How much.......

[LeazesMag 0]

I reckon Leazes is actually joking, and is in fact the longest running joke in internert history. I bow down before his stamina- awe inspiring

147949[/snapback]

 

Hard to believe that you once made a worthwhile post of more than a couple of lines

[LeazesMag 0]

I still fail to see the relevence. Perhaps you should have started another thread you frootloop. Btw, I'm not answering your questions for the time being at least as a protest at you ignoring mine and everyone else's

147911[/snapback]

 

Howay man Alex...and don't get all huffy at me either for ignoring you...I haven't got time, besides I saw that post where you said you were taking the piss......

 

Maybe I could have started a new thread like ... but I see them as all deserving of the same thing. Zero tolerance, for all of them.

[LeazesMag 0]

Rather than say this shouldn't be happening, I think it should happen more.

 

Zero tolerance with all rapists, terrorists, kiddy fiddlers and muggers, is the connection.

147906[/snapback]

 

 

You think the police should make more false raids? We cannot simply go barging in with the slightest bit of info- not because of an issue of individual rights against the greater good, but that such acts will restrict the flow of information from certain parts of the community, resulting in even sketchier intelligence. Never mind the time and effort put in, which for whatever reason has been wasted. I certainly wouldn't blame those on the front line, but those making the calls.

 

The poor intelligence has damaged the efforts to track terrorists, not assisted it. Let's face it, it's not a huge leap of logic to suggest that radical elements amongst the Muslim community could feed false information to the Police and security services in the full knowledge the action will cause anger amongst moderates but potentially act as a recruiting drive for the terrorists.

147955[/snapback]

 

No, of course we don't want mistakes. They have to investigate the intelligence and ascertain if it is genuine or not. If they think someone is armed, then they have to go armed. So under those circumstances, if someone acts suspiciously, then they are basically stupid. We have to back the police. If we stop, the terrorists are winning.

 

Your comment is correct, but it doesn't change the fact that they still have to investigate and be prepared for the worst possible scenario.

Edited June 12, 2006 by LeazesMag

[Guest Sima]

I'm confused as to the story in LM's link. The guy looks white.

 

Wrong link?

[LeazesMag 0]

I'm confused as to the story in LM's link.  The guy looks white.

 

Wrong link?

148013[/snapback]

 

Despite your incorrect assumption of me - for which I am truly deeply offended - a kiddy fiddler is a kiddy fiddler. I hope somebody kicks the living shit out of him.

[Guest Sima]

You still haven't said yes or no to whether you are a card carrying member of the bee-enn-pee so I'm keeping my options open tbh

 

Nonces are oxygen thiefs tbh

[LeazesMag 0]

You still haven't said yes or no to whether you are a card carrying member of the bee-enn-pee so I'm keeping my options open tbh

 

Nonces are oxygen thiefs tbh

148027[/snapback]

 

I answered.

 

Showing your prejudice

[Guest Sima]

If you really did you'll have absolutely no bother linking me to the post, cheers.

 

Again, options open

[LeazesMag 0]

If you really did you'll have absolutely no bother linking me to the post, cheers.

 

Again, options open

148033[/snapback]

 

Again, I did.

 

Again, you show your own prejudice.

[Guest Sima]

What? You've linked me to the post

 

Aye ok, I'll keep my options open then :icon_lol:

Edited June 12, 2006 by Sima

[Matt 0]

No, of course we don't want mistakes. They have to investigate the intelligence and ascertain if it is genuine or not. If they think someone is armed, then they have to go armed. So under those circumstances, if someone acts suspiciously, then they are basically stupid. We have to back the police. If we stop, the terrorists are winning.

 

Your comment is correct, but it doesn't change the fact that they still have to investigate and be prepared for the worst possible scenario.

147983[/snapback]

 

But it's becoming apparent that our intelligence is a weapon which can be turned on ourselves and the more we use it, the more it hurts us and not the intended target.

 

If we do what the US did immediately post 9/11 and go super-defensive and acting irrationally to supposed terror threats then we will take away the liberties that the Al-Quaeda foe is trying to deny us. In terms of reaching their political goals fear can be a weapon to match any bomb. That's why even when faced with a terror threat, we must maintain the values that underpin our society- innocent until proven guilty, trial by jury (although I draw the line at KFC and a packet of fags for all and sundry). We shouldn't let ourselves be outsmarted so easily.

