Search results

I also quoted the book by the head Portuguese detective on the case, so go on, poo poo that!

How much supporting evidence do you require? I could fill pages and pages of links, if you choose to discredit one person fine, but theres plenty of others all in the public domain if you ever want to peak behind the news headlines. You quoted my claim about the moon landings, well...

You clearly have no knowledge of the case, and have obviously resorted to mud slinging in a pointless attempt to cover your ignorance. Your obviously quite happy to blindingly go along with the sheep who have no idea what goes on behind the headlines that's great, good for you, I'm not going...

Well to name but one, there's her defence lawyer Mark Mcdonald and his team, who have now amassed so much evidence from "expert" medical practitioners that he's taking her case to The Criminal Case Review Commisssion. Apparently he's amassed enough medical data to shred the prosecution evidence...

Exactly, I think Shipman's conviction was pretty safe in everyone's mind. I'm beginning to think Grendel is just being a WUM, no one can be THAT thick.

Are you being fucking serious???? I strongly suggest you take some time out to educate yourself! Have you read the book "the truth of the lie" by the head of the Portuguese investigation? Have you seen the interviews with Scotland Yard's Jon Wedger? Have you watched the documentary film by...

It was brought up at the court case which is now being held to scrutiny because the subsequent conviction is now thought to be unsafe. It's incredibly difficult to get a safe conviction based on any amount of circumstantial evidence. Let alone no motive. That's why Maddeline Mccann's parents...

Drug sniffer dogs on the way in!

Are those things meant for your hands???? 😱😱😱😱

But not been put down to Letby, or even to malicious intent. Purely tubes dislodged more times than expected. Nothing more, nothing less. On its own, purely circumstantial.

The home goal replay button was rusty and stuck solid.

A McDonald's?

I totally agree. There's absolutely no problem with reviewing the case evidence, as long as she remains in prison while the review is conducted. In fact I'd argue it's good to review proceedings to ensure such high profile cases are 100% watertight, and to ensure the process is robust. As...

Doug's to do list 1, a new scoreboard for Hutch11 2, 4 more strikers 3, a central midfielder 4, a right back 5, a new no2 for Mark. 6, an injury proof right winger.

If she's not witnessed, or cctv recorded tampering with the lines then it ISNT evidence, it's purely circumstantial. For example, a defence lawyer would argue that the figures could be wrong, who says the normal failure rate was 1% ? Based on what? From where, collated by who? do...

That's a lot of racists! 😮

Be honest guys, it was just like watching Brazil. 😍😍😍

Allen 🤣🤣🤣

That's circumstantial. It's not evidence. If (big if) there is found to be inconsistencies or errors in the trial, then an independent judicial review should be carried out. Imo She should stay in prison until that review has been done, if the review concludes that enough errors and/or...

And in other news, Princess Diana has been killed in a car crash. British forces have retaken the Falkland islands. And the miners union have started a national strike.