Due a police visit - help

Jamie_Carter

adouglasmhor wrote: »

Ah well I have never claimed to be a genius. Sorry about that. I see where I went wrong, a bit saying "or in my case out on bail for 6 months" then case dismissed after the time I was told to report for trial", would have been clearer.

I had polished my shoes, shaved, had a suit dry cleaned, taken time off work, arranged for my mum and dad to look after the dog if I was sent to gaol and had to pay for a lawyer afterwards.

Your posts are becoming more and more unbelievable, as you just keep changing your story.

By the way, if the charges were dropped, you wouldn't have to pay the lawyer.

DVardysShadow

Jamie_Carter wrote: »

Sorry for my misunderstanding. I thought you were claiming to have represented them in court.

So you actually have no legal training then?

So you are making accusations about the police, based on what you have been told by friends?

Colleagues? Represent colleagues in court? Your level of miscomprehension is appalling.

I have seen what has happened to my colleagues. You can make your choice as to whether you will accept it or not and be quiet. But I am not having the hurt and pain suffered by my innocent colleagues dismissed as being of no consequence.

Jamie_Carter

DVardysShadow wrote: »

Colleagues? Represent colleagues in court? Your level of miscomprehension is appalling.

I have seen what has happened to my colleagues. You can make your choice as to whether you will accept it or not and be quiet. But I am not having the hurt and pain suffered by my innocent colleagues dismissed as being of no consequence.

It was the early hours of the morning when I read it!

You only give one side of the story...and that is second hand. And it has to be viewed that way, and not one sided.

Judges are always repremanding the CPS for not preparing their cases correctly, and throwing the cases out of cout for that reason. This doesn't mean that the accused are innocent, it just means that they got off.

Now your rants are nothing at all to do with the OP's original post. It appears that yours and others scare mongering has scared them off.

sassyblue

So has the OP ever been back to update us? I keep looking but this thread is someone else's 'show' now :rotfl:

Padstow

sassyblue wrote: »

So has the OP ever been back to update us? I keep looking but this thread is someone else's 'show' now :rotfl:

Some here give, give and give more.

Some simply take.

Jamie_Carter

sassyblue wrote: »

So has the OP ever been back to update us? I keep looking but this thread is someone else's 'show' now :rotfl:

No. They haven't even been back on the forum since. I hope it all went ok.

DVardysShadow

Jamie_Carter wrote: »

It was the early hours of the morning when I read it!

You only give one side of the story...and that is second hand. And it has to be viewed that way, and not one sided.

Judges are always repremanding the CPS for not preparing their cases correctly, and throwing the cases out of cout for that reason. This doesn't mean that the accused are innocent, it just means that they got off.

Now your rants are nothing at all to do with the OP's original post. It appears that yours and others scare mongering has scared them off.

If you had got the words 'not necessarily' in the bolded statement, I would have let you off. But let me be quite plain about this, my colleagues did not just 'get off'.

You made an assertion that

If you don't break the law, then you will never get on the wrong side of the police.

By introducing what happened to 2 of my colleagues I have shown 2 instances of it being possible to get on the wrong side of the police without getting on the wrong side of the law. For you to go on and suggest that these 2 men were not innocent shows you up for the malign little pooh flinger you really are. Come on you need to face it. The police can and do do wrong. If you cannot accept that, you are just providing more cover for them to do more wrong.

And to suggest that my posts here have scared off the OP tops you off with a quite idiotic rant.

Yorkie1

I can see that this argument is running for pages.

Can anyone help me out by telling me whether the OP has been back to update, so I don't have to read all the to-and-from-posts on here?

DVardysShadow

Yorkie1 wrote: »

I can see that this argument is running for pages.

Can anyone help me out by telling me whether the OP has been back to update, so I don't have to read all the to-and-from-posts on here?

Probably best to look here http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/member.php?u=58362 and check on OP's last activity.

• Last Activity: 17-08-2012 11:39 AM

diable

This thread has been raped more then Genghis Khans escapades around the world.

Did BritishBoy post an update or was he scared off and children please be nice (like that will ever happen)