Search results

Should have

Think I can guess who you’re replying to, had the twat on ignore for 6 months

I know this won’t be very popular but is he even that good? Remember him being very frustrating and loads of people saying he was dog shit in the first few games. I think he was good, but are people actually getting so caught up in this hype they are thinking of him as much more than he actually is?

Buss

Huh?

Gotcha. Didn’t make the Fulham relegated link.

Why will we fall?

I know just my shit sense of humour. Bit awkward now

No good loaning them players, give them some cash!

No that’s incorrect. If it’s relevant to the trial it should have been revealed and it was. Well that’s the point of a retrial isn’t it? Correct me if I’m wrong, but were you not one of the people previously who took the stance of “he was convicted in a court of law so there’s nothing to...

Well yes, unless I’m missing something? The conviction was quashed because previous partners came forward and gave evidence about her sexual behaviour that was so similar it couldn’t be ignored. The implication being that this sexual behaviour could reasonably be believed to be consent? Or did...

“Suggests”? “High levels”? Come on, you’re better than that...have a debate

Yes, and the court and judge rejected any implications that they had been fed evidence or were financially motivated. It was relevant information, why wouldn’t it be included?

No it does not. She could have consented at the time despite being drunk. He also could have easily therefore reasonably believed consent was given. To be an offence, one person has to not consent and the other doesn’t reasonably believe consent is given. Just being unable to remember...

Oh yes, I’m not defending his character. Just don’t think there was enough to call him a criminal and more pointing out the hypocrisy/double standards of certain posters on here when our justice system rules against their view

What evidence? The girl couldn’t remember anything. I’ve had sex before and not remembered anything the next day. Was I raped? What was the sexual history used for? The guys a piece of shit by the way, but he’s not a rapist (or at the very least, we can’t say he is because a girl can’t remember...

Right so when he’s guilty it doesn’t matter that there was no real evidence etc he’s just guilty because a court said so and that’s that...when it gets overturned though different story...

“If” “Looks to...” Too easy this mate. No I don’t but I know the rumoured/reported fees, and I’m not the one making unfounded claims so I don’t need to back anything up...

You ugly bastard go fuck your owl Edit: whoops sorry wrong person