Savile again

[ajstoneservices]

Fook off sooey you want everyone to say he's done it and they've seen him do it otherwise it won't float your boat

 

[sooey]

I don't care what others think, but I reserve the right to correct them when they talk sh*te, especially about me.

 

[LastMagicBean]

Evidence is NOT something a person or persons have said .

I think technically it is.(or at least can be)

When a witness to a rape is called to appear in court (for example), They're described as being 'called to give evidence'.

They don't mean produce anything physical like DNA or a pair of Knicks, they mean the spoken word.

So therefore evidence is evidence, regardless of whether believed or not.

 

[sooey]

Ah, sorry about the out of context. I don’t like when someone does that to me either. It wasn’t a cheap shot, it’s just this thread is turning into War and Peace.

After writing "Savile's guilt is indisputable" and "it's undeniable what happened", both referring to Savile and which I stand by completely

You may stand by it but I maintain you don’t know and even less so back then; not to mention the thread before which goes back even longer ago.

I'm sure of it beyond reasonable doubt, therefore I know it. I've known it since I heard those first victims, just like most other people. Not my fault if you're slow to catch on.

 

[ajstoneservices]

Evidence is NOT something a person or persons have said .

I think technically it is.(or at least can be)

When a witness to a rape is called to appear in court (for example), They're described as being 'called to give evidence'.

They don't mean produce anything physical like DNA or a pair of Knicks, they mean the spoken word.

So therefore evidence is evidence, regardless of whether believed or not.

Yep, even lies can constitute evidence but not necessarily against the accused.
In fact, you can play with evidence to suit your needs or wants as chapeau has in that an absence of something is proof of it happening.

 

[sooey]

Evidence is whatever a judge will accept. Victims testimonies certainly fall into that category, and the more of them there are the stronger the evidence they make.

 

[calorific]

Now then now then now then. Guys and gals, what's going on here then? Howz about that?

 

[alumni]

Evidence is NOT something a person or persons have said .

I think technically it is.(or at least can be)

When a witness to a rape is called to appear in court (for example), They're described as being 'called to give evidence'.

They don't mean produce anything physical like DNA or a pair of Knicks, they mean the spoken word.

So therefore evidence is evidence, regardless of whether believed or not.

But is something that's been verified/corroborated first. Neither side will call someone if the other side can show to be doubtful.
However, your example of a witness to a rape is someone who saw/heard it happen. Not someone who claims to be a victim. Significant difference in the two.

 

[sooey]

However, your example of a witness to a rape is someone who saw/heard it happen. Not someone who claims to be a victim. Significant difference in the two.

Why are most of the points you try to make so completely irrelevant?

I know why really, because you've got no argument whatsoever...you've lost....had your ar*e kicked....get over it.

 

[alumni]

However, your example of a witness to a rape is someone who saw/heard it happen. Not someone who claims to be a victim. Significant difference in the two.

Why are most of the points you try to make so completely irrelevant?

I know why really, because you've got no argument whatsoever...you've lost....had your ar*e kicked....get over it.

Ah, the redtop reader back from the pub.

 

[LastMagicBean]

However, your example of a witness to a rape is someone who saw/heard it happen. Not someone who claims to be a victim. Significant difference in the two.

Nope, Not when you debate the definition of 'evidence'. They Both come under the same legal umbrella. Both be called to 'give evidence'. Both equally important.

 

[sooey]

However, your example of a witness to a rape is someone who saw/heard it happen. Not someone who claims to be a victim. Significant difference in the two.

Why are most of the points you try to make so completely irrelevant?

I know why really, because you've got no argument whatsoever...you've lost....had your ar*e kicked....get over it.

Ah, the redtop reader back from the pub.

Another irrelevant post.
Come up with a proper argument why don't you?

 

[alumni]

However, your example of a witness to a rape is someone who saw/heard it happen. Not someone who claims to be a victim. Significant difference in the two.

Nope, Not when you debate the definition of 'evidence'. They Both come under the same legal umbrella. Both be called to 'give evidence'. Both equally important.

so you think the legal teams call people to give evidence without checking it first?

 

[LastMagicBean]

so you think the legal teams call people to give evidence without checking it first?

That's not what I said.

 

[chapeau]

Saville 'Did It'. Of that there is no doubt. What I don't get is why people still defend his reputation. Are they saying that there's nothing wrong with kiddie fondling?