Alinta wrote on Jan 5
th, 2016 at 8:02pm:
cods wrote on Jan 5
th, 2016 at 7:27pm:
Alinta wrote on Jan 5
th, 2016 at 6:35pm:
I don't read it as an attempt to make light of Allison's death. Even though it's in the Baden-Clay thread, try to put that aside and just read the scenario putting yourself in the place of the teenagers' mum...........and assess it on the basis of the "evidence" supplied.
why should we?????...
just to make numpty feel better.. you have got to be kidding..
let him start another thread and see what response he gets...
he has already shown us what he thinks about women in general on the domestic violence threads....
he is deranged.. and will do anythign and say anything to get his own way...I am sorry to see you think it is ok......
but at least we know where you stand...now..
first of all he claims he only believes what he READS..
then!!!!he hasnt read the Book because it would sully what he claims is the TRUTH..
then bugger me he comes along with a HYPOTHETICAL that bares no relationship to a murder..... and the subsequent disposal of a body...
I am sure that happens in court all the time....
Where I stand on it is this Cods......
Hypotheticals/ scenarios are an excellent teaching tool......in this case to encourage posters to turn their minds to the "evidence" presented
and assess it in the light of proof, or not proof, of intent.
It matters not to me who introduced the scenario........and who chooses to participate (or not) is none of my business.......no should or shouldn't about it.........
mate.... if you think there is a comparison between his HYPO.. and the real case..
It is a very precise (deliberate) comparison with the evidence in both cases. In my scenario, cods, where is proof beyond reasonable doubt the teenager with the cut hand intended to destroy the ornament?
then I feel sorry for you....the fact is this person used ME in his pathetic hypo.. why not himself....why not numpty goes away for two weeks.. leaving two teenagers who cant feed themselves..
no because that wouldnt be putting cods down..
and he enjoys doing that...like a child...
its what he does.......if you look through this thread alone I have done my best to ignore this person...I dont want to play his pathetic games.....
If you read the scenario, you will see that I stated the kids were capable of feeding themselves. The point there was that they were not 13, but hypothetically in the 17/18 type bracket. It is a scenario cods....an imagined case. There would not be one person here who thought it was descriptive of your real life. Get a grip, cods.
I Know WHAT evidence MEANS.... I KNOW WHAT BEYOND A SHADOW OF DOUBT >>>MEANS.......
dont you get it... we all have our own opinion on that..
Good. Excellent! In my scenario, is there evidence which proves beyond reasonable doubt that the kid with the cut hand intended to destroy the ornament?
3 judges have thrown out.
what 12 men on a jury decided their verdict was based on what they saw as BEYOND A SHADOW OF DOUBT...it was murder.....
why did he lie and lie and lie.. and clean up clean up clean up...if he didnt have anything to be guilty of????
He did have plenty to hide and to be guilty of! He was involved the the death of his Wife.
if he is so innocent....why pretend he had a shaving accident...all he had to do was claim she struck him first...and he was defending himself....
because he strangled her....its a bit hard to do that by accident.
hows that for a HYPOTHETICAL
There is no satisfactory evidence for anyone to conclude he strangled her. None whatsoever. That fact blows your hypothetical apart. Why did the teenager with the cut hand 'pretend' the cut was from mucking around with a pocket knife?
Forum
Pages: 
Baden Clay wins appeal. (Read 99883 times)
