wasn't knocked off by his losers.
ash204 wrote:
OH BUBBINS....I THINK THE JFRB SUPPORTERS GOT THE THREAD BUMPED OFF ALL BY THEMSELVES....
No . Losers dont get threads knocked off . Thats your forray
Quote
steve1958 (396 ) 7:47 pm, Thu 23 Jun #63
He's probably got a point, admitting that losers don't get there own threads knocked off. Good work Steve, if you ever stop knocking yourself off you'll have less blisters.
I've started this blog to share with those that may be interested in sports, books, topical news and the justice system as it applies to cyberspace and generally.
Showing posts with label From the world of the insane.. Show all posts
Showing posts with label From the world of the insane.. Show all posts
Thursday, June 23, 2011
Wednesday, May 25, 2011
The joys of being a hate-siter.
The crazier you are the more at home you are in the hate-site mentality....
win8 wrote:
Yes true.... bbuuutt
The second trial proved he would have been found not guilty in the first trial, if he was given a fair trial with all the facts presented to the court.
Seems odd then that hearsays were allowed for the second trial by the defense . Yet screamed predujice of the prosecution did the same . So the defense got to have 3 scenerio hearsays . Presecution zero . and teh prosecution was denied the right to put even defense evidense before the court
Quote
steve1958 (395 ) 6:56 pm, Wed 25 May #43
The poster win8 points out the obvious, but nutbar Steve writes about 'hearsays' and that the defence got have '3 scenario hearsays.' He talks about 'hearsays' as though they are some strategic advantage and not simply a word he doesn't understand and misuses - then comes the humdinger 'teh prosecution was denied the right to even put defense evidense before the court.' This spinner believes the prosecution put their own 'evidense' before the court and are therefore entitled to put 'defense evidense' before the court. He got the dense part right. He thought getting the dunce's cap at school was a major achievement and that he held the world record for having it 'bestowed' upon him no less than 772 times. But he sums up well what it is to be a hate-siter, that you're accepted no matter how thick or 'dense' you are - just as long as you 'believe' and spread the hate.
And so they waffle on about all the 'withheld' evidence but remain silent on that which indicated that dear daddy was a fiddler. They also ignore the amount of 'hearsays' (that word again that sounds like a previously unknown breed of fish) that the Crown presented in their failed case.
win8 wrote:
Yes true.... bbuuutt
The second trial proved he would have been found not guilty in the first trial, if he was given a fair trial with all the facts presented to the court.
Seems odd then that hearsays were allowed for the second trial by the defense . Yet screamed predujice of the prosecution did the same . So the defense got to have 3 scenerio hearsays . Presecution zero . and teh prosecution was denied the right to put even defense evidense before the court
Quote
steve1958 (395 ) 6:56 pm, Wed 25 May #43
The poster win8 points out the obvious, but nutbar Steve writes about 'hearsays' and that the defence got have '3 scenario hearsays.' He talks about 'hearsays' as though they are some strategic advantage and not simply a word he doesn't understand and misuses - then comes the humdinger 'teh prosecution was denied the right to even put defense evidense before the court.' This spinner believes the prosecution put their own 'evidense' before the court and are therefore entitled to put 'defense evidense' before the court. He got the dense part right. He thought getting the dunce's cap at school was a major achievement and that he held the world record for having it 'bestowed' upon him no less than 772 times. But he sums up well what it is to be a hate-siter, that you're accepted no matter how thick or 'dense' you are - just as long as you 'believe' and spread the hate.
And so they waffle on about all the 'withheld' evidence but remain silent on that which indicated that dear daddy was a fiddler. They also ignore the amount of 'hearsays' (that word again that sounds like a previously unknown breed of fish) that the Crown presented in their failed case.
Saturday, September 18, 2010
There, there misspew. Trout spout.
All your 'recovered memory' proves is that you've always been a bser able to convince yourself of anything.
But don't worry Christine Saturday night is upon us, isn't it time for a meltdown, time for one of barely disguised psycho personalities to emerge again. You know the ones, were you start stalking, threatening and fantasise about torchlight.
I had a recovered memory once. My father and I were carting things out of the garage and into the yard. It was very vivid and very real. I remembered every detail, even the clothes I was wearing and I knew exactly how old I was. Five. Everything was fine until my parents pointed out that the garage wasn't built until I was seven.
I would even have sworn to it being the truth on the Bible.
I have never trusted recovered memories since then and fake ones even less.
Quotemisspw (65 ) 3:44 pm, Sat 18 Sep #27433
I like that touch about the Bible, certainly shows how far you'll go to try and convince people with your lies! 'Very vivid and very real' I'm sure it was, just like all your other episodes.
Had any visits from officials about your Contempt of Court? You remember, when you were frothing at the mouth over getting an illegal copy of the Trial transcript. What a fizzer for you, when you finally realised that the Jury got it right and that you really are a moron after all. The big breakthrough - the Trial transcript that you managed to read in a single day sitting in your lonely outhouse with the wetas, it wasn't worth it, was it Christine? You were better off not knowing the truth. Chins up, old trout spout.
