PDA

View Full Version : Justice, Laser Treatment & Scale Rigging.



Rex Fearnehough
04-29-2004, 03:29 AM
I was recently accused of a serious crime.
Even though I knew that the accusation was untrue and that I could prove it,I have been through many months of horror.
It seems that I do not trust the system, (British).
I was always a believer in our system but the belief has gone.
Why?
Rex

stan v
04-29-2004, 05:30 AM
Originally posted by Rex Fearnehough:
I was recently accused of a serious crime.
Even though I knew that the accusation was untrue and that I could prove it,I have been through many months of horror.
It seems that I do not trust the system, (British).
I was always a believer in our system but the belief has gone.
Why?
RexWhy?

Why what?

Why are you being accused of a serious crime?
Why do you no longer believe in the Brit system?
Why has the belief gone?

Here's one:
Why do we care? :rolleyes:

Rex Fearnehough
04-29-2004, 05:57 AM
Stan, there are still a few words that you do not understand, look these up, humanity, common decency, fellow man, daft.
I used (British) out of common decency, I cannot comment on your legal system I am not part of it!
How come you didn't cut and post? I'll be amazed if your post was an original thought.
Are the humming birds back yet?
Donn, I cannot blame Blair, I voted for him. I must look up daft!
Did you ever get to having a beer with Joe?

[ 04-29-2004, 07:01 AM: Message edited by: Rex Fearnehough ]

stan v
04-29-2004, 06:03 AM
Actually I thought your plight was a signal of things to come...good news...I thought finally a law was on the books allowing law enforcement to round up aunties. Terrorists and aunties...wouldn't they make great cell mates?

Memphis Mike
04-29-2004, 06:07 AM
"Here's one:
Why do we care?"

Little peckerhead.

stan v
04-29-2004, 06:13 AM
Oldriverratdrongodutch:

Have I mentioned my business meeting in Memphis?

I'll give you a buzz when I'm in town...maybe we can get together and have ribs?

Ian McColgin
04-29-2004, 06:50 AM
Why not take it for a moment that Rex is writing in good faith. Certainly in our US system it can happen that law enforcement focus on the wrong person, perhaps even convict and, in a captial crime, execute the wrong person.

Victemizing the innocent can happen in any justice system under any leadership. We may imagine that it's more likely under the leadership of certain types than of others, but it can happen any time.

Without knowing the facts of Rex's situation, it's not possible to answer 'why?' But even knowing the facts, the answer is about as elusive as the answer to any other misfortune. Why cancer? Why the drunk driver rounding that bend on the wrong side of the road?

Part of the healing process from any survived misfortune is sharing it, sometimes publicly. Cancer can strike anyone but cancer patients who smoke have an especially strong story to tell. A random drunk can hit anyone, but the village drunk who's been tolorated and coddled and protected by the police and the neighbors is another matter.

I hope that Rex finds the forum to tell the details so that we may all be reminded that there is a reason for rights for the accused, even when the eventual working out of those rights is long, damaging and painful.

Rex Fearnehough
04-29-2004, 07:27 AM
It would be stupid of me to say what my non-crime was on the web.
Thank God I was vindicated. The accusation was made by a drunk.
So I will post the thread under a new heading

Andrew Craig-Bennett
04-29-2004, 07:39 AM
It can happen to any of us.

A man known to me, and to very many people, was wrongly accused of something that was not only a serious crime, but incredibly humiliating and embarrassing. He is self employed and makes a good living by supplying, maintaining, restoring and dealing in Agas. An Aga is an icon of the British countrified upper middle classes, a very substantial, heat retaining, kitchen range, designed by a Swede in the 1920's, built in Britain ever since. Any household with pretensions to gentility should have one.

He was accused, by a woman he did not know, of exposing himself to her in a supermarket car park.

The vicious twist was, of course, that he depends on being invited into lonely houses in the middle of the countryside, by women on their own, in order to make his living...

He was found "not guilty", after half the county, including the MP's wife, turned out for him as character witnesses...but suppose they had not done so?

Keith Wilson
04-29-2004, 10:18 AM
Here's one:
Why do we care?
Actually I thought your plight was a signal of things to come...good news...I thought finally a law was on the books allowing law enforcement to round up aunties. Terrorists and aunties...wouldn't they make great cell mates? :mad: Stan, assuming you are serious, you have just crossed the line into something very different and far worse than merely right-wing politics. You have just said that "aunties", (your sneering name for those who don't support the current war in Iraq) should be "rounded up" and imprisioned like terrorists. Sir, this is fascism. If you want to know where Meerkat's fascists are, look in the mirror. What you have suggested is profoundly un-American, against every principle on which this country was founded, and against everything that makes it worth defending. You are no sort of patriot, and what you have suggested is an offense to everyone who loves this country, and to anyone who has ever defended it from its enemies (not all of which are elsewhere).

