The news thread - Page 149 - Anything Goes - Other topics not covered elsewhere - Tartan Army Message Board Jump to content

Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, ParisInAKilt said:

Aye it read like that. 

Quick google “The jury at Reading Crown Court acquitted him of murder and he was given a 26-year sentence for manslaughter by reason of diminished responsibility, which he had already admitted”

I know the first article there mentioned adjustment disorder. Still staggering to me how the jury could find him not guilty of murder though. 

I imagine there's a lot of facts in mitigation that have been omitted from that article.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 6.1k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

13 minutes ago, aaid said:

A contemporary account.

10 jurors to 2 found him not guilty of murder.

https://www.getreading.co.uk/news/local-news/robert-brown-murder-trial-full-4213482

“The jury heard British Airways pilot Brown had been suffering from an stress-related condition called an “adjustment disorder” and made a ruling on the grounds of diminished responsibility.

The court heard how the condition very rarely causes violent reactions, but the jury accepted it had caused Brown to attack his wife.“

The defence must have had the more persuasive psychiatrist 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

DRS haters out there.  UKG are saying they will grant approval to the Scottish DRS Scheme if glass bottles are removed, but there's no problem with glass bottles in the proposed Welsh scheme.

Wake up and smell the coffee folks.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, aaid said:

DRS haters out there.  UKG are saying they will grant approval to the Scottish DRS Scheme if glass bottles are removed, but there's no problem with glass bottles in the proposed Welsh scheme.

Wake up and smell the coffee folks.

 

Of all the "controversial Scottish Government legislation" the opposition to DRS is the one that makes the least sense to me.  No one complains about taking things to the recycling and the world didn't fall apart when shops started charging 5p for a carrier bag.  One of the major plus points of that scheme is you no longer see manky discarded carrier bags lying around the place, and if the DRS resulted in fewer empty cans and bottles lying around making the place look like a shitehole, then I'm all for it.

I can see how it might be a problem for people who cannot physically or mentally get to a supermarket to return their empties, such as elderly or disabled people, but if someone's only issue is they can't be arsed spending a few minutes more at the supermarket once a week then I've no sympathy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, aaid said:

DRS haters out there.  UKG are saying they will grant approval to the Scottish DRS Scheme if glass bottles are removed, but there's no problem with glass bottles in the proposed Welsh scheme.

Wake up and smell the coffee folks.

 

Front page of the Mail telling us how lucky we are that the UK gov are stepping into save us from ourselves,  and help businesses the country over. 
They are not even trying to hide the attack on devolution anymore. When folk finally do wake up it will be too late. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, TDYER63 said:

Front page of the Mail telling us how lucky we are that the UK gov are stepping into save us from ourselves,  and help businesses the country over. 
They are not even trying to hide the attack on devolution anymore. When folk finally do wake up it will be too late. 

 

Yoons will love it because they'll see it as the big, grown up parliament filled with clever English folk pulling rank on the pretendy parliament in Edinburgh and getting it up the natz.

They'd get a shock if they woke up one day to find they had to pay for their own prescriptions and fund their children's university tuition fees though. In the current climate it's actually hard to imagine policies like that being "allowed" to go through HR.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, scotlad said:

Of all the "controversial Scottish Government legislation" the opposition to DRS is the one that makes the least sense to me.  No one complains about taking things to the recycling and the world didn't fall apart when shops started charging 5p for a carrier bag.  One of the major plus points of that scheme is you no longer see manky discarded carrier bags lying around the place, and if the DRS resulted in fewer empty cans and bottles lying around making the place look like a shitehole, then I'm all for it.

I can see how it might be a problem for people who cannot physically or mentally get to a supermarket to return their empties, such as elderly or disabled people, but if someone's only issue is they can't be arsed spending a few minutes more at the supermarket once a week then I've no sympathy.