But don't worry Christine Saturday night is upon us, isn't it time for a meltdown, time for one of barely disguised psycho personalities to emerge again. You know the ones, were you start stalking, threatening and fantasise about torchlight.
I had a recovered memory once. My father and I were carting things out of the garage and into the yard. It was very vivid and very real. I remembered every detail, even the clothes I was wearing and I knew exactly how old I was. Five. Everything was fine until my parents pointed out that the garage wasn't built until I was seven.
I would even have sworn to it being the truth on the Bible.
I have never trusted recovered memories since then and fake ones even less.
Quotemisspw (65 ) 3:44 pm, Sat 18 Sep #27433
I like that touch about the Bible, certainly shows how far you'll go to try and convince people with your lies! 'Very vivid and very real' I'm sure it was, just like all your other episodes.
Had any visits from officials about your Contempt of Court? You remember, when you were frothing at the mouth over getting an illegal copy of the Trial transcript. What a fizzer for you, when you finally realised that the Jury got it right and that you really are a moron after all. The big breakthrough - the Trial transcript that you managed to read in a single day sitting in your lonely outhouse with the wetas, it wasn't worth it, was it Christine? You were better off not knowing the truth. Chins up, old trout spout.
Tuesday, September 14, 2010
Mad Mike having 2 conversations at once? Who is he talking to? The rafter thereafter or urbandims.
therafter1 wrote:
I think you may need to swot up on that disaster Sleuthy, Mahon was correct and there was an ‘orchestrated litany of lies” ... the pilot was flying to the coordinates/flight plan that he had been provided with by Air NZ.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_New_Zealand_Flight_901[/quo
te]
thereafter,please do not presume anything about me.I see that linz is more up to date than I am,but I had "swotted up" on the Erebus disaster.I wonder if you have actually read Chippindale's full report,as I have.
Also,a few days ago I was asking why David Bain would be wearing a shepherds whistle.I still don't know why.But from that,and correct me if I am wrong,you presumed I was a "townie".
Now I didn't want to argue the toss,dissent in the ranks and all that.
But now that ro and co have gone I will.
For the first 22 years of my life,urban ,I lived on a farm.In fact for well over half my life rainwater has been the source of my drinking water,which means for all those years I lived outside town supply.
There was a time when I was thinking of becoming a farm manager,but I decided to become a clerical worker instead.
In my school holidays[secondary school that is],I worked on a farm.
Most of the farms where I lived were sheep farms,there were a couple of stud farms.The farms were fairly small,ranged between 400 and 800 acres,and I don't believe any farmer carried a shepherds whistle.I remember one farmer used the fingers in the mouth trick.Another farmer,when he was changing the stock from one paddock to another used to just open the gate and call out to the sheep.They came running from all corners ,eager to get to the fresh pasture.
I had the use of a horse,but I didn't have any dogs.
I went to secondary school in town,that meant a 12 km bike ride twice a day,six days a week ,come rain hail or shine.For four years.
Even when I started working in an office I still biked to work for the first couple of years.That was a 10km bike ride both ways.[School was at the other end of town,hence the difference in the kilometres.]
I hope you don't mind me making this point ,urban.
Quote
supersleuth (0 ) 8:56 pm, Mon 13 Sep #27274
I think you may need to swot up on that disaster Sleuthy, Mahon was correct and there was an ‘orchestrated litany of lies” ... the pilot was flying to the coordinates/flight plan that he had been provided with by Air NZ.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_New_Zealand_Flight_901[/quo
te]
thereafter,please do not presume anything about me.I see that linz is more up to date than I am,but I had "swotted up" on the Erebus disaster.I wonder if you have actually read Chippindale's full report,as I have.
Also,a few days ago I was asking why David Bain would be wearing a shepherds whistle.I still don't know why.But from that,and correct me if I am wrong,you presumed I was a "townie".
Now I didn't want to argue the toss,dissent in the ranks and all that.
But now that ro and co have gone I will.
For the first 22 years of my life,urban ,I lived on a farm.In fact for well over half my life rainwater has been the source of my drinking water,which means for all those years I lived outside town supply.
There was a time when I was thinking of becoming a farm manager,but I decided to become a clerical worker instead.
In my school holidays[secondary school that is],I worked on a farm.
Most of the farms where I lived were sheep farms,there were a couple of stud farms.The farms were fairly small,ranged between 400 and 800 acres,and I don't believe any farmer carried a shepherds whistle.I remember one farmer used the fingers in the mouth trick.Another farmer,when he was changing the stock from one paddock to another used to just open the gate and call out to the sheep.They came running from all corners ,eager to get to the fresh pasture.
I had the use of a horse,but I didn't have any dogs.
I went to secondary school in town,that meant a 12 km bike ride twice a day,six days a week ,come rain hail or shine.For four years.
Even when I started working in an office I still biked to work for the first couple of years.That was a 10km bike ride both ways.[School was at the other end of town,hence the difference in the kilometres.]
I hope you don't mind me making this point ,urban.
Quote
supersleuth (0 ) 8:56 pm, Mon 13 Sep #27274
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)