Baby shot by muggers because his mother had no money.

Miss Lockhart · 25-07-2013 08:03PM

I think it's quite weird that those so ardently defending the teenagers seem so eager to act as judge and jury for the parents.

It's an awful case and the media and online fora have acted disgracefully. But it seems many of those pushing the innocent until proven guilty message are more interested in just pushing their own agenda.

crockholm · 25-07-2013 08:06PM

Killer Wench wrote: »

The quotes that I posted in this thread were from 'The Rad Runner'. Are you saying that you made those statements under that screen name?

Makes sense since you and 'The Rad Runner' seem to be the only ones who use 'KW' so frequently.

Not at all,your powers of detection are waning,I used his name on the Aff.Action thread,under the incorrect assumption that he was guilty, I have had only this one account since joining in december.

Using your initials is quicker and easier,also since both are self capitalized,it makes sense,so much so that another user also shortened your moniker,and no doubt more will when referencing you in future.

Christ the Redeemer · 25-07-2013 08:13PM

God dam.. the mother asked about an insurance cheque the day the baby was supposedly murdered by the "gang bangers"

Gatling · 25-07-2013 08:16PM

Christ the Redeemer wrote: »

God dam.. the mother asked about an insurance cheque the day the baby was supposedly murdered by the "gang bangers"

Supposedly asked this the thing there also sayings she's bipolar and has schizophrenia

Seems to be a push ohhhh lets just discredit a grieving mother and hope for the best, some defence to a pair of total scum bags

Killer Wench · 25-07-2013 08:16PM

Christ the Redeemer wrote: »

God dam.. the mother asked about an insurance cheque the day the baby was supposedly murdered by the "gang bangers"

The agenda apparently!

Smiles35 · 25-07-2013 08:21PM

Gatling wrote: »

Supposedly asked this the thing there also sayings she's bipolar and has schizophrenia

Seems to be a push ohhhh lets just discredit a grieving mother and hope for the best, some defence to a pair of total scum bags

Was it not her own daugher that said that? And how common is it for (i assume) poor parents to have life-insurance on a baby?

Gatling · 25-07-2013 08:26PM

Smell Badda wrote: »

Was it not her own daugher that said that? And how common is it for (i assume) poor parents to have life-insurance on a baby?

Absolutely no idea ,as seen by the martin case everyone involved seems to have book deals and TV movies planned ,

The alleged attackers alibi has been blown out of the water too after two of there family members were charged with giving false and misleading statments

Mr. Nice · 25-07-2013 08:31PM

Gatling wrote: »

Unconnected violent robbery using a firearm ,
Murders a baby in a violent robbery using a firearm 10 days later

No connection at all there

Really ,

Seriously

Did you mean no conviction there at all?
You are either prejudiced, a troll or below average intelligence.

Really ,

Seriously

Smiles35 · 25-07-2013 08:32PM

Gatling wrote: »

The alleged attackers alibi has been blown out of the water too after two of there family members were charged with giving false and misleading statments

I remember that now from earlier in the thread. Made me angry, but ofcource the Mammys were always going to give alibis

Gatling · 25-07-2013 08:44PM

Mr. Nice wrote: »

Did you mean no conviction there at all?
You are either prejudiced, a troll or below average intelligence.

Really ,

Seriously

TWO yes count TWO people identify the same attacker 10 days apart ,
Proof of he's a violent attacker legal 101 go to the legal forum and ask the question would the law ignore the fact he's a history of violence or his mammy say he's innocent so it is so

As for the rest of your statement seriously really seriously

Overheal · 25-07-2013 11:10PM

alright, boys and girls, stop.

Was the gun used in crime A the same as the gun used in crime B?

Didn't think so. Ta

Gatling · 25-07-2013 11:46PM

Overheal wrote: »

alright, boys and girls, stop.

Was the gun used in crime A the same as the gun used in crime B?

Didn't think so. Ta

Have you seen the ballistic reports from both
Crime A and Crime B

Didn't think so

Anyhow it seems the martin family are calling for a new gun law to be named after there son ,
Like that's going to happen

Killer Wench · 26-07-2013 04:22AM

The mother alleged that these boys killed her son because she had no money. Yet, it is now alleged that the mother was asking how soon she could get the insurance money from her son's death.

26-07-2013 04:42AM

Nodin wrote: »

...so because two violent crimes happen in an city it has to be the same person?

You've obviously never watched The Simpsons.

Officer Eddie: (reading Steve Sax's license) Well well, Steve Sax, from New York City.
Officer Lou: I heard some guy got killed in New York City and they never solved the case. But you wouldn't know anything about that now, would you, Steve?
(Lou and Eddie laugh)
Steve Sax: But there are hundreds of unsolved murders in New York City.
Officer Lou: You don't know when to keep your mouth shut, do you, Saxxy Boy?

26-07-2013 04:43AM

Killer Wench wrote: »

The mother alleged that these boys killed her son because she had no money. Yet, it is now alleged that the mother was asking how soon she could get the insurance money from her son's death.

I don't see your point, is that meant to be a contradiction?

26-07-2013 09:11AM

Killer Wench wrote: »

The mother alleged that these boys killed her son because she had no money. Yet, it is now alleged that the mother was asking how soon she could get the insurance money from her son's death.

I don't think that sounds suspicious KW. I never carry cash on me, just my debit card and I quite often I have no money in my account either as it has been used for paying my insurance instalments and other monthly bills.