It’s a pattern. The Tories, aided by the Scottish establishment and the pliable unionist media are trying to make Scotland ungovernable by hyping up objection to any legislation passed by or proposed by Holyrood and stymieing it.  I’m not suggesting that the GRR bill didn’t cover some difficult or controversial ground but someone needs to explain to me why out of the multiple similar countries that have passed similar legislation with little of the fuss that’s happened in Scotland. 

DRS *should not* be controversial legislation.  Dig deeper into who is actually opposing it.

HPMA and judicial reform bills are both at the early stages of their development but are being touted as absolutely evil.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Absolutely scandalous interview on the Sunday Show with Lorna Slater on this.

Martin Geissler, who in general I think is pretty fair and decent tends to take "devil's advocate" approach to interviewing - particularly - politicians which generally along the lines of "You're an idiot and this is all your fault".  He's not alone in that style.

I've no issue with that style of interviewing, politicians need to challenged and put under pressure and I think Slater did a reasonable job of dealing with those and getting her point across.

However, after that interview, Geissler said that "of course, there's two sides to this and we asked the UKG to come on and they refused".

I think they really have to address this style of interviewing when one side refuses to appear and answer questions on their side.  I'm not saying that - in this case - Lorna Slater should've been given an easy ride but perhaps the temperature should've been dialled down a bit.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, scotlad said:

Yoons will love it because they'll see it as the big, grown up parliament filled with clever English folk pulling rank on the pretendy parliament in Edinburgh and getting it up the natz.

They'd get a shock if they woke up one day to find they had to pay for their own prescriptions and fund their children's university tuition fees though. In the current climate it's actually hard to imagine policies like that being "allowed" to go through HR.

Yip, the UKG would find some way to accuse the SG of  putting other parts of the UK at a disadvantage with these policies. 

🤔 Oh wait, they do. The rest of the UK need to pay for these things. But don’t worry, that is only normal people and poorer families being disadvantaged , its ok for them to pay more, just so long as its not businesses that need to put their hand in their pocket .
The UK really do have a brass neck pretending that they care about business when they have well and truly fucked the country with Brexit. 
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, aaid said:

Absolutely scandalous interview on the Sunday Show with Lorna Slater on this.

Martin Geissler, who in general I think is pretty fair and decent tends to take "devil's advocate" approach to interviewing - particularly - politicians which generally along the lines of "You're an idiot and this is all your fault".  He's not alone in that style.

I've no issue with that style of interviewing, politicians need to challenged and put under pressure and I think Slater did a reasonable job of dealing with those and getting her point across.

However, after that interview, Geissler said that "of course, there's two sides to this and we asked the UKG to come on and they refused".

I think they really have to address this style of interviewing when one side refuses to appear and answer questions on their side.  I'm not saying that - in this case - Lorna Slater should've been given an easy ride but perhaps the temperature should've been dialled down a bit.

 

If Slater did ok then people might actually look at the UKG refusal to come on as being weak and unsure of their stance. Geissler could have said ‘ no one at the UKG was available’ which would been more of a get out for them. 
Not that I am supporting Geissler, and I agree they should have 2 sides  , but it might make the UKG look like they dont have a strong case by refusing to come on. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Quite a turnaround from "the most powerful devolved parliament in the world". Now our parliament is apparently akin to a wee doggie on a lead that needs tugged now and again when it gets out of control. 

Edited by scotlad
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, scotlad said:

 

Quite a turnaround from "the most powerful devolved parliament in the world". Now our parliament is apparently akin to a wee doggie on a lead that needs tugged now and again when it gets out of control. 

This is a style of interviewing where the interviewer plays devil's advocate and attacks the interviewee's point of view and gets them to justify it.  I've no idea whether or not he believes that to be true.

The problem lies when the alternate position cannot be questioned in the same manner as the opponent refuses to be interviewed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/26/2023 at 9:45 PM, Ally Bongo said:

Would not be one bit surprised if Phillip Schofield commits Hari Kari in the next weeks/months as the walls of his sham come tumbling down

Also good to see that those who turned a blind eye are in the headlights

🤣🤣

IMG_1976.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/28/2023 at 12:22 AM, aaid said:

It’s a pattern. The Tories, aided by the Scottish establishment and the pliable unionist media are trying to make Scotland ungovernable by hyping up objection to any legislation passed by or proposed by Holyrood and stymieing it.  I’m not suggesting that the GRR bill didn’t cover some difficult or controversial ground but someone needs to explain to me why out of the multiple similar countries that have passed similar legislation with little of the fuss that’s happened in Scotland. 

