The "delighted Ashley has gone, but uncomfortable with Saudi ownership" thread

[Guest HTT II]

Just now, Jackie Broon said:

 

I'd recommend it, it's fascinating and terrifying, it would change your mind on the reliability of the justice system. Particularly in the US, but I imagine we have the same issues here with police deciding some is guilty because its convenient and twisting, or completely fabricating, the evidence to fit rather than actually trying to find the real perpetrator.

It’s a must watch, both series, that whole family was fucked over. The poor nephew as well…

[Jackie Broon]

Just now, HTT II said:

It’s a must watch, both series, that whole family was fucked over. The poor nephew as well…

 

Yeah. The way you can tell what the judges are going to decide just by looking at them, nothing to do with the actual evidence, purely their political persuasion. America is fucked up.

[Guest HTT II]

1 minute ago, Jackie Broon said:

 

I'd recommend it, it's fascinating and terrifying, it would change your mind on the reliability of the justice system. Particularly in the US, but I imagine we have the same issues here with police deciding some is guilty because its convenient and twisting, or completely fabricating, the evidence to fit rather than actually trying to find the real perpetrator.

We’ve had a few, the Guildford Four and no way did them two men convicted of the Rettendon murders kill those 3 blokes in the Range Rover…

[macphisto]

18 minutes ago, HTT II said:

Aye!

Another recommending then! Innocent Man by John Grisham if you haven't read it.

 

 

Edited March 17, 2022 by macphisto

[Guest HTT II]

8 minutes ago, macphisto said:

Another recommending then! Innocent Man by John Grisham if you haven't read it.

 

 

 

I’ve seen the series!

[Kid Icarus]

The Jinx is the pick of the lot imo.

[Guest HTT II]

2 minutes ago, Kid Icarus said:

The Jinx is the pick of the lot imo.

Aye that’s a good one and so is The Staircase.

[Groundhog63]

I'd rather see 1000 felons, however deviant, banged up for life if it meant 1 innocent party wasn't executed. 

Emotionally, I could easily see off nonces, rapists etc but the justice system doesnt and shouldnt be led by emotion.

The US has a long record of innocent (usually men, usually black) being released from death row. 

We've a shit record as well never mind how many kids die whilst in custody. 

"political correctness" "cancel culture" "woke" "sportswashing" & "whataboutary" have been spoon-fed into the public domain, ironically, to subjugate discourse. 

 

Top and bottom of it all is our Gvt does considerable business with SA Inc the means to bombard Yemen. They ain't gonna flex anything. 

The Premier League have accepted the takeover. 

They ain't gonna flex anything either. 

 

As for Chelsea, these oligarchs have been buying London and tories for years. Having said that Gordon Brown was first to lay out the red carpet whilst the supposed "Putin apologist" Jeremy Corbyn was warning against allowing them and their money into the UK

 

Football's fucked. The UK's fucked. All by Foriegn money. 

 

In short... "Toon, Toon" 

 

 

 

[Guest]

Imagine being the executioner and finding out the life you took was actually innocent. I mean, imagine taking a life in the first place, but yeah. 

[Groundhog63]

https://innocenceproject.org/the-innocent-and-the-death-penalty/#:~:text=Eighteen people have been proven,crimes they didn't commit.

[Shays Given Tim Flowers]

1 hour ago, TRon said:

 

1) This is the same for any crime, there is always a chance that with human error/bias a miscarriage could take place.

2) But the world doesn't stop still, you have to prosecute criminals based on reasonable evidence, you can't just let everyone off under the premise it's not 100% foolproof evidence.

3) So then we would come to the more serious crimes which carry the most severe sentences. I would imagine you would need rock solid evidence if you are going to execute someone, or even put them away for life.

 

How do they address these questions in the US?

 

1) Some crimes don't require any intent. 

2) We are not talking about the prosecution of people but the sanction to be imposed on conviction. 

3) This just simply isn't true. A jury needs to be sure based on the evidence, sure means different things to different people. That is markedly different in Practice I suspect, to what you are imagining 'rock solid' evidence to be. Rock solid itself shows you the problem with human interpretation, it means different things to different people. 

 

In the US for every 9 people executed 1 person on Death Row has been exonerated. 

 

https://eji.org/issues/death-penalty/

 

Is worth checking out for how the US deals with these questions; in summary, badly. 

[CaliMag]

I sincerely hope that everyone going down all these rabbit holes is helping folks process this. I mean that. This is complicated and we all love the club.

[Awaymag]

1 hour ago, CaliMag said:

I sincerely hope that everyone going down all these rabbit holes is helping folks process this. I mean that. This is complicated and we all love the club.

This thread.............best represented by

 

 

[triggs]

Just to counter the "they're just jealous about Newcastle" shite.

 

 

[Tsunami]

See Exile is in like Flynn on the comments section ?.

