Broad gate 6pm (1 Viewer)

[SBT]

I didn't write in and complain, I asked a Telegraph reporter why yet again they were misleading people and missing out facts. As for Telegraph obsession, might be worth going through your post history.

You should probably try some balance at some point. You are the one that keeps saying "there may not have been a knife" and "people imagined it".

So, either they had a knife or it was planted. It's as simple as that.

Glad to know you're delving through my post history again - as I said, almost all of my posts about the Telegraph are replies to you. I've told you before, you have the power to stop me droning on, but you keep coming back like a puppy. The fact you spend your spare time pestering reporters about stories you don't like suggests you won't stop either.

I'm more than happy to play devil's advocate if it means offering some balance to the steady stream of people willing to convict someone based on not very much evidence. I have no idea why people get so touchy about that.

 

---

[David O'Day]

Glad to know you're delving through my post history again - as I said, almost all of my posts about the Telegraph are replies to you. I've told you before, you have the power to stop me droning on, but you keep coming back like a puppy. The fact you spend your spare time pestering reporters about stories you don't like suggests you won't stop either.

I'm more than happy to play devil's advocate if it means offering some balance to the steady stream of people willing to convict someone based on not very much evidence. I have no idea why people get so touchy about that.

Balance?

You are talking utter shite now

 

[Liquid Gold]

What makes you think I'm English?

Twat.

Whatever nationality you are I'm sure you don't want to be blamed for the atrocities they've committed. Why don't you extend that courtesy to other people?

 

[Nick]

Glad to know you're delving through my post history again - as I said, almost all of my posts about the Telegraph are replies to you. I've told you before, you have the power to stop me droning on, but you keep coming back like a puppy. The fact you spend your spare time pestering reporters about stories you don't like suggests you won't stop either.

I'm more than happy to play devil's advocate if it means offering some balance to the steady stream of people willing to convict someone based on not very much evidence. I have no idea why people get so touchy about that.

I don't need to delve, you just click on the username and you will see a fair amount of your posts are when somebody mentions the Telegraph.

I just asked for accurate reporting when it comes to CCFC, that's all. Shouldn't need to have to ask for basic reporting. It's not about "not liking" something, it's about reporting the full story.

 

[SBT]

We do convict people on eye witness evidence alone, in fact lots of people are.

Wow

Very true!

Also true: Nearly three-quarters of wrongful convictions (in the US, at least) are based on eyewitness evidence How an unreliable eyewitness can make you a murderer

Again - don't get precious. Who knows, you might turn out to be right!

 

[oscillatewildly]

In addition to this I had a right shock going to my first England game. Racist chanting everywhere. I was cringing my head off. I innocently assumed all football crowds would be like us.

Have watched England (intermittently) home and away for decades - No longer a member of the FA's official supporters group (for a variety of reasons) One thing I don't miss though is rubbing shoulders with some of my 'fellow countrymen'.

 

[skybluetony176]

Have to say that if these two lads were giving it the bigun pulling a knife on a Cov fan in the middle of gathering of CCFC fans how stupid must they be.

 

[David O'Day]

Very true!

Also true: Nearly three-quarters of wrongful convictions (in the US, at least) are based on eyewitness evidence How an unreliable eyewitness can make you a murderer

Again - don't get precious. Who knows, you might turn out to be right!

Don't get precious but the vast majority of eye witness evidence cases are not overturned as wrongful.

I am right and your just being an cock as you're bored.

You sad, sad man

 

[clint van damme]

This all happened in and aroud broadgate.

Very true!

Also true: Nearly three-quarters of wrongful convictions (in the US, at least) are based on eyewitness evidence How an unreliable eyewitness can make you a murderer

Again - don't get precious. Who knows, you might turn out to be right!

you'd probably be better taking that up with William Barr. Not sure there's much we can do about it on here.

 

[RegTheDonk]

Give a statement to the Bill. We need to clear this shit up properly.

