Watching an act with dodgy a rumour about them

[clarkete]

38 minutes ago, balti-pie said:

I remember a big countdown in the papers with Linsey Dawn McKenzie coming up to her 16th birthday - some teaser photos, and then the big reveal on the day. She’s finally legal!

Different times barely even covers it ? 

The daily fail are one of the worst culprits (of course along with tons of other shameful things they've done) which are beautifully satirised here.

https://www.spellingmistakescostlives.com/dailymail



Incidentally he's going to be showing some of his work about Shell in Shangri La this year.

Edited June 11, 2019 by clarkete

[Tuna]

Feel pretty uncomfortable with the "innocent until proven guilty" stance people on here are encouraging others to adopt with respect to sexual assault, grooming, etc. of a young woman.

[gherkin8r]

1 hour ago, balti-pie said:

I remember a big countdown in the papers with Linsey Dawn McKenzie coming up to her 16th birthday - some teaser photos, and then the big reveal on the day. She’s finally legal!

Different times barely even covers it ? 

[gigpusher]

37 minutes ago, Homer said:

 

Was he? Bah - that’s my evening absolutely ruined then!

Could be worse you could have watched them and then it definitely would have been ruined. 

[Mark E. Spliff]

24 minutes ago, Tuna said:

Feel pretty uncomfortable with the "innocent until proven guilty" stance people on here are encouraging others to adopt with respect to sexual assault, grooming, etc. of a young woman.

So if I accused you of genocide, we'd all have to get the flaming torches out straight away because it's too serious an offence to bother waiting for proof?

 Innocent until proven guilty is a cornerstone of civil society.  If we didn't have it, Christopher Jeffries would have been lynched by the tabloid-reading mob for the crime of looking like the sort of creep who would (but didn't) murder his tenant Jo Yeates.

It's inconvenient, but the alternative is a very dark place indeed.

[rosieangel]

On a lighter note a colleague mentioned to me that she saw me roaring my head off through an office window yesterday evening and it was me reading this thread. So thank you.

[clarkete]

@gherkin8r I think that juxtaposition of the photo and the article where they moan about paedogeddon is a great example.

[gherkin8r]

The text at the bottom of Charlotte church's picture is properly creepy as fuck. 

[Tuna]

18 minutes ago, Mark E. Spliff said:

So if I accused you of genocide, we'd all have to get the flaming torches out straight away because it's too serious an offence to bother waiting for proof?

 Innocent until proven guilty is a cornerstone of civil society.  