Another Drive4show 'Anything goes' thread

[beninho]

First topic message reminder :

I think bailly does look a good prospect, but he is pretty raw. The spurs pairing is probably the best in tge league as a partnership. I think mendy looks an immense left back, alonso also good, I think rose is better then bertrand though, when fit. I remember a time when full backs had to defend!

[pedro]

What did you get her? I hope the answer isn't pregnant.

No. She was too niggardly with it.

[McLaren]

You just love using that word Super.

[Roller_Coaster]

You just love using that word Super.

So much so that he signed in as pedro to use it again.

[super_realist]

You just love using that word Super.

More proof that you can't read Mac. How on earth did you complete your MSc?

[McLaren]

oops.

Although the point could still stand, and I believe pedro may have been making the same point by parodying a super realist post.

[super_realist]

I only use the word because I know that wet people with poor vocabularies will jump on it and associate it with racism, the same as you ridiculously did with the Sambo/Sammy cat instance and with Guerrilla/Gorilla Serena Williams story.

Niggardly is a perfectly good word, shame it's not used very often. Again you fail to understand its use in the post before, because it was clearly used as it's a homonym (or close to one), not a parody of me.

[pedro]

Homonym? Has that word been PC approved by Mac?

[beninho]

Niggardly basically means mean, mean is shorter and easier to write.nothing wrong with the word niggardly but if the reason the word is used is solely as a v trolling excercise, thats a bit sad.

[beninho]

So now these sexual harassment allegations have caused someone to kill himself. I can understand people not reporting the abuse from Weinstein, he was a very powerful man in Hollywood and could break careers, but all these lowly mps? The luton mp case seems ridiculous, and the welsh guy who has killed himself case seems to have been handled terribly.

[McLaren]

Not sure we should discourage people from coming forward because some people might take their lives if confronted with sexual harassment allegations.

[kwinigolfer]

Is "allegation" now synonymous with "fact"? Only on the buses Mac.

[beninho]

We should encourage people to report crimes in tbe correct way, in order for them to be fully investigated. People should also not be sacked from their jobs without being advised of the reasons in full.

The luton mp case, is a complete nonesense. And the welsh case is tragic.

[McLaren]

Kwini

I am using "accusation" to mean a claim made about someone committing an offence. Are people using it differently?

[kwinigolfer]

Mac,
You're not using "accusation".
ben is spot on.

[raycastleunited]

It's interesting how a lot of these "victims" are reporting the crimes via social media or entertainment websites, carefully managed by PR representatives.

[McLaren]

Kwini 

You have got me here. I have no idea what you are talking about?

[super_realist]

Is "allegation" now synonymous with "fact"? Only on the buses Mac.

Get that bus out Butler ehhhhh

[pedro]

It's interesting how a lot of these "victims" are reporting the crimes via social media or entertainment websites, carefully managed by PR representatives.

+1

[super_realist]

Kwini 

You have got me here. I have no idea what you are talking about?

Why doesn't that surprise us Mac? Always a bit of a 1* Doak on the comprehension stakes aren't you Mac?

[navyblueshorts]

Not sure we should discourage people from coming forward because some people might take their lives if confronted with sexual harassment allegations.

What you don't do is go public with crappy smears of people that end up with them topping themselves. Justice would be these same people who post bollox on social media, based on zero provable evidence, finding themselves on the receiving end of exactly the same sort of thing in the future.

What you do if you have an allegation is approach the police, with evidence. That's how it works.

[McLaren]

I guess what you don't do is go public with a false accusation. Why would there be an issue with going public with an accurate accusation? Unless of course it could harm the chances of the wrong doer being brought to justice.

If an individual carries out a sexual crime it isn't anyone else's responsibility to remain silent to prevent the perpetrator killing themselves.


Kwini

I am not trying to difficult but I genuinely don't get what you meant?

[kwinigolfer]

I guess what you don't do is go public with a false accusation.  Why would there be an issue with going public with an accurate accusation?  Unless of course it could harm the chances of the wrong doer being brought to justice.

If an individual carries out a sexual crime it isn't anyone else's responsibility to remain silent to prevent the perpetrator killing themselves.


Kwini

I am not trying to difficult but I genuinely don't get what you meant?