Yes agreed. Police are asking for witnesses, there's a log number you can quote. The quicker they can progress this, check the knife and CCTV, maybe we can move on.

Hopefully there will be some apologies from certain parties.

 

[David O'Day]

Very true!

Also true: Nearly three-quarters of wrongful convictions (in the US, at least) are based on eyewitness evidence How an unreliable eyewitness can make you a murderer

Again - don't get precious. Who knows, you might turn out to be right!

If you want to be precious you need to look at the up to date stats

DNA Exonerations in the United States - Innocence Project

Seems the vast majority of eye witness failures are after the event indentifications

1 nil

 

[SBT]

If you want to be precious you need to look at the up to date stats

DNA Exonerations in the United States - Innocence Project

Seems the vast majority of eye witness failures are after the event indentifications

1 nil

Only an idiot would say eyewitness testimony was useless. I'm only trying to point out how it's not infallible. But you can have your '1 nil' if you like, I don't really mind.

This all happened in and aroud broadgate.


you'd probably be better taking that up with William Barr. Not sure there's much we can do about it on here.

You know, it's OK to learn stuff from other countries too sometimes. But something tells me my lesson plan isn't going well so maybe I'll give it a rest...

 

[clint van damme]

Only an idiot would say eyewitness testimony was useless. I'm only trying to point out how it's not infallible. But you can have your '1 nil' if you like, I don't really mind.



You know, it's OK to learn stuff from other countries too sometimes. But something tells me my lesson plan isn't going well so maybe I'll give it a rest...

you've linked an article that's behind a paywall you cretin.
Only 3 and a half paragraphs are visible before subscription is required and they contain one citation of a case from 1979. Do you think that backs up your argument?
I'd bet a large sum of money you'd don't actually subscribe the the publication, you just saw the headline and though it would prove your point. That would be in keeping with the nonsense you've been spouting.

 

[SBT]

you've linked an article that's behind a paywall you cretin.
Only 3 and a half paragraphs are visible before subscription is required and they contain one citation of a case from 1979. Do you think that backs up your argument?
I'd bet a large sum of money you'd don't actually subscribe the the publication, you just saw the headline and though it would prove your point. That would be in keeping with the nonsense you've been spouting.

Yeah I know, it wasn't ideal. Obviously I don't subscribe to New Scientist magazine. But let's be realistic, poor DOD wasn't going to read a lengthy academic paper, was he. So I went with the most concise summary of the argument I could find in 5 minutes. My bad! If you want a good book to read on this stuff then Thinking Fast and Slow by Daniel Kahneman is probably the best introduction to it.

 

[David O'Day]

you've linked an article that's behind a paywall you cretin.
Only 3 and a half paragraphs are visible before subscription is required and they contain one citation of a case from 1979. Do you think that backs up your argument?
I'd bet a large sum of money you'd don't actually subscribe the the publication, you just saw the headline and though it would prove your point. That would be in keeping with the nonsense you've been spouting.

The rusty spoon is ignoring the fact the 2 lads told people they had a knife as well

 

[clint van damme]

Yeah I know, it wasn't ideal. Obviously I don't subscribe to New Scientist magazine. But let's be realistic, poor DOD wasn't going to read a lengthy academic paper, was he. So I went with the most concise summary of the argument I could find in 5 minutes. My bad! If you want a good book to read on this stuff then Thinking Fast and Slow by Daniel Kahneman is probably the best introduction to it.

people who were there told me they saw the knives. I don't need to read a book about it.

 

[Grendel]

Yeah I know, it wasn't ideal. Obviously I don't subscribe to New Scientist magazine. But let's be realistic, poor DOD wasn't going to read a lengthy academic paper, was he. So I went with the most concise summary of the argument I could find in 5 minutes. My bad! If you want a good book to read on this stuff then Thinking Fast and Slow by Daniel Kahneman is probably the best introduction to it.

You have made some claims regarding the fact you comment mostly on football matters from the limited involvement you have on here.

Even as a post percentage this is now false but more crucially the length of posts are massively skewed to defending a certain local publication.

