Student jailed for slapping woman with mantool whilst she sleeps

Well in that case, your sentence reflects a your obsession with picking on something you don't agree with, accuse it if being "right wing", then launching into some sort of claptrap without actually dealing with any of the points made, in an effort to discredit.

It fools no-one with any brains.

 

You always fall for it.

 

Norway's post cast the first stone so to speak blaming 'PC' in that lazy facile way. Why do you only pick up on the reaction to it? As if I started something? Your bias is evident. No objectivity whatsoever.

 

Why should I pick on his post, I agree with everything he said.

What he didn't do was to try and make this into a right v left argument, which you were clearly trying to do, and the reason why you didn't actually disagree with any specific part of it - instead, just tackling what you think is his political reason for posting it.

Sometimes, Moose, this sort of subject is not about right v left, no matter how hard you try and portray it so. There is common decency on both sides of the political spectrum.

 

I wouldn't say Norway's post was particularly right wing.

The vast majority of us on this board agree this wasn't worthy of a jail term based on what we know.

The vast majority of us agree that not investigating organised child abuse is a bad thing.

I would say the only slightly polarising comment is the "PC gone mad" bit, purely because it touches somewhat on the current social media conflict of feminism v everything else. If we were to accept that (based on what we know) most of us don't think a jail term was merited, then I think there is a degree of truth in the often hysterical "PC gone mad" point in this particular case.

As an aside I will state that I am for complete equality in all things, but I do not consider myself a feminist because I think that the active feminist movement has been almost completely hijacked by creeping misandry. The radical element is increasingly bleeding into the more mainstream thinking.

I would label myself an egalitarian.

 

Progressive sentencing would be for the perpetrator to be slapped in the face by 100 willies. Would be reduced to 50 if he took the first half in good spirit.

 

based, it would seem, entirely on one line from what his defence barrister said

 

I've been clear that I also thought the sentence was too severe.

Norway was the one who had to politicise this by claiming it was due to 'PC gone mad' - by implication that it's mad feminists and their progressive allies who demand such thing (and are able to wield this power), when actually what most women modestly wish is to merely stop being harassed. Surely it's the right wing press that goes ape **** over sexual misdemeanours and namby pamby sentencing. What do you believe in today boys? Flip a coin why don't you.

ZZ you're talking daft and others can see it. Norway was the one being provocative - you are just too provocative yourself to see it or even allow debate on it.

 

But that is just it. You didn't debate it, you just criticised it as being right wing, not for anything specific. But now you have, just the PC gone mad bit, so maybe you agree with everything else he said. Well, that's progress.

By the way, why can't you be right leaning as well as a feminist. They are completely different.

 

The point I made was that it was a lazy assumption to assume the sentencing was influenced by 'PC' i.e progressive or left thinking. The right with it's penchant for severe sentencing was a more likely candidate. Were you wooshed by this simple proposition?

In any case had I criticised it merely for being right wing that would have been fine because right wing things are without exception very bad and lose all known arguments always.

 

Judge was a woman, possibly a tory ... sort that one out

 

Don't blame it on the sunshine. Don't blame it on the moonlight. Don't blame it on the good times. Blame it on the Tories.

 

Which just goes to prove my initial assertion. When you see that you are on a loser, you resort to labelling something right-wing as it saves you coming up with any actual arguments.

 

Sigh. No it proves you were wooshed or not paying attention, or heaven forbid (and I just throw this in to the maelstrom of speculation) unwilling to consider an alternative point of view due to your horrendous and all too evident lack of objectivity.

 

You give me an alternative point of view, and I'll consider it. But when you just give that usual "right -wing" deflecting tactic, then there is nothing to consider, is there? Maybe it was a "whoosh" but as you regularly use the same tactic it becomes tiresome.

 

I remember once when ZZ would only ever argue with me (I always won). I felt privileged. I miss those days.

 

Well apart from a couple of issues that you annoyed me with, I quite miss the exchanges as well. At least you argued specific points (mostly) with facts and experience, rather than come out with this empty, dogma continually, as others do when they attempt to deflect from the truth.

 

'Empty dogma continually'. I'm going to shock you here ZZ, but that sounds a lot like you.

 

:doh:

 

Haha, they were quite fun weren't they!

Maybe me, you and PhillipineOrn need to be locked into another heated debate... Then again, maybe not!

 

When I am able to get my hands on a printed article, I'll post the link. But in the meantime it seems that the sentence was suspended and the offence was quite a lot more serious than first reported. She was naked and asleep but was also groped intimately.

If true, then it seems that everyone who thought that the initial sentence was too harsh for a mere slapping her face with his **** was shown to be totally correct whilst those who thought it was a correct sentence are seen to be intolerant bar stewards.

 

Hang on. So his defence barrister was lying?!?!

 

I don't get it. Literally. I don't think this makes sense ZZ. What has happened?

 

I am saying that the initial reports trivialised the offence, the effects on the victim were not fully explained and the sentence was suspended. So those on here that defended the punishment were actually trying to justify a tougher sentence for a less serious offence than was actually the case.

http://www.nottinghampost.com/Man-f...*****-avoids/story-24528925-detail/story.html

:sick1:

 

Nope, I've tried and I've tried and I also can't make sense of what you're trying to say zz. Just because the bloke who filmed it gets his same sentence, but suspended because of his personal circumstances, doesn't change how people should view Dale.

 

But equally, the punishment could be too lenient and in a moral sense these people could be right and everyone else wrong ..... right?

 

On learning this I still think imprisonment harsh but the grope certainly merits a listing.
I guess that's why her boyfriend brought the complaint (think I'd have used a baseball bat personally)

 

I understand the point you are making but, without wading back through it, that's not my recollection of what the argument was principally about. The argument was between those who could see why the case went to court (including me) and those who thought it shouldn't have done (including you). Those who defended the court case (including me) argued that all the female had done was to tell the truth when asked and that she shouldn't be required to trivialise what she felt to avoid the case coming to court. We also argued that the full circumstances would only come to light as a result of the court case. Now, with this second case, they have. It was never about the sentence. Pretty much everyone thought the prison sentence seemed too harsh given what was known at the time.

So that looks like vindication for my group then and time for yours to concede we were right all along.

 

I had a good day, yesterday.

Part of my day was to join in with a mini celebration after work with the result that I had to get a taxi home.

On arriving home, I deftly dodged Mrs ZZ (we were meant to be going out with some friends of hers) and crept up to bed and decided to post on the Forum a couple of times before succumbing to alcohol induced slumber until I was woken abruptly and unsympathetically by Mrs ZZ at 7 this morning.

I checked out the Forum, mostly to see whether we had changed our Coach yet, but was greeted by several posts trying to make sense of my last nights posts.

I read the newspaper article again. I read my posts again.

I have come to the conclusion that I may have been writing total b****x.

Sorry about that!

I'm off to get the bus.

 

Top post ZZ.

 

Well said. I'm certainly capable of exactly the same thing myself. Especially after a couple of beers!

 

She'd have woken up before you even got the tip in.