[Renton 17795]

The police knocked down the door of one of my colleagues last week (a lass who lives alone) leaving a right mess. Turns out it was a case of mistaken address - they meant to get the one next door. The bloke next door has been accused of raping a girl at a party, and the police now want to DNA profile EVERY man who was present. Thing is, she was pissed out of her mind at the time and can't remember any details. I would say the chances of conviction were zero - but how much money is being wasted and what about the intrusion into innocent peoples' lives, not to mention probably having their details stored away on some computer?

 

As for the case Rob is talking about, you have to worry about the quality of intelligence the police are acting on. And 250 officers seems pretty excessive for acting on a hunch. Have they actually intercepted any terrorists yet? Is it a possibility they are looking for people who don't exist?

147633[/snapback]

 

It's up to the CPS to decide on whether to pursue the case. The Police wouldn't be doing their job if they didn't adequately investigate when someone has come forward as a rape victim. Also, as people are usually at pains to point out on here - you can't fully know the details of the case or how much she does/doesn't remember. I'd be appalled if the Police didn't investigate, although they obviously fucked up with the address.

147975[/snapback]

 

I admit Bridget that I am hearing this story second hand, but apparently they still want samples from people who were only at the party for 1/2 an hour with their girlfriends. If that was me I'd be pretty resentful of giving a sample to the police because some drunken girl claimed she had been raped, especially as i do not trust the police to destroy the records when I am found in the clear.

 

Of course it's up to the CPS whether they prosecute or not (I don't think they will), but the police have seemingly already committed a huge amount of resouces on an unwinnable case (only 1 in 20 rape cases result in a successful prosecution I am told). If what has happened to the girl is true, then of course I sympathise, but I can't help feeling that the money spent (which must be thousands of pounds) could have been spent on something more likely to produce results.

 

Not to mention that they have knocked down a door of a single woman, not repaired it, and subsequently told her she is living next door to a potential rapist.

[The Fish 8993]

why?

 

 

why won't it stop?

 

for the Love of GOD!

[LeazesMag 0]

What?  You've linked me to the post

 

Aye ok, I'll keep my options open then :icon_lol:

148042[/snapback]

 

YOu continue showing your prejudice and lack of reading skills then Sima.

 

And I'll continue to be absolutely devastated by your assumption of me.

 

You don't have the medical qualifications that Renton has do you ? [making you an expert on matters of defence and security ]

Edited June 12, 2006 by LeazesMag

[LeazesMag 0]

No, of course we don't want mistakes. They have to investigate the intelligence and ascertain if it is genuine or not. If they think someone is armed, then they have to go armed. So under those circumstances, if someone acts suspiciously, then they are basically stupid. We have to back the police. If we stop, the terrorists are winning.

 

Your comment is correct, but it doesn't change the fact that they still have to investigate and be prepared for the worst possible scenario.

147983[/snapback]

 

But it's becoming apparent that our intelligence is a weapon which can be turned on ourselves and the more we use it, the more it hurts us and not the intended target.

 

If we do what the US did immediately post 9/11 and go super-defensive and acting irrationally to supposed terror threats then we will take away the liberties that the Al-Quaeda foe is trying to deny us. In terms of reaching their political goals fear can be a weapon to match any bomb. That's why even when faced with a terror threat, we must maintain the values that underpin our society- innocent until proven guilty, trial by jury (although I draw the line at KFC and a packet of fags for all and sundry). We shouldn't let ourselves be outsmarted so easily.

148068[/snapback]

 

I can't see this being the norm. Just now and again. Most of the time you would have to take the situation and information at face value, and act accordingly. Maybe you are making it more complicated ? Its very difficult though, in lots of ways it is a game, but a very serious one. Of course, you could consider the thought that it would be better if we had had tighter immigration control and legal powers in the first place ?

[Guest alex]

I still fail to see the relevence. Perhaps you should have started another thread you frootloop. Btw, I'm not answering your questions for the time being at least as a protest at you ignoring mine and everyone else's

147911[/snapback]

 

Howay man Alex...and don't get all huffy at me either for ignoring you...I haven't got time, besides I saw that post where you said you were taking the piss......

 

Maybe I could have started a new thread like ... but I see them as all deserving of the same thing. Zero tolerance, for all of them.

147977[/snapback]

Zero tolerance for rapists and innocent brown blokes.

[Lazarus 0]

intelligence is a funny thing.

 

it can come from many, many sources such as people, newspapers, the web and intercepted communications from all over the world. that means its in different languages.

 

you might think that its just a case of adding 2 and 2 together and getting 4. but its not that simple.

