Katherine Zappone Envoy Gig

Ok, let's put it to the test please, you're obviously confusing a defendant in a court of law, where obviously the presumption of innocence is afforded to the defendant, or else yourself and blanch152 don't have the wit not to realise people are still entitled to free thoughts and their own beliefs on things. (neither of which make either the pair of you look very bright, and that is being kind)

There's no law or mechanisms anywhere in out society to prevent people assuming, or thinking about things.

Yourself and blanch152 have obviously never heard or seen any scenarios where someone becomes a Garda suspect, because the Garda have reason to believe (think) someone committed a crime/ ot want to speak to witnesses they think may have present at a scene/spoke with someone and so on and so forth, etc etc. Those suspects are afforded the right to the assumption of innocence. The guards (or any other police force in the world) can still believe the suspects involvement though.

There's no court of law at play in our little discussion about people being free to form their own conclusions and assumptions about the reasons why politicians refused to answer the very reasonable questions put to them. Some might even assume or believe that they weren't there' (which will suit you obviously) and some might assume or believe the opposite (shock horror!!!)

There's only one thing more embarrassing about someone who is evidently wrong, thinking they are in fact correct, and that is when some one piles in with them to swear in the original incorrect statement to begin with.

Now away you go off to another thread and be consistently wrong in that one too.

They interview suspects because they believe they may be involved. If they gain evidence enough, they arrest.

Attending the Zappone Merrion event wasn't a crime. Is it, 'Has she lost weight? I think she has' "Hush your mouth, she's innocent until proven guilty!" 'Is Joe Duffy on holidays?' "silence, he's innocent until proven guilty!" 😂

What "rubbish" have I posted? If you would care to point it out and we can discuss it, but I don't think it will do yourself any favours at this stage dudley72. You are trying (and failing) to convince me, and anyone else reading this thread that people aren't free to form their own conclusions on things, make assumptions, or have thoughts.

And as for your last line "the original point" always has been that people are free to form their own conclusions and assumptions on why the politicians refused to answer, the "presumed guilty" part is something you threw into the mix as a failed attempt to muddy the water.

This. Isn't. A. Court. Repeat after me dudley72, those politicians aren't on trial, and if they ever are, they'll be assumed innocent until their case is concluded. In the meantime people are free to draw their own conclusions and assumptions as to why they're refusing to answer questions. Everything and anything you throw out to try and counter that is irrelevant and incorrect nonsense. Give it up.

And with that, I shall bid you farewell.

**I am bailing out from this ridiculous nonsense with you for this evening**

Best of luck!!

what mask Francie? please enlighten us all?

So no explanation for the mask comment?

As usual people are trying to have a discussion and you come in with accusations/insults etc and never back them up. As this is again been forced off topic with your accusations(3rd time today on this thread) I will leave you to it.

It's all a big conspiracy is it? Have you noticed it's mostly you trying to make out everyone else is throwing out insults and moving threads off topic?

Sure leave us to it, please.

Well said Ken.

I sense some things even the AG won't wear need redacting 😗