OT Border Control State of Emergency

[Back of the net]

https://x.com/gsgb01/status/19563027...a5CJQSL-fc1GEg

Child **** images no problem we will let you off.
Threaten to slit peoples throats no problem we will let you off
Tweet something bad take it down show remorse. Over 3 years prison.
2 tier labour 2 tier kier 2 tier solicitors.

[Timbertop]

More of the British population are listening to Talk and watching GB News and realising how much they are being deceived by the main stream media particularly about the rapidly increasing Islam prescence.

[Stovicmiller]

Where is our residence legal eagle the Oricle the all seeing eye to tell us everything is fine and he was found not guilty.

[KerrAvon]

What would you like me to say?

12 independent members of the public sitting on a jury heard the evidence - what the bloke said, the context of what he said and his explanation of what he said. They heard that evidence tested in cross examination and then found him not guilty.

Should we trust their judgement or should we listen to the talking heads on Twitter who have passed judgement based on a short video clip?

[Yak]

It’s clear now that all this is planned.
It’s not by chance it’s too far gone for that.
Police law enforcement justice system are paid enforcers of a bigger picture from this treacherous government. They are like there private army enforcing unfair and corrupt rules.
I never thought I would see such callousness from a government and puppets happy to take the pound.

Morals, ethics have gone now
Anyone who supports or votes labour imo have blood on their hands and should be ashamed and embarrassed
You are imo broken and lack any self respect
If that gets me banned off here so be it.

[NorthWestCorner]

What would you like me to say?

12 independent members of the public sitting on a jury heard the evidence - what the bloke said, the context of what he said and his explanation of what he said. They heard that evidence tested in cross examination and then found him not guilty.

Should we trust their judgement or should we listen to the talking heads on Twitter who have passed judgement based on a short video clip?

It?s not their judgement we are trusting but their opinion. There is no doubt over what he said.

As said above, we are living under a two tier leftist regime. It is obvious that the ?state? are attempting to control public opinion. This will end in a manner which we will all regret.

[Stovicmiller]

What would you like me to say?

12 independent members of the public sitting on a jury heard the evidence - what the bloke said, the context of what he said and his explanation of what he said. They heard that evidence tested in cross examination and then found him not guilty.

Should we trust their judgement or should we listen to the talking heads on Twitter who have passed judgement based on a short video clip?

. Thought I?d try a little fishing this morning and surprise surprise caught someone whose morals have disappeared up his arse.

[KerrAvon]

It?s not their judgement we are trusting but their opinion. There is no doubt over what he said.

As said above, we are living under a two tier leftist regime. It is obvious that the ?state? are attempting to control public opinion. This will end in a manner which we will all regret.

It was their judgement upon whether he held the intent required to prove the charge that was brought against him.

If you think that you or the Twitter crew are in a better position than to make that judgement then so be it. I disagree.

[howdydoo]

He or his lawyer had foresight to plead not guilty.

Lucy Connolly got bad advice and is in prison. If she'd pleaded not guilty she would have got off as well.

Both guilty in my opinion but neither should be doing time.

So why do I think they would both get off. The make up of the jury.

These are the twitter crew that people like Kerr want to discredit and talk down at every opportunity. Does he not think these people make up juries?

I can't fathom why people don't see there's a very worrying trend developing and it's not going to end well.

[KerrAvon]

But again, howdy, you are making your judgement upon who is or isn't guilty based upon fragments of reporting and a lot of conjecture and supposition on the Internet.

As I said to NWC, if you think that you are in a better position to determine guilt than a jury then I disagree.

You have made allegations about the judgement and professional integrity of the lawyer who advised Connolly. He would have reviewed the evidence, spent time in face to face conversation with her and ultimately acted on her instructions. If you think that you are in a better position than him to advise her then, again, we disagree, which is fair enough.

My understanding is that Connolly made a full admission (including the intent required to render her guilty) when she interviewed. That would not have made it impossible to run the case to trial, but would made it very hard to secure her acquittal. Without credit for a guilty plea, she would have got closer to 4 years.