 

its more often than not a case of adding together tiny fractions of information (from many sources) in order to get the whole picture. as theres a huge margin for error its no wonder things go tits up.

[Meenzer 14055]

it can come from many, many sources such as people, newspapers, the web and intercepted communications from all over the world. that means its in different languages.

True enough. There were some pretty tasty-looking translation opportunities at GCHQ when I graduated. Given the choice between bumming around Germany (so to speak) or living in Cheltenham, though....

[Rob W 0]

or picking on some black guys round the corner -

 

we may not be able to find osama but shit can we knock down doors in London........................

[LeazesMag 0]

intelligence is a funny thing.

 

it can come from many, many sources such as people, newspapers, the web and intercepted communications from all over the world. that means its in different languages.

 

you might think that its just a case of adding 2 and 2 together and getting 4. but its not that simple.

 

its more often than not a case of adding together tiny fractions of information (from many sources) in order to get the whole picture. as theres a huge margin for error its no wonder things go tits up.

148172[/snapback]

 

Absolutely.

 

EDIT. I also agree with Bridget and I think some of the one liners in the last 2 pages from some who think these things ie terrorism, child abuse, rape and murder, are something to joke or be lack lustre about, are pathetic. I'm presuming they think they are intelligent people, like Renton ?

Edited June 13, 2006 by LeazesMag

[Renton 17795]

The police knocked down the door of one of my colleagues last week (a lass who lives alone) leaving a right mess. Turns out it was a case of mistaken address - they meant to get the one next door. The bloke next door has been accused of raping a girl at a party, and the police now want to DNA profile EVERY man who was present. Thing is, she was pissed out of her mind at the time and can't remember any details. I would say the chances of conviction were zero - but how much money is being wasted and what about the intrusion into innocent peoples' lives, not to mention probably having their details stored away on some computer?

 

As for the case Rob is talking about, you have to worry about the quality of intelligence the police are acting on. And 250 officers seems pretty excessive for acting on a hunch. Have they actually intercepted any terrorists yet? Is it a possibility they are looking for people who don't exist?

147633[/snapback]

 

It's up to the CPS to decide on whether to pursue the case. The Police wouldn't be doing their job if they didn't adequately investigate when someone has come forward as a rape victim. Also, as people are usually at pains to point out on here - you can't fully know the details of the case or how much she does/doesn't remember. I'd be appalled if the Police didn't investigate, although they obviously fucked up with the address.

147975[/snapback]

 

I admit Bridget that I am hearing this story second hand, but apparently they still want samples from people who were only at the party for 1/2 an hour with their girlfriends. If that was me I'd be pretty resentful of giving a sample to the police because some drunken girl claimed she had been raped, especially as i do not trust the police to destroy the records when I am found in the clear.

 

Of course it's up to the CPS whether they prosecute or not (I don't think they will), but the police have seemingly already committed a huge amount of resouces on an unwinnable case (only 1 in 20 rape cases result in a successful prosecution I am told). If what has happened to the girl is true, then of course I sympathise, but I can't help feeling that the money spent (which must be thousands of pounds) could have been spent on something more likely to produce results.

 

Not to mention that they have knocked down a door of a single woman, not repaired it, and subsequently told her she is living next door to a potential rapist.

148080[/snapback]

 

From what you've told me, I'd be surprised if the CPS pursued it. However, we both know very little about it. The low rape conviction is a complex problem and not simply about women getting drunk then the CPS being unable to secure a conviction. It is not for the Police to determine whether a conviction is likely. The receive a report of a crime and must investigate fully. In fact, various Police forces around the country have been criticised for their lack of rigour in pursuing rape allegations.

 

Also, your logic effectively amounts to: the conviction rate for rape is low, why bother?

 

In my opinion, not enough is done to secure rape convictions - the low conviction rate, is in part due to allegations not being rigorously pursued. Obviously, rape is a unique crime which often involves one person's word against that of another. That alone does not justify the low conviction rate, especially when you take into account the fact that many women never come forward. However, systems in certain US states have massively increased the conviction rate - by providing victims with their own attorney at an early date. The defendant has months to work on tactics/their story with their solicitor in this country whereas the victim arrives at court and often meets their solicitor for the first time having had minimal preparation for the onslaught they will face from the defence. A couple of years ago, there was a terrible story where a 16 year old virgin was raped by a stranger in the street and following the public humiliation she received at the hands of the defendant's amoral barrister, she committed suicide.

 

Also, just because someone was at a party with their girlfriend doesn't mean they are not capable of rape. Rapists are often 'respectable' men with wives/girlfriends.