:mad: If you are joking, OTOH, you have merely acted like a thoughtless sneering asshole. If you weren't serious, a sincere apology to Rex Fearnehough is in order.

And apologies to Rex for hijacking his thread, but I thought this was serious enough that some comment was needed.

For your education, Stan, here are some exerpts from the Constitution of the United States of America. What you have advocated violates, as far as I can tell, at least four of the amendments to the Constitution.

Amendment I
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

Amendment V
No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

Amendment VI
In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the state and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the assistance of counsel for his defense.

Amendment XIV
Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

[ 04-29-2004, 11:23 AM: Message edited by: Keith Wilson ]

Andrew Craig-Bennett
04-29-2004, 10:26 AM
Stan, assuming you are serious, you have just crossed the line into something very different and far worse than merely right-wing politics. You have just said that "aunties", (your sneering name for those who don't support the current war in Iraq) should be "rounded up" and imprisioned like terrorists. Sir, this is fascism. If you want to know where Meerkat's fascists are, look in the mirror. What you have suggested is profoundly un-American, against every principle on which this country was founded, and against everything that makes it worth defending. You are no sort of patriot, and what you have suggested is an offense to everyone who loves this country, and to anyone who has ever defended it from its enemies (not all of which are elsewhere).

If you are joking, OTOH, you have merely acted like a thoughtless sneering asshole. If you weren't serious, a sincere apology to Mr Fearnehough is in order.

Well said, Keith.

Wild Dingo
04-29-2004, 10:38 AM
aaahhh geez fellas... stan has been sayin that to us furreners for at least the 3 years Ive been here cripes hes said it to me often enough in respect to comments about Aussie... or my views regarding US the so called "war in Iraq" etc etc etc... just stans way of not bein able to understand furreners is all and it so reminds me of that Standley fella from Laurel and Hardey I actually call him Standley for short... shrug it off mates

Rex sorry to hear of your probs mate but as has been said it can happen anywhere its not isolated to the British system it happens in every legal system that has at its core those pesky creatures called... humans who are notorious for getting their facts screwed up

Ian McColgin
04-29-2004, 02:13 PM
Kieth, well said indeed.

Rex, I can certainly see not sharing on a public forum, especially if the matter was not public in your area. Often over here there's a great deal of public record - arrest reports and court reports are published in the newspaper - so I did not think of the possibility that the details of your nightmare might be better kept private.

The general issue of faith or lack of faith in the system is a tough one, given that the innocent can be deprived of liberty. And even when an untrue accusation has been disproven, it can leave a blot on your good name, extending the nightmare.

I certainly hope that your community realizes that a false accusation, whether done deliberatly (in which case it may be a crime) or done in good faith mistake (as good faith as a drunk can get), makes you as much a crime victem as any real or imagined victem of the crime that formed the basis for the accusation.

As for faith in the system: The system is not built on faith. It's built on a modern, slightly civilized form of trial by combat in which truth may be an incidental by-product. It's not a matter of faith but of probability. Would another land's legal system have eventually exhonorated you, as yours did, or would no one have cared and you'd have been condemned?

John of Phoenix
04-29-2004, 03:14 PM
Hey fellas, don't feed the troll.

Glad things worked out for you Rex. Innocent until proven guilty except in cases of trial by innuendo, of course.

Keith Wilson
04-29-2004, 03:38 PM
Sorry, Donn. I probably should have calmed down some more before I replied. It's still true, though.

Memphis Mike
04-29-2004, 03:48 PM
Originally posted by stan v:
Oldriverratdrongodutch:

Have I mentioned my business meeting in Memphis?

I'll give you a buzz when I'm in town...maybe we can get together and have ribs?Don't count on it little peckerhead. There are only three people on this forum I never want to meet and you're one of them.

