t8yman Posted March 14, 2014 Report Share Posted March 14, 2014 I call "shopped".... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jump Posted March 14, 2014 Report Share Posted March 14, 2014 I call "shopped".... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yoghurt on a Stick Posted March 14, 2014 Report Share Posted March 14, 2014 Let us not forget that there are some out there who don't appear to have the normal reference points that the consensus have. I recall being asked to rush into a room to see something on Jeremy Kyle. Despite my reservations I rushed into the room and saw this plonker who actually thought he looked good with his tattood face; Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kaosmark2 Posted March 14, 2014 Report Share Posted March 14, 2014 Let us not forget that there are some out there who don't appear to have the normal reference points that the consensus have. I recall being asked to rush into a room to see something on Jeremy Kyle. Despite my reservations I rushed into the room and saw this plonker who actually thought he looked good with his tattood face; Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
atomised Posted July 16, 2014 Report Share Posted July 16, 2014 http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2014/07/16/ian-watkins-paedophile-lostprophets-sex-abuse_n_5591236.html?utm_hp_ref=tw Didn't realise that pleading guilty would make him look guilty. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eFestivals Posted July 17, 2014 Report Share Posted July 17, 2014 Didn't realise that pleading guilty would make him look guilty.He probably didn't realise that starring in his own child abuse video would make him look guilty too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jump Posted July 17, 2014 Report Share Posted July 17, 2014 The article has disabled it's comment section for "legal reasons", does anyone know what the legal reasons are? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eFestivals Posted July 17, 2014 Report Share Posted July 17, 2014 The article has disabled it's comment section for "legal reasons", does anyone know what the legal reasons are?It's fairly normal with stories where if they had comments enabled, they're likely to quickly have lots of libellous or legally dubious comments posted.In this particular instance it's probably specifically because the names of the two women convicted with him are not allowed to be named (for the protection of their kids). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jump Posted July 17, 2014 Report Share Posted July 17, 2014 I figured it was something along those lines but I was hoping for something more intresting. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.