Sun May 25, 2014 11:29 am
Sun May 25, 2014 11:46 am
Sun May 25, 2014 12:09 pm
Sun May 25, 2014 12:16 pm
Sun May 25, 2014 1:56 pm
Sun May 25, 2014 2:09 pm
Sun May 25, 2014 2:18 pm
smakerzthebluebird wrote:I still don't see how he was convicted when the other lad got off having read into the case in a lot of depth I still can't understand how he was convicted in not saying he's innocent or guilty but based on the unbelievably thin evidence and the CCTV footage showing what it did I find to remarkable he was convicted
Sun May 25, 2014 3:34 pm
mr'mogreenz wrote:smakerzthebluebird wrote:I still don't see how he was convicted when the other lad got off having read into the case in a lot of depth I still can't understand how he was convicted in not saying he's innocent or guilty but based on the unbelievably thin evidence and the CCTV footage showing what it did I find to remarkable he was convicted
Never followed the trial, or read into anything about the case, but if as you say, the evidence is thin at best, then with the money he was on, he really should have invested in a decent barrister
Sun May 25, 2014 3:40 pm
Sun May 25, 2014 3:50 pm
Bakedalasker wrote:I'm all for giving people the 2nd chance but this just seem so unjust.
Sun May 25, 2014 10:11 pm
Sun May 25, 2014 10:33 pm
BobbyBlue wrote:Although he was of course found guilty, I think the boy is innocent but that's just my view. A pissed up girl throwing it about then crying rape after they find out a guy is minted is just to suspicious for me. There's rape, then there is rape, for me this was just a load of pissed up people having a gang bang. He's served his time so should be given a second chance.
Mon May 26, 2014 5:56 am
Mon May 26, 2014 7:28 am
Mon May 26, 2014 8:49 am
BLUEUSA wrote:Seems like the girl had it off with two blokes in one night and then decided she didn't want to be labeled as a slag. Claimed she was too drunk to agree to it and therefore it must have been rape. What I can't understand is how the prosecution got a jury to agree with them. Defies logic that you convict one guy and let off the other.
Mon May 26, 2014 9:14 am
The Cobra wrote:BLUEUSA wrote:Seems like the girl had it off with two blokes in one night and then decided she didn't want to be labeled as a slag. Claimed she was too drunk to agree to it and therefore it must have been rape. What I can't understand is how the prosecution got a jury to agree with them. Defies logic that you convict one guy and let off the other.
Also this girl got form for rape accusations, accused a rugby player of raping her about 18 months earlier, think it was a Saracens player.
Mon May 26, 2014 9:48 am
jtc wrote:The Cobra wrote:BLUEUSA wrote:Seems like the girl had it off with two blokes in one night and then decided she didn't want to be labeled as a slag. Claimed she was too drunk to agree to it and therefore it must have been rape. What I can't understand is how the prosecution got a jury to agree with them. Defies logic that you convict one guy and let off the other.
Also this girl got form for rape accusations, accused a rugby player of raping her about 18 months earlier, think it was a Saracens player.
how are mr cobra?.hope your ok and getting better
Mon May 26, 2014 9:52 am
The Cobra wrote:jtc wrote:The Cobra wrote:BLUEUSA wrote:Seems like the girl had it off with two blokes in one night and then decided she didn't want to be labeled as a slag. Claimed she was too drunk to agree to it and therefore it must have been rape. What I can't understand is how the prosecution got a jury to agree with them. Defies logic that you convict one guy and let off the other.
Also this girl got form for rape accusations, accused a rugby player of raping her about 18 months earlier, think it was a Saracens player.
how are mr cobra?.hope your ok and getting better
Had a few problems recently, cancer seems to have returned, have biopsi on thursday, worst bit is waiting for the result