[Happinesstan]

On 15/03/2022 at 06:19, Whitley mag said:

Good luck to the PL with that, they’d be holding football to a completely different standard to other businesses within the U.K. As the minister quite rightly said PIF invest billions in the western economy, regardless of links to the govt our current directors would pass the O&D test. The only reason Abramovich is no longer at Chelsea is govt sanctions, that’s just not happening anytime soon with Saudi Arabia.

But as a private members club, they can do that, no? 

Not saying they will, like.

 

 

Edited March 19, 2022 by Happinesstan

[madras]

7 minutes ago, Happinesstan said:

But as a private members club, they can do that, no? 

Not saying they will, like.

 

 

 

Not sure they could as they are also businesses and that would bring in competition law, restraint of trade and all that stuff.

[Happinesstan]

Just now, madras said:

Not sure they could as they are also businesses and that would bring in competition law, restraint of trade and all that stuff.

Businesses that have agreed to operate within an exclusive group of similar businesses. 

[madras]

8 minutes ago, Happinesstan said:

Businesses that have agreed to operate within an exclusive group of similar businesses. 

Is that binding in law ?

[Happinesstan]

11 minutes ago, madras said:

Is that binding in law ?

I imagine it would be for a court of law to decide.

[TRon]

On 17/03/2022 at 17:09, Shays Given Tim Flowers said:

 

1) Some crimes don't require any intent. 

2) We are not talking about the prosecution of people but the sanction to be imposed on conviction. 

3) This just simply isn't true. A jury needs to be sure based on the evidence, sure means different things to different people. That is markedly different in Practice I suspect, to what you are imagining 'rock solid' evidence to be. Rock solid itself shows you the problem with human interpretation, it means different things to different people. 

 

In the US for every 9 people executed 1 person on Death Row has been exonerated. 

 

https://eji.org/issues/death-penalty/

 

Is worth checking out for how the US deals with these questions; in summary, badly. 

 

Thnaks for that, appreciate your take on it. So despite all the miscarriages of justice in the US, they still haven't done away with capital punishment. I guess the public at large just have too much of an emotional attachment to it, and in a democracy what the people want is what goes.

[Jackie Broon]

 

22 minutes ago, Happinesstan said:

I imagine it would be for a court of law to decide.

 

The point is that it's not backed up by legislation, for example the way the NHS trust fit and proper directors test is.

 

It was made pretty obvious in the ESL debacle that at least some of the PL's rules wouldn't stand up in court, which is why the government had to threaten legislation in order to stop PL clubs from joining the ESL.

[Guest HTT II]

26 minutes ago, TRon said:

 

Thnaks for that, appreciate your take on it. So despite all the miscarriages of justice in the US, they still haven't done away with capital punishment. I guess the public at large just have too much of an emotional attachment to it, and in a democracy what the people want is what goes.

And the public wants what the public gets. But I don't get what this society wants!

[Khalidao]

1 hour ago, triggs said:

Just to counter the "they're just jealous about Newcastle" shite.

 

 

 

Not really countering anything.

 

UAE is a major player in the war in Yemen. UAE has had a huge crackdown on 100s of political activists in 2012 where they were jailed without a trial. By % of population and number of crimes, UAE executes prisoners in the same rate that Saudi Arabia does. In fact just 6 months ago, they executed 5 for the murder of 1 person. None of this is regularly mentioned in the press, and I have never seen Pep Guardiola questioned about it.

 

But hey, Man City owner had tea with a dictator. Even Macron had tea with Putin. Big deal.

[TomYam]

13 minutes ago, Khalidao said:

 

Not really countering anything.

 

UAE is a major player in the war in Yemen. UAE has had a huge crackdown on 100s of political activists in 2012 where they were jailed without a trial. By % of population and number of crimes, UAE executes prisoners in the same rate that Saudi Arabia does. In fact just 6 months ago, they executed 5 for the murder of 1 person. None of this is regularly mentioned in the press, and I have never seen Pep Guardiola questioned about it.

 

But hey, Man City owner had tea with a dictator. Even Macron had tea with Putin. Big deal.

 Yes. U.A.E gets a bit of a free pass in the media because a) it's been an open commercial powerhouse for 2-3 decades and many have been enriched by those ties b) lots of instagram disciples just love topping up their tans there.

 

Saudi and U.A.E have long been joined at the hip in a big bro/little bro way, but there has been a sparating of the ways recently. Saudi wants some international commercial stardust while retaing its traditional alliances (USA, UK, EU, Kuwait, Egypt, Qatar) while U.A.E covets closer ties with China, Russia, Syria, Israel and Turkey. 

 

Vis-a-vis Yemen, my understanding is that U.A.E convinced Saudi to increase involvement there but they've backed off in attempting more cordial relations with Iran while Saudi has been left carrying the can and feels compelled to carry on in order to save face. Saudi needs to find a way out pronto.