ThewhiteJesus wrote: » Another person that won't actually say what evidence there is. You are easily convinced.
ThewhiteJesus wrote: » Just what i've heard from someone that would know that's all i can say.That's why i have to repeatedly ask what evidence makes people so sure he's guilty, all i'm getting is abuse, or end of story ! I have no hidden agendas i just like to know the actual truth.
ThewhiteJesus wrote: » End of story, in other words you don't have a clue either, like the two people spouting the same nonsense in this thread.
mynamejeff wrote: » what makes you , "not so sure " do you know something that the jury didn't ? as others have said if you do spit it out other wise its really hard to see what your trying to do
ThewhiteJesus wrote: » I'm not sure the conviction will stick that's my point, if only someone could tell us what the actual hard evidence was instead of saying end of story !
suicide_circus wrote: » Do you treat all court verdicts like this?
ThewhiteJesus wrote: » Hardly makes him guilty talking crap in a pub, like i said earlier, if he's really guilty then well done. I'm not so sure.
CrankyHaus wrote: » Well since a jury was satisfied of his guilt, why do you think there was insufficient evidence? Genuine question. I'm not coming at the case with an expert's knowledge and if you have substantive criticisms of the prosecution I'd be interested in them.
ArmaniJeanss wrote: » The judge's summing up of the evidence for the jury took half a day. Posters here seem to want someone to sum it up in a few bullet points, whilst also be detailed enough to stand up their scrutiny.
Pythagorean wrote: » Delighted that sewer rat got his comeuppance. The only regret I have is that the Det. Garda didn't shoot first, and save the taxpayer the expense of the trial, and the cost of keeping this vermin in jail for years to come. I hope they get the rest of the dirtbags too.
event wrote: » Tbf, it doesn't matter a joy what you think. A jury of his peers found him guilty. End of story. This is not some miscarriage of justice. Absolutely delighted, brilliant news for the family and colleagues.
ChikiChiki wrote: » He's guilty. The evidence is there. Get over it. Hope the rotten piece of **** lives a miserable existence for the rest of his day's.
begbysback wrote: » I take it your from the country so I’ll help you out with some context, I was conversing with another poster who gave me one piece of information which I questioned. I usually try my best to avoid people like you who arrive on a thread with a conclusion, good luck.
padd b1975 wrote: » Once less piece of "republican" scum to worry about.
Hodors Appletart wrote: » this is pretty sickening tbh you are aware there is evidence other than hearsay but still choose to try to undermine the justice system one would wonder why and what the agenda here is
Tacitus Kilgore wrote: » Correct, and as per your own definition here - usually one would look at some information prior to questioning it - you are questioning the validity of evidence before you even know what it is I don't got a problem with that but you are literally going against your own logic. :pac:
Tacitus Kilgore wrote: » So you didn't follow the case and have no details but are doubting the validity of evidence that you haven't even read up on?
White lighting wrote: » Well he went over to Woodlawn in New York hiding after it and told everyone over there he did it when he used to get drunk. Sounded like a scumbag his father went over to celebrate his birthday one year and pulled a gun on a fella in a pub so scumbag family. Wonder will Tony McEntee write him another Character reference