Mac,
Spelling it out: When I asked about your apparent assertion that "allegation" was synonymous with "fact", you immediately retorted but using "accusation", similar but not quite the same. Wasn't sure where you were going with that, so gave up.

Regardless, it's become almost a national pastime here of victims or their surrogates (always lawyered up) coming out of their respective woodwork making increasingly lurid allegations in public, often in staged events, before there's any sign they've lodged a complaint with respective police forces. As others have said, that's not quite right. There's a process for these things and surely not healthy for complaints to be judged in the (breathless of course) media?
Interesting that a headline incident of derogatory racial epithets being aimed at non-whites at the US Air Force Academy, front page news in September with aspersions being cast against the Academy, has been found to have been a hoax perpetrated by the alleged "victim". But the damage was already done, from headlines to fine print - and plenty of that about.

[navyblueshorts]

I guess what you don't do is go public with a false accusation.  Why would there be an issue with going public with an accurate accusation?  Unless of course it could harm the chances of the wrong doer being brought to justice.

If an individual carries out a sexual crime it isn't anyone else's responsibility to remain silent to prevent the perpetrator killing themselves...

Amazing. You just don't get it do you? Well, at least that's clear.

[super_realist]

Mac, Do you not understand how the law works? It's not up to the victim to declare the other person's guilt. It's up to the courts. Therefore, no matter how certain they are of what happened to them, it's not their place to make an accusation in public no matter how true it might be, and it may also harm their case by declaring it like that.
They should be going through the proper channels i.e a police statement, and they should be keeping quiet about the allegations UNTIL they are PROVEN to be true.

You really are an ingénue aren't you?

[beninho]

So, rich people pay people to legally restrict their tax liabilities, I am shocked and appalled.

And lots of people are brexit supporters who want to cut us off from the eu who are looking to close tax loopholes, what another surprise.

[I'm never wrong]

they should be keeping quiet about the allegations UNTIL they are PROVEN to be true.

In principle Super, I agree with this. Let us take an hypothetical case. A woman makes a complaint of r*** against a male. Case comes to court. She is granted anonymity, but he isn't. If he is found not guilty, mud will stick. So, the law should preserve his anonymity as well, shouldn't it, for those type of results? But then there is the other side of the coin, that if one person makes the allegation and when the case goes public at court with the defendants name, other people who may have also been subjected to the defendant now feel strong enough to come forward, as they know they are "not alone". (In an ideal world, they would have come forward earlier, but we know it's not that easy).

So how do we balance the rights of the defendant against possible extra witnesses/victims?

[super_realist]

I agree INW. If these people were really serious about making an allegation of a criminal offence, you don't raise a allegation through social media. You do it through the police.

It's not one victims responsibility to try and coax others out of the woodwork, which is why we ought to provide a system where this sort of thing can be reported more readily, and crucially such claims are followed up and taken more seriously. In a perfect world, stop situations where potentially vulnerable people are placed alone with men in powerful positions, but obviously this isn't practical.

Trouble is though, with the vast majority of these cases there is precisely no evidence of any offence ever having occurred, and so most of the perpetrators of crimes that actually happened will never have to face any punishment over them.

[pedro]

So, rich people pay people to legally restrict their tax liabilities, I am shocked and appalled.

And lots of people are brexit supporters who want to cut us off from the eu who are looking to close tax loopholes, what another surprise.

How can you be shocked? Or are you being sarcastic?

[pedro]

I think the increasing use of social media can have some preventive effect on potential offenders. With that being said, in the case of Weinstein, and in a judicial system where cicumstantial and character evidence is widely used, there are no excuses for not reporting it.

[kwinigolfer]

Here's a classic case where a politician could be being smeared for political reasons:

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2017/11/09/woman-tells-newspaper-roy-moore-groped-her-when-she-14-other-women-make-similar-claims/848832001/

He should lose because he's widely known as a racist, right-wing, gun-toting scumbag (which is OK in Alabama), not because he may have done something 40 years ago that's only now being publicised and can't possibly be properly adjudicated before the by-election.
Democrats already being blamed which is equally absurd.

[pedro]

If it’s a classic smear campaign why is it absurd that the other party is being blamed?

PS. Why should he lose when all his traits are perfectly ok in his own state?

[pedro]

D&G screwed by H&M..

[McLaren]

If he groped 14 year old's isn't it better to find out sooner rather than later?