Stiletto
04-29-2004, 05:42 PM
And the other two are? ;)

JimD
04-29-2004, 09:18 PM
I was always a believer in our system but the belief has gone.
Why?
Because human designed systems are falable and those whose job it is to enforce them are corrupt to one degree or another. Don't mean to sound harsh but how could an adult not appreciate such a simple reality?

stan v
04-29-2004, 09:20 PM
Better watch out, Keith may still be on line. :rolleyes:

Keith Wilson
04-29-2004, 11:18 PM
Perhaps it's merely tossing another bone to the troll, but I received this private message a little while ago from Stan V. Just so we all know what we're dealing with here, I figured I'd post it. I'll let him speak for himself:


stan v
.
Member # 3673 posted 04-29-2004 10:16 PM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I hate cry babies on the forum. Don't you? Grow up, it's an internet forum. You've never met Rex, you've never met me....yet you think Dutch is OK. **** you.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posts: 6202 | From: Spring, Texas, USA

[ 04-30-2004, 12:20 AM: Message edited by: Keith Wilson ]

Rex Fearnehough
04-30-2004, 03:10 AM
Of course I realise that all systems are fallible.
Yes I am an adult and also fallible.
This was meant to be a debate on a system that protects wrongdoers and persecutes possible innocents.
Nothing was going to be done in my case until I screamed,"Enough".
I'm proud of how I handled my case, so let us leave it.
Let us look at OJ's case. He was proven innocent.
Why is it not generally accepted?

stan v
04-30-2004, 04:19 AM
Rex, which explains why we are at war. You know, the war you don't like...and apparently, why you don't like the USA.

We've had enough.

Keith, your liberalism is showing one of your weaknesses....you jump to conclusions (who else did this yesterday?) without asking or thinking about my post. **** you.

Rex Fearnehough
04-30-2004, 05:20 AM
Stan,
Your memory is very selective. Read my posts on my admiration of the USA and that I wished to know more about it.
I am as you know an ex soldier,(not drafted), and I hate war but, at the start of the Iraqi debacle,
I gave my views on why I thought that we had to go to war.
You debase your hero's by your stupid statements,
some of them died and are dying still to give you the right to speak your drivel.
Despite you, I still admire your country.
So your wingeing childlike cry of, "You do not like the USA," is yet another load of garbage.
Go back to sleep and dream of what you did for your wonderful country.

stan v
04-30-2004, 05:29 AM
Rex, that's not what I remember you having to say about my country. Or, the war on terror. You're being consistent on what you think of me, however, I'll give you that. You do know what I think of the anti-war crowd? (you do know that I too am anti-war?, but find it useful as a last resort...in this case as a defense)

But, I'm not an auntie. Don't be surprised when you see me unload on those that unload on America. (here or abroad)

Chris Coose
04-30-2004, 05:32 AM
unload Interesting use of the word from a pacifist.

Too bad the dubbya didn't think to use war as diplomatically as you would.

stan v
04-30-2004, 05:36 AM
This would be a good example of an auntie Rex....here at home. We have bunches and bunches (not really, they just make the news here, since most of the media is auntie)...and they believe they support the troops when they protest everyone but the terrorists. :rolleyes:

Chris Coose
04-30-2004, 05:49 AM
Supporting troops is easy and regrettably memorable.

Supporting dubbya would seem to be a task limited to the brain damaged.

Rex Fearnehough
04-30-2004, 06:01 AM
Stan, I have been looking through my posts to find what you were referring to but, I got bored.
I did find this however and once again you are right, I am consistant.

Chad, I have re-read the post and even though I am not an American, I am proud to know you.
Soldiers have a job to do, they don't always agree on the wheres and the whys of their jobs.
So you and the thousands, who will do this terrible work are the heroes.
They are the Patriots!
Unlike, the red faced puffed up fools, that sit at home, caressing their penile weapons and howl at the moon.
You, wave your flag gently but, forcefully.



[ 04-30-2004, 07:03 AM: Message edited by: Rex Fearnehough ]

stan v
04-30-2004, 06:04 AM
Like you I've done my time..had my turn. And since my time there has been no end to war, death or destruction. And no end to aunties....do you ever protest the terrorists?

Rex Fearnehough
04-30-2004, 06:29 AM
Damned right I do, actively and in person.

stan v
04-30-2004, 06:39 AM
Well, looks like you're a little bowed up.....what's 'in person' mean? I haven't seen an anti-terrorist protest on the tube (tele to you) from anywhere in the world. Seen a bunch of W bashing, but no terrorist bashing. Who were you protesting?

ken mcclure
04-30-2004, 06:45 AM
Welcome back, Rex. Glad that you've been cleared of whatever it was.

One of my personal fears is being in that situation - having to defend myself from charges for something I didn't do.

stan v
04-30-2004, 06:47 AM
Happens to me every day on this forum. ;)

Memphis Mike
04-30-2004, 07:48 AM
Posted by Stan:

"****you"

you little peckerhead.