You restrict this ire as well to the local publication. If you had a passion for this topic fair enough but then you would be vigorously challenging the anecdotal and false posts on the Madeline McCann thread. You would be all over that - you are not

 

[David O'Day]

Yeah I know, it wasn't ideal. Obviously I don't subscribe to New Scientist magazine. But let's be realistic, poor DOD wasn't going to read a lengthy academic paper, was he. So I went with the most concise summary of the argument I could find in 5 minutes. My bad! If you want a good book to read on this stuff then Thinking Fast and Slow by Daniel Kahneman is probably the best introduction to it.

Why wouldn't I read an academic paper? Mate you seem to think you are smart but sadly as everyone is trying to tell you you are in fact a tad stupid.

Fucking virgin

 

[shmmeee]

I’ve read Thinking Fast and Slow and it doesn’t support the idea multiple eye witness accounts can be independently wrong in the exact same way.

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

Why wouldn't I read an academic paper? Mate you seem to think you are smart but sadly as everyone is trying to tell you you are in fact a tad stupid.

Fucking virgin

What is the thread even about at this point?

 

[clint van damme]

I’ve read Thinking Fast and Slow and it doesn’t support the idea multiple eye witness accounts can be independently wrong in the exact same way.

there's a fucking shock. You've read it, he's probably read the synopsis on the cover.

 

[shmmeee]

there's a fucking shock. You've read it, he's probably read the synopsis on the cover.

Its a great book, and it does go into how memory can be faulty. But AFAIK only on a case by case basis not when triangulating several independent reports. Could be wrong though! Was a while ago

 

[David O'Day]

people who were there told me they saw the knives. I don't need to read a book about it.

It's a book on behavioural science that talks about instinctive thought vs rational thought.

His work is on human irrationality in decision making something that is looked at in nudge theory.

He has fuck all to do with why people may make incorrect eye witness testimony

 

[SBT]

You have made some claims regarding the fact you comment mostly on football matters from the limited involvement you have on here.

Even as a post percentage this is now false but more crucially the length of posts are massively skewed to defending a certain local publication.

You restrict this ire as well to the local publication. If you had a passion for this topic fair enough but then you would be vigorously challenging the anecdotal and false posts on the Madeline McCann thread. You would be all over that - you are not

Funnily enough, the CET is the only publication that comes up on a CCFC board. I couldn't be less interested in the Maddie McCann thread - I'm sure it's a true hellscape.

Anyway, the CET website is largely awful - the product of horrific cuts to local news across the country and disastrous industry consolidation. But I've stood up for it in the past because it still serves an important purpose in generating interest in our local club, even if it often fails in that mission. It gets some unfair criticism from people who don't realise how much they rely on it, and how precious their complaints are. I realise it's not a popular opinion, but I don't mind that.

Anyway, you do realize that putting together a statistical analysis of my posts is....really really weird?

 

[David O'Day]

there's a fucking shock. You've read it, he's probably read the synopsis on the cover.

I've read it and yep there is nothing in it that backs up SBT's argument that multiple eye witnesses can be wrong at the same time about the same thing.

Also the can't argue cross racial bias as the accused were not identified at a later date

 

[Grendel]

Anyway, you do realize that putting together a statistical analysis of my posts is....really really weird?

No its very easy actually and has took far less time and effort than you have today on this thread. It took 10 minutes.

 

[clint van damme]

Funnily enough, the CET is the only publication that comes up on a CCFC board. I couldn't be less interested in the Maddie McCann thread - I'm sure it's a true hellscape.

Anyway, the CET website is largely awful - the product of horrific cuts to local news across the country and disastrous industry consolidation. But I've stood up for it in the past because it still serves an important purpose in generating interest in our local club, even if it often fails in that mission. It gets some unfair criticism from people who don't realise how much they rely on it, and how precious their complaints are. I realise it's not a popular opinion, but I don't mind that.