 

I've found your posts on the matter thoroughly depressing. As you may have gathered, it's something I feel strongly about. However, as someone who has always come across as liberal/call-it-what-you-like, your laissez faire attitude towards rape is incongruous.

148452[/snapback]

 

I'm speaking of one incident, which I have admitted was based second hand knowledge, in the context of how best the police should spend their budget, knowing that it isn't infinite. I have also pointed out the irony the police can knock a door off its hinges, not repair it, and tell a single woman she is living next door to a potential rapist. Then track every man down who was present at a party, request them to participate in a DNA test, even when they were only present in the building for 30 minutes and they have witnesses to say they were never alone with this girl.

 

Try and look at it from the other point of view - does this really sound reasonable to you, and given that the chances of conviction are virtually zero, is it an avenue worth pursuing? Of course all claims like this must be taken seriously, but unfortunately in this particular case nothing was ever going to come of it, which is probably why its been closed, as I have been told. Although my friend had to sort out the door herself, which the tax payers will ultimately have to pay for. I could go all Daily Mail and point out that lots of other crimes, including violent ones, are seemingly not investigated, but I'll refrain.

 

I don't see how I am having a laissez faire attitude about rape, I really don't - I am just questioning the wisdom of spending so many resources on this particular case, in the same way I challenge the wisdom of 250 armed police raiding a house where two suspect terrorists are claimed to be, seemingly based on the flimsiest of evidence (which was the context of my post). That is going to cost the tax payer a small fortune. It was probably an unfortunate thing to bring up and I only did so because it was fresh on my mind, having just been told about it (I might add though, my female friend commented on how absurd the investigation was, and she knows more of the details than me).

 

Obviously this subject matter is close to you but please don't make assumptions that I don't think rape is a serious issue, because I do. Also find it hugely ironic you have Leazes Mag jumping to support you, but there you go.

[LeazesMag 0]

The police knocked down the door of one of my colleagues last week (a lass who lives alone) leaving a right mess. Turns out it was a case of mistaken address - they meant to get the one next door. The bloke next door has been accused of raping a girl at a party, and the police now want to DNA profile EVERY man who was present. Thing is, she was pissed out of her mind at the time and can't remember any details. I would say the chances of conviction were zero - but how much money is being wasted and what about the intrusion into innocent peoples' lives, not to mention probably having their details stored away on some computer?

 

As for the case Rob is talking about, you have to worry about the quality of intelligence the police are acting on. And 250 officers seems pretty excessive for acting on a hunch. Have they actually intercepted any terrorists yet? Is it a possibility they are looking for people who don't exist?

147633[/snapback]

 

It's up to the CPS to decide on whether to pursue the case. The Police wouldn't be doing their job if they didn't adequately investigate when someone has come forward as a rape victim. Also, as people are usually at pains to point out on here - you can't fully know the details of the case or how much she does/doesn't remember. I'd be appalled if the Police didn't investigate, although they obviously fucked up with the address.

147975[/snapback]

 

I admit Bridget that I am hearing this story second hand, but apparently they still want samples from people who were only at the party for 1/2 an hour with their girlfriends. If that was me I'd be pretty resentful of giving a sample to the police because some drunken girl claimed she had been raped, especially as i do not trust the police to destroy the records when I am found in the clear.

 

Of course it's up to the CPS whether they prosecute or not (I don't think they will), but the police have seemingly already committed a huge amount of resouces on an unwinnable case (only 1 in 20 rape cases result in a successful prosecution I am told). If what has happened to the girl is true, then of course I sympathise, but I can't help feeling that the money spent (which must be thousands of pounds) could have been spent on something more likely to produce results.

 

Not to mention that they have knocked down a door of a single woman, not repaired it, and subsequently told her she is living next door to a potential rapist.

148080[/snapback]

 

From what you've told me, I'd be surprised if the CPS pursued it. However, we both know very little about it. The low rape conviction is a complex problem and not simply about women getting drunk then the CPS being unable to secure a conviction. It is not for the Police to determine whether a conviction is likely. The receive a report of a crime and must investigate fully. In fact, various Police forces around the country have been criticised for their lack of rigour in pursuing rape allegations.

 

Also, your logic effectively amounts to: the conviction rate for rape is low, why bother?

