with you entirely.

I suppose I just think that we ought to be glad (at some 'intellectual' level) that there are people who will do it. I reckon that anyone who has found himself unwillingly and unintentionally in a police station late at night ought to be glad that there is always someone on the end of a phone line to advise without passing judgment. It's one of the marks of a civilised society. Legal representation for the sort of vile types you mention is just something that goes along with that, as I see it. But as to your question.. again no, I agree it would take a different character from mine to do it. Heck I have enough trouble sleeping in the (largely) blameless life that I already lead!!!!

[Michaeleff]

Unfortunately, you are missing a critical and necessary point here.

This is judging - after the event - lawyers who defend people.

You have the benefit of two realities:

1. The Verdict: &,

2. The evidence given in Court.

Lacking that evidence (And the subsequent verdict), then you wouldn't have the ability to reach any value judgement whatsoever.

It must be remembered that under English law an accused is deemed innocent until and unless proven guilty beyond normal and reasonable doubt.

Any trial cannot take place without some defence and some prosecution.

Or perhaps, instead, you would prefer lawyers to adjudge a potential client guilty at their first meeting?

Then they could take the guy out and hang him?

As yet another option, we could institute trial by media?

Personally, I would prefer the admittedly imperfect legal system we have now, rather than take my own chances with such as Rupert Murdoch, thank you very much!

[Andy Northface]

Originally Posted by Darryl

I cannot disagree with any of the above but in all honesty would you sleep easy in your bed at night knowing that you were being paid ( invariably at an obscene rate, by the tax payer ) to stand up and try to free the likes of:-

Ian Huntley

Kenneth Noye,

Yorkshire Ripper

Fred West ( RIP )

No, in all honesty the normal guy in the street should have their rights upheld to the very last at whatever cost BUT for Scum such as above you have to question the morality of those in the Legal Profession who accept the money to defend them. Birds of a feather stick together??????

I asked this question in another thread and no-one replied,can a solicitor refuse to defend the likes of the above? The Yorkshire rippers lawyers recently said that he "is no longer a risk to women" and "it was cruel to keep him locked up!" If he ain't a risk to women-then let his solicitor let him live with him and his family.