Starmer's vision quest

Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.

matticus

Guru
Plenty on here have mentioned Epsteins paedo ring, and have suggested other public figures were involved, and suggested names, yet I get singled out for suggesting Mandelson, self confirmed best mate of Epstein, might have also indulged?
You're complaining about being singled out??
How about manning up and actually owning what you wrote. Makes no difference whether others have said the same.

Paedophilia is serious stuff - you really shouldn't accuse someone without really good evidence.
 
Brace yourself! The forum troll's awake. ^_^
giphy.gif
 

Stevo 666

Über Member
Brace yourself! The forum troll's awake. ^_^
View attachment 9981

Did your alarm not go off?
 
It would have made more sense to get rid of not guilty.

The court is there to decide if the crown have proven their case. The original Scottish verdicts were 'proven' and 'not proven'.

Not proven is, and always has been, an aquittal.

Hmm. I think if you'd been tried for something you knew you hadn't done, and you left being told the case was 'not proven' (as opposed to 'not guilty'), you might feel otherwise.

I appreciate that if there are only two possible outcomes, it's a question of semantics of what phrase you use for those who aren't found guilty, but using 'not proven' for all those who aren't found guilty seems like a weaselly cop-out for those who genuinely didn't do it, guv.
 
Top Bottom