 

In my opinion, not enough is done to secure rape convictions - the low conviction rate, is in part due to allegations not being rigorously pursued. Obviously, rape is a unique crime which often involves one person's word against that of another. That alone does not justify the low conviction rate, especially when you take into account the fact that many women never come forward. However, systems in certain US states have massively increased the conviction rate - by providing victims with their own attorney at an early date. The defendant has months to work on tactics/their story with their solicitor in this country whereas the victim arrives at court and often meets their solicitor for the first time having had minimal preparation for the onslaught they will face from the defence. A couple of years ago, there was a terrible story where a 16 year old virgin was raped by a stranger in the street and following the public humiliation she received at the hands of the defendant's amoral barrister, she committed suicide.

 

Also, just because someone was at a party with their girlfriend doesn't mean they are not capable of rape. Rapists are often 'respectable' men with wives/girlfriends.

 

I've found your posts on the matter thoroughly depressing. As you may have gathered, it's something I feel strongly about. However, as someone who has always come across as liberal/call-it-what-you-like, your laissez faire attitude towards rape is incongruous.

148452[/snapback]

 

I'm speaking of one incident, which I have admitted was based second hand knowledge, in the context of how best the police should spend their budget, knowing that it isn't infinite. I have also pointed out the irony the police can knock a door off its hinges, not repair it, and tell a single woman she is living next door to a potential rapist. Then track every man down who was present at a party, request them to participate in a DNA test, even when they were only present in the building for 30 minutes and they have witnesses to say they were never alone with this girl.

 

Try and look at it from the other point of view - does this really sound reasonable to you, and given that the chances of conviction are virtually zero, is it an avenue worth pursuing? Of course all claims like this must be taken seriously, but unfortunately in this particular case nothing was ever going to come of it, which is probably why its been closed, as I have been told. Although my friend had to sort out the door herself, which the tax payers will ultimately have to pay for. I could go all Daily Mail and point out that lots of other crimes, including violent ones, are seemingly not investigated, but I'll refrain.

 

I don't see how I am having a laissez faire attitude about rape, I really don't - I am just questioning the wisdom of spending so many resources on this particular case, in the same way I challenge the wisdom of 250 armed police raiding a house where two suspect terrorists are claimed to be, seemingly based on the flimsiest of evidence (which was the context of my post). That is going to cost the tax payer a small fortune. It was probably an unfortunate thing to bring up and I only did so because it was fresh on my mind, having just been told about it (I might add though, my female friend commented on how absurd the investigation was, and she knows more of the details than me).

 

Obviously this subject matter is close to you but please don't make assumptions that I don't think rape is a serious issue, because I do. Also find it hugely ironic you have Leazes Mag jumping to support you, but there you go.

148479[/snapback]

 

Ironic ? Why ?

 

I've always said rape is right up with terrorism, child abuse and murder as the most despicable of things and worthy of the most severe punishment, and unlike you I don't mean a tap on the wrist, serving a few years and being set free to do it again.

Edited June 13, 2006 by LeazesMag

[Renton 17795]

As I have already said, there doesn't exactly seem to be a solid case there. But, as you yourself admit - you don't know the facts.

 

As for making assumption, I was basing what I said on your comments for example, "some drunken girl claimed she had been raped". Whether she was drunk or not is besides the point. The CPS might not pursue the case and there might be no conviction but that doesn't necessarily mean it didn't happen.

 

Whether Leazes Mag agrees with me/supports me is frankly irrelevant. My views couldn't be further apart from Leazes on most issues, but it is possible to share common ground with people you fundamentally disagree with. I'm making a general point there, I've not got a clue what Leazes thinks on the matter and I'm not really concerned either.

148487[/snapback]

 

Right, unfortunate choice of words maybe, but did you think I was suggesting it's aceptable to rape people because their drunk?

 

I'm not, I'm saying if someone can't remember what happened, it will never stand up in court - how can it? Why do you think the police knocked down the wrong door? It's because she couldn't remember what flat the party was at. It's unfortunate whatever happened happened, but if a case cannot be won, why pursue it?

 

Then there's the fact she can't clearly identify the alleged rapist, so all men become suspects, regardless of alibi, in case they slipped away for 5 minutes from their girlfriends in order to rape someone? Would you like to be labelled a potential rapist and forced to submit to forensic tests, on the testimony of someone who was too drunk to remember where they were? I'm pretty sure I'd be fairly unhappy about that, personally, but maybe I'm being unreasonable there.

[LeazesMag 0]

So what's ironic about me agreeing with Bridget, Renton. Come on, share with us your thoughts and knowledge ?

 

You're so intelligent, the wait is excruciating.

[Guest Sima]

Rape the same as murder :P