DRS *should not* be controversial legislation.  Dig deeper into who is actually opposing it.

HPMA and judicial reform bills are both at the early stages of their development but are being touted as absolutely evil.

 

Is the glass issue (approved in Wales but not in Scotland) true? I've not been following this story. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, Bzzzz said:

Is the glass issue (approved in Wales but not in Scotland) true? I've not been following this story. 

Wales haven't finalised their regulations yet but they are proposing glass should be included.  It's also a u-turn by the Tories in Westminster as glass was a manifesto commitment in 2019 for them.

Edited by aaid
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, aaid said:

Wales haven't finalised their regulations yet but they are proposing glass should be included.  It's also a u-turn by the Tories in Westminster as glass was a manifesto commitment in 2019 for them.

Well they don't believe in manifesto commitments do they?

So are they planning to block the Welsh plan too because of glass or is it just Scotland's?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/28/2023 at 4:42 PM, aaid said:

This is a style of interviewing where the interviewer plays devil's advocate and attacks the interviewee's point of view and gets them to justify it.  I've no idea whether or not he believes that to be true.

The problem lies when the alternate position cannot be questioned in the same manner as the opponent refuses to be interviewed.

I get that, but even if Geisler is just playing devil's advocate, the fact that WM pulling rank over HR is now considered an acceptable concept is a complete volte-face from a few years ago, when HR was deemed to be one of the most powerful devolved parliaments in the world. 

Put it this way, they wouldn't have dared to pull this shit when Salmond was FM, or up until the later days of Sturgeon's tenure, because they'd have made merry hell with the political capital it would have given them. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, scotlad said:

I get that, but even if Geisler is just playing devil's advocate, the fact that WM pulling rank over HR is now considered an acceptable concept is a complete volte-face from a few years ago, when HR was deemed to be one of the most powerful devolved parliaments in the world. 

Put it this way, they wouldn't have dared to pull this shit when Salmond was FM, or up until the later days of Sturgeon's tenure, because they'd have made merry hell with the political capital it would have given them. 

How many devolved parliaments are there in the world? I get fed up hearing this ‘most powerful devolved parliament in the world ‘shit and folk thinking that it is something to be grateful for. Devolved parliaments are not normal . The vast majority of countries in the world make all their own decisions . FFS they wont even let us run our own recycling scheme. 
I seen that interview with Lorna Slater earlier today . I am not a massive fan of LS but was unbelievably calm and did really well. I would have been screaming ‘FFS Geissler, exactly what part of ‘the UKG have moved the goalposts ‘ do you not understand’  . Dont think he liked the fact she was not being intimidated . I try not to get too excited about interviewers as they are just looking for reaction and viewing figures , but he was a wee bit aggressive. 

Made himself look a bit of a fanny too when he was suggesting that the SG go out of their way to go against WM  at every opportunity, then 5 mins later saying would it not be better to go along with the rest of the UK on this and make political capital out of things going wrong.  
So , its better just to put up and shut up like a good wee 1/8 th of the total population, even when you think its wrong, to make some political capital .  But standing by the decision all 4 countries made on DRS is trying to be awkward . 
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Real possibility now that Leslie Van Houten will be released after spending 50 years in jail for her part as an accomplice in the murder of Leno and Rosemary Bianca when she was 20 years old.

A California court of appeal has ruled against Governor Newsom's denial of her parole by 2-1

Newsom can appeal this decision to block her release however it is likely the court will allow her to be parolled while they consider the appeal

Did Charles Manson Get Paroled? Leslie Van Houten Might Get Released

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...



×
×
  • Create New...