Also, not sure official adjudication needs to exist for me to believe someone about a sexual harassment claim. I can still judge whether or not someone is a sex pest without them having to go to jail.

This myth of the totally made up sexual harassment claim against a totally innocent person is way overblown.

[I'm never wrong]

Also, not sure official adjudication needs to exist for me to believe someone about a sexual harassment claim.

Mac, I just hope you don't selected for jury service. Innocent until proven guilty and all that?

[McLaren]

In every day situations do you hold people to the same standards of evidence as a court room?


All I am saying is that the claim of sexual harassment isn't so incredible that I would need mountains of good evidence to believe it.

[I'm never wrong]

In every day situations do you hold people to the same standards of evidence as a court room?

Being devils advocate, Mac, sometimes you have to. One persons word against the other?

[McLaren]

In every day situations do you hold people to the same standards of evidence as a court room?

Being devils advocate, Mac, sometimes you have to. One persons word against the other?

I agree that sometimes you have to. Are you saying that a woman making a sexual harassment claim is one of those occasions?

[I'm never wrong]

Are you saying that a woman making a sexual harassment claim is one of those occasions?

. Mac, that is a bit of a leading question and a generalisation. I am saying that in order to get to the bottom of any allegation, you would need to gather information (evidence) and hear what either person has to say. How practical that is, depends on the circumstances/location etc. But I would expect in any workplace environment there would be policies and processes in place to facilitate this.

[McLaren]

INW

Of course that is true if you were conducting an official investigation of some sort, but if a friend/acquaintance/family member/social media buddie etc comes to you and says that they have been a victim of sexual harassment, how much evidence would you need to believe them?

[super_realist]

In every day situations do you hold people to the same standards of evidence as a court room?

Being devils advocate, Mac, sometimes you have to. One persons word against the other?

I agree that sometimes you have to.  Are you saying that a woman making a sexual harassment claim is one of those occasions?

Mac, you're always the first person to request EVIDENCE. How is it you now are giving a claim of sexual harassment a free pass on this?

Are you really suggesting you convict someone on a claim?

You know what they say Mac, you reserve belief until there is sufficient evidence, that's how it works. Doesn't mean I wouldn't take their claim seriously, but doesn't mean I would necessarily believe it immediately. It would be the starting point for going down a route of investigation.

[pedro]

INW

Of course that is true if you were conducting an official investigation of some sort, but if a friend/acquaintance/family member/social media buddie etc comes to you and says that they have been a victim of sexual harassment, how much evidence would you need to believe them?

Then I’d probably believe them. But not if a first resort is a well orchestrated twitter or facebook statement.

[super_realist]

Looks like the turgid are out of the World Cup.

[McLaren]

Super

Are you really suggesting you convict someone on a claim?

Are you kidding? Read the f***ing thread.

[super_realist]

You're the one saying you believe claims on someone's word.

[McLaren]

In context, and if you could be bothered to read the rest of the thread you would find out the courtroom isn't that context.

[pedro]

Looks like the turgid are out of the World Cup.

Famine is over. got stuffed. With bacon.

[I'm never wrong]

INW

Of course that is true if you were conducting an official investigation of some sort, but if a friend/acquaintance/family member/social media buddie etc comes to you and says that they have been a victim of sexual harassment, how much evidence would you need to believe them?

Four different types of person listed there Mac, so it would, to an extent, depend on how well I knew them as to how much I believed them. (Which is not the same as to what would you do afterwards...)

[super_realist]

In context, and if you could be bothered to read the rest of the thread you would find out the courtroom isn't that context.

The point is Mac, in regards to the context of the post, you accept whatever someone tells you just because it comes with the caveat of being sexual harassment, simply because you know them.

That's precisely the same reason why you and I laugh at the religious. They believe what someone tells them without question.

Of course if someone tells you something like that, it's normal to be alarmed and concerned, but believing something like that immediately is also known as being gullible. With a claim like that the burden of proof is a lot higher than someone trivial like saying they had a cheese sandwich for lunch.

It's how you deal with a claim like that, not whether you believe it.

[westisbest]

Looks like the turgid are out of the World Cup.

How can we be Out when we were never in it.

Shocking performance.

Well done Denmark totally deserved it.
Quality from Erickson.

[pedro]

If you want to see a light footed Irishman you should go and watch Riverdance.

[Sponsored content]