IK09 · 26-07-2013 09:27AM

Seachmall wrote: »

They're not exclusive.

Revenge and justice often go hand in hand.

Sometimes we call it "closure".

There is a big difference between revenge and retribution

Overheal · 26-07-2013 04:19PM

Gatling wrote: »

Have you seen the ballistic reports from both
Crime A and Crime B

Didn't think so

Have you? Furthermore are you a ballistics expert? If not, why are you convicting the kid of two crimes which have no determined forensic connection?

Killer Wench · 26-07-2013 04:30PM

Strawberry Milkshake wrote: »

I don't think that sounds suspicious KW. I never carry cash on me, just my debit card and I quite often I have no money in my account either as it has been used for paying my insurance instalments and other monthly bills.

It isn't supposed to be suspicious. Truthfully, I find your post out of place.

I find it rather enlightening that she accused someone else of killing her baby for money when it could be that the death of the baby was for her own financial gain.

Gatling · 26-07-2013 04:35PM

Overheal wrote: »

Have you? Furthermore are you a ballistics expert? If not, why are you convicting the kid of two crimes which have no determined forensic connection?

Again two violent robbery's using a fire arm 10 days apart

Two victims identify the same attacker ( pretty damimng in any trial unless its an Irish trial where he would be sent home to enjoy his birthday and Christmas )

Pretty well versed on firearms wouldnt make much of a difference if several firearms area used by an individual in several crimes ,
Once He was identified several times by several victims shows a connection for violent robbery ,

Modus operandi

Amirani · 26-07-2013 04:42PM

Gatling wrote: »

Two victims identify the same attacker ( pretty damimng in any trial unless its an Irish trial where he would be sent home to enjoy his birthday and Christmas )

That's such a load of rubbish, on a number of levels.

Gatling · 26-07-2013 04:45PM

NiallSparky wrote: »

That's such a load of rubbish, on a number of levels.

No its a fact Irish judge allowed a burgular to be sentenced after he enjoys his birthday in October despite 40 previous convictions

Nodin · 26-07-2013 04:48PM

Gatling wrote: »

No its a fact Irish judge allowed a burgular to be sentenced after he enjoys his birthday in October despite 40 previous convictions

...what has that to do with this thread?

Overheal · 26-07-2013 04:56PM

Gatling wrote: »

Again two violent robbery's using a fire arm 10 days apart

Two victims identify the same attacker

So you don't think its possible that a cash strapped parent could have seen a report or heard about the first robbery and used him as a scapegoat for another?

Similarly, most small businesses that employ part timers to handle cash will often see discrepancies in the tills after hiring on a new employee. In a pretty fair chunk of those cases, it's an established employee that goes for the money, because suspicion will obviously lie on the new hire.

Artful_Badger · 26-07-2013 04:58PM

Killer Wench wrote: »

It isn't supposed to be suspicious. Truthfully, I find your post out of place.

I find it rather enlightening that she accused someone else of killing her baby for money when it could be that the death of the baby was for her own financial gain.

What exactly are you trying to say because I'm confused. It seems like your saying its ironic she accuses people of murdering for money even though they didnt, it was the opposite, murder because no money.

But in order to do that you first have to assume she's guilty of murdering the baby for money. So despite your outrage at people trying to hang the first two suspects without a conviction your absolutely fine with it now the new suspect fits in with your predetermined views of anyone accusing black people of murder to be upto something ?

Overheal · 26-07-2013 05:00PM

Artful_Badger wrote: »

What exactly are you trying to say because I'm confused. It seems like your saying its ironic she accuses people of murdering for money even though they didnt, it was the opposite, murder because no money.

Gatling · 26-07-2013 05:00PM

Overheal wrote: »

So you don't think its possible that a cash strapped parent could have seen a report or heard about the first robbery and used him as a scapegoat for another?

And its not possible for a violent criminal to actually guilty

Blaming the mother is just lazy defending by his legal team being honest ,
You think they would be all over the media screaming his innocence,
No just let blame the mother apparently she has mental
Health issues

Nodin · 26-07-2013 05:01PM

Gatling wrote: »

And its not possible for a violent criminal to actually guilty

Blaming the mother is just lazy defending by his legal team being honest ,
You think they would be all over the media screaming his innocence,
No just let blame the mother apparently she has ments
Health issues

Good to see you're back to making substantive points.

Artful_Badger · 26-07-2013 05:03PM

Overheal wrote: »

Can you elaborate on that or is cartoons the extent of your ability to communicate ?

Artful_Badger · 26-07-2013 05:23PM

I see what happened, you misread the post. That wasnt actually the argument she was making, the end of that sentence was a side note to say she didnt accuse anyone of killing the baby for money. No rebuttal from killer Wench either, sneaking in a thanks on overheals misinformed post knowing full well thats not what she actually meant

I'll spell it out for those too lazy to read posts before throwing in their two cents.

Killer Wench wrote: »

It isn't supposed to be suspicious. Truthfully, I find your post out of place.

I find it rather enlightening that she accused someone else of killing her baby for money when it could be that the death of the baby was for her own financial gain.

Its not enlightening, so she seems to mean ironic. You cant say its ironic without assuming she's guilty, the exact thing she had a shít fit over when others assumed the initial suspects were guilty.

Baby shot by muggers because his mother had no money.

Comments