Anyway, you do realize that putting together a statistical analysis of my posts is....really really weird?

that 'statistical analysis' takes seconds using the search function.It's not like he called in the ONS.

 

[David O'Day]

Funnily enough, the CET is the only publication that comes up on a CCFC board. I couldn't be less interested in the Maddie McCann thread - I'm sure it's a true hellscape.

Anyway, the CET website is largely awful - the product of horrific cuts to local news across the country and disastrous industry consolidation. But I've stood up for it in the past because it still serves an important purpose in generating interest in our local club, even if it often fails in that mission. It gets some unfair criticism from people who don't realise how much they rely on it, and how precious their complaints are. I realise it's not a popular opinion, but I don't mind that.

Anyway, you do realize that putting together a statistical analysis of my posts is....really really weird?

What is also really weird? The stuff you are posting today.

We have multiple eye witnesses who saw a knife and we also have multiple witnesses who heard the 2 lads tell people they had a knife.

So there are multiple witnesses and multiple different types of witness

 

[David O'Day]

What is the thread even about at this point?

fuck knows

Some goon trying to make himself look clever I think

 

[Liquid Gold]

Can this go to off topic now?

 

[Nick]

Anyway, you do realize that putting together a statistical analysis of my posts is....really really weird?

You just click on your username and it shows them.

It's not half as weird as somebody who is more bothered about posting about defending the CET than they are about us getting promoted.

 

[SBT]

Grendel, I just didn't know you cared. Just don't make Nick jealous! But it's the little touches that count - post percentage vs post length was a nice flourish.

Its a great book, and it does go into how memory can be faulty. But AFAIK only on a case by case basis not when triangulating several independent reports. Could be wrong though! Was a while ago

This wins ironic post of the day - genuinely made me laugh, so thank you.

 

[Sky_Blue_Dreamer]

Racism will never go away whilst "RACIST" attack is the put at the start of every headline.

i do not for one minute doubt or dispute the fact racism exists (see other video!) but a hell of a lot of what we hear about is made up nonsense and not racist at all. As i said earlier, theyre doing a great job of widening the gap and making it woerst.

I've been to football games where bottles and bricks have been thrown, has nothing to do with race. If these lads were white and turned up with knives, i would fully expect the same outcome.

It does seem there are people that just automatically assume racism are harming the cause and giving the racist element ammo and turning others away. It's not like there aren't enough actual acts of racism to promote the cause without needing to turn ones that aren't into them. In this example the actual racist rant that started it all has been largely forgotten. They're ignoring the actual racist to make out a lot of people who actually aren't are.

It's like with the anti-semitism thing. Israel gets justifiable criticism and just immediately goes "ANTI-SEMITISM', annoying those that fundamentally support the anti-semitism cause.

It has to be approached responsibly and admit that sometimes black people do stuff wrong and deserve punishment for it.

 

[chiefdave]

If this does turn out to be a racist attack then the vast majority of our fans would be appalled and want everyone involved banned and the dealt with by the police however lets look at the two scenarios being presented.

One scenario is at a gathering of fans that wasn't pre-planned and included families, kids etc a couple of chaps turned up started having a pop at people and saying they had a knife, as multiple eye witnesses have said. Some people went to inform the police, others chased the group. The police arrived and dealt with the two chaps and a knife was recovered from the scene.

The other scenario is at the same gathering, someone persuaded two innocent chaps to turn up and start having a go at people. They arranged for some members of the crowd to go and lie to the police saying the chaps were armed. They arranged for a mob of fans (although some are claiming not actually fans but undercover police) to attack the group based on the colour of their skin, which would be unlike anything I have witnessed in 35 years of going to games. The mob were also instructed that during this racist attack they should make false claims about the chaps having knifes in case it was caught on video. They were conveniently chased to a location where a knife had been planted.

Which one seems more likely?

 

[hill83]

Couldn’t stay away.

I’ll say though. This is a taster into what it’s like being tarnished with the same brush when it’s nothing to do with you.

Imagine this all the time.

“Where are the community leaders?”