Keith Wilson
04-30-2004, 08:36 AM
Actually I thought your plight was a signal of things to come...good news...I thought finally a law was on the books allowing law enforcement to round up aunties. Terrorists and aunties...wouldn't they make great cell mates?
you jump to conclusions (who else did this yesterday?) without asking or thinking about my post. **** you. Sam, I quoted exactly what you posted, and responded to it directly after thinking about it fairly carefully. You may not like what I said; that's your right. However, it was a direct result of a careful reading of your own words. Did you read them as carefully?

OK, so I'll ask. Do you really believe what you post, or is it just empty rhetoric? Do you really believe those who oppose the war in Iraq should be "rounded up" and imprisioned with terrorists? How would you sugest changing the Constitution to make this possible? Would you advocate suspending the Bill of Rights (on an emergency basis, of course) during the "war on terror"? Perhaps we could suspend the operation of Congress during the present emergency and have a military government. Do you think this would be a good idea? And I'm sorry, but "**** you" isn't much of an answer.

(Sorry, gentlemen, I just couldn't resist feeding the troll this morning.)

[ 04-30-2004, 09:45 AM: Message edited by: Keith Wilson ]

Ian McColgin
04-30-2004, 09:22 AM
Ah Rex, I wrote more incisive stuff on accusations and false accusations, reflections on my own brush with an FBI devoted to lies and intimidation at the time, and such but managed to hit the wrong button and lost it. Perhaps just as well.

The system did eventually work for you because folk more level headed than Stan did the investigating. The system also defends Stan's freedom of speech. Which is a good thing. While we formally try not to establish guilt by mere association, Stan's rants must embarrass thinking conservatives and might even move a few of them towards more progressive thoughts.

It's probably a few years off, but I hope one day to sail by your way. Till then, keep writing here and

G'luck

stan v
04-30-2004, 11:12 AM
By the way, it's ReAgan. Great president.

I'd round up the aunties and wire 'em for some high voltage....ZAP till they screeched each of their buds names......then give 'em another jolt to make sure they weren't faking it. Does the Patriot Act permit this? We can call it 'Free Electricity' day....that ought to work as bait. tongue.gif

Keith Wilson
04-30-2004, 01:46 PM
Well, Stan, according to the latest figures somewhere between 40 and 50 percent of Americans oppose the war in Iraq, depending on precisely how the question is asked. Here's a reference for a wide variety of polling data (http://www.pollingreport.com/iraq.htm) on the subject.

So you have twice now said that about half of all American citizens should be imprisoned for their political opinions, and in your latest post, that they should be tortured while in prison. Do you really believe this? Forgive me if my sense of humor isn't large enough to include this sort of thing.

[ 04-30-2004, 02:49 PM: Message edited by: Keith Wilson ]

High C
04-30-2004, 02:13 PM
Originally posted by Rex Fearnehough:
Let us look at OJ's case. He was proven innocent. Why is it not generally accepted?OJ's criminal trial featured DNA evidence that put his guilt beyond what most folks would call "reasonable doubt", the appropriate standard in our courts. His blood was positively identified at the crime scene. There were many odd things about the trial, a weak judge who couldn't control the theatrics of OJ's attorney, and the fact that it was televised live for days on end. Perhaps the reason so many people are convinced of his guilt is because they actually saw the trial.

One is never found "innocent" in an American court, BTW, it's "not guilty", a somewhat different term.

After his acquittal in criminal court OJ was sued by the victims' families and found guilty. Admittedly, the standard of proof is lower in a civil trial than in criminal.

So OJ was acquitted in a criminal trial that was widely seen as a farce, and found guilty in a civil proceeding.

It's not much of a strecth to believe the man guilty.

Memphis Mike
04-30-2004, 02:14 PM
I recommend all RRW fascists from Texass be castrated and their genitals fed to the hogs.

Alan D. Hyde
04-30-2004, 02:19 PM
Some LA police officers close to the case believe that OJ was protecting his son, who detested OJ's second wife and had been charged with violent offenses previously.

It's a long story, which I don't wish to re-hash here.

Apparently, OJ's counsel were absolutely forbidden by him to even mention his son during the course of the proceedings.

Alan

Rex Fearnehough
04-30-2004, 04:07 PM
Stan, if you changed the free electricity day to evening, then the progom you advocated could be called "Die Freistrom Nacht".
Sounds to risky and familiar to me.