What is Huntley playing at...?? - Page 4

downquark1 · 27-11-2003, 18:52

Quote:

1. Bring back hanging for Child murders and multiple Murderers.

He hasn't been convicted yet, so this won't help currently

Quote:

2. Force pedos to take chemicals or have implants to prevent them seeing children as sexual objects. When they want sex they are tagged and confined to their home.

These implants sound interesting - got a link?

Besides you hasn't been convicted of such previously either - so this wouldn't have helped.

Tiptoes · 27-11-2003, 19:13

Quote:

Originally Posted by downquark1

He hasn't been convicted yet, so this won't help currently

These implants sound interesting - got a link?

Besides you hasn't been convicted of such previously either - so this wouldn't have helped.

No the implants thing is Just an Idea I had when I wrote the Chatdanger Article below

Ive been discussing it for about three years now but it seems those with the "connections" are only interested in feathering their own back.

I also had an idea for the safechat system discussed in this thread

http://forum.nthellworld.co.uk/showt...light=safechat

downquark1 · 27-11-2003, 19:20

Quote:

No the implants thing is Just an Idea I had when I wrote the Chatdanger Article below

So they don't exist?

27-11-2003, 19:30

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tiptoes

Graham what is your description of a man that is on charges for the murder of two innocent young girls who claims he accidentally killed them both at the same time. Whilst preparing to give his dog a bath?

Having looked at the link you mentioned, I can only assume that if it hasn`t happened yet, your activities could very well place you in the position of participating in a criminal trial as an expert witness. I`m more than a touch disturbed that someone in that position could have such scant regard for the due process of the law, and the rights of prior to the completion of that process.

If one were to post such messages to a public forum, and then be placed in a courtroom situation, I`m sure it wouldn`t take very long for any defence to discredit you as a biased witness. That could possibly put the prosecution in jeopardy. It's strange that someone who makes such a show about protecting children could act in such a way that they could predujice a trial and accomplish quite the opposite.

Tiptoes · 27-11-2003, 19:36

Quote:

Originally Posted by dr wadd

Having looked at the link you mentioned, I can only assume that if it hasn`t happened yet, your activities could very well place you in the position of participating in a criminal trial as an expert witness.

When they do I am minded to keep my opnions to myself until then Im free to say my views ......

Tiptoes · 27-11-2003, 19:38

Quote:

Originally Posted by downquark1

So they don't exist?

No as I said it is an idea..

downquark1 · 27-11-2003, 19:47

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tiptoes

No as I said it is an idea..

So you came up with an idea without that would solve all problems but actually have no idea if it is possible

27-11-2003, 19:53

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tiptoes

When they do I am minded to keep my opnions to myself until then Im free to say my views ......

I never said that you weren`t entitled to express your opinion. However, just because you wouldn`t blurt it out in court doesn`t mean that documentation of such opinions is impossible to find, this forum for example. Granted, the odds of a defence team finding this thread is minimal, but the risk is there all the same.

But that is not what concerns me, I am concerned that regardless of whether or not you overtly express your views in court, you're responses to any given questions are likely to be coloured by them, increasing the risk that an innocent person is convicted. I see nothing in this forum that suggests to me you could maintain an attitude of complete and total objectivity, your generalisations and middle-England fear inspiring soundbites suggest to me an almost rabid fervour.

Tiptoes · 27-11-2003, 20:03

Quote:

Originally Posted by downquark1

So you came up with an idea without that would solve all problems but actually have no idea if it is possible

Actually any Medical doctor should be able to tell you there are drugs available to Inhibit Sexual arousel..

It is a common side effect of an anti depressant is it not?

The delivery mechanism is simple ..........

Surely you dont need links for that

Do you?

downquark1 · 27-11-2003, 20:05

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tiptoes

Actually any Medical doctor should be able to tell you there are drugs available to Inhibit Sexual arousel..

It is a common side effect of an anit depressant is it not?

The delivery mechanism is simple ..........

Surely you dont need links for that

Do you?

That's not what you said - you said prevent sexual arousal from children :p

Tiptoes · 27-11-2003, 20:17

Quote:

Originally Posted by dr wadd

I am concerned that regardless of whether or not you overtly express your views in court, you're responses to any given questions are likely to be coloured by them, .......................suggest to me an almost rabid fervour.

Concerns and assumption are not a basis on which a court works.

It is fact.. and Im glad for that , that much is true.

As one poster said above.. The huntley case shows there are many unanaweed questions...Why this that and the other.....

You dont have to be an idiot to not have an opinion...

I have a belief I am entitled to express on any forum .... The presentation of a fact using a factual methodology of obtaining those facts in a court case would present itself as just that....

The only time I have seen what you describe happen is when funnly enough a doctor came along and expressed his opnion that a women had killed her three children when in fact she hadnt.

If I was ever asked in a court of law what my opinion was on factually given evidence I would have to decline simply because the burdnen of verdict lies with the jury and not myself.

I would only present evidence based on what was obtained based on proved methodologies.

Here I can express what I like as long as it is within the forum rules.

27-11-2003, 20:25

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tiptoes

I would only present evidence based on what was obtained based on proved methodologies.

Maybe so, but the presentation in a court can be just as important as what is presented, and on the evidence I have seen both in this forum and on your "DangerChat" page does not indicate to be that you could maintain objectivity.

Here I can express what I like as long as it is within the forum rules.[/QUOTE]
You seem to need to keep making that point, when I had already stated that I was *not* saying you couldn`t express an opinion.

Ramrod · 27-11-2003, 20:31

Quote:

Originally Posted by dr wadd

Having looked at the link you mentioned, I can only assume that if it hasn`t happened yet, your activities could very well place you in the position of participating in a criminal trial as an expert witness. I`m more than a touch disturbed that someone in that position could have such scant regard for the due process of the law, and the rights of prior to the completion of that process.

If one were to post such messages to a public forum, and then be placed in a courtroom situation, I`m sure it wouldn`t take very long for any defence to discredit you as a biased witness. That could possibly put the prosecution in jeopardy. It's strange that someone who makes such a show about protecting children could act in such a way that they could predujice a trial and accomplish quite the opposite.

Hang on....in 2 paragraphs you have set him up as an expert witness (which he would probably never be in a month of sundays), put him in a courtroom, had him savaged by the defence and lost the case for the prosecution! Thats one hell of a leap of imagination!

Tiptoes · 27-11-2003, 20:40

And you are basing you assumptionsor opinion solely what is written here rather "How" evidence is actually presented.

One is not allowed to express opinions in a courtroom unless asked to do so.Also one is visibly seen to present evidence rather than merely write it in text format so one is also alway putting ones own slant on written texted because that is the way it is interpreted.

Not very objective is it?

When one is presented with factual evidence there are only some many way in which one can present that evidence.

For example how can ways can one possibly desicribe how one achieved to obtain data via a regulated procedural method.?

If one were to experience how one may present factual evidence under questioning then one may get a better impression of how one would actually be percieved.

Tiptoes · 27-11-2003, 20:47

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ramrod

Hang on....in 2 paragraphs you have set him up as an expert witness (which he would probably never be in a month of sundays), put him in a courtroom, had him savaged by the defence and lost the case for the prosecution! Thats one hell of a leap of imagination!

Hmm yes it is possible to be both wrong and right in the same pparagraph. I leave the rest to fish because there is no more line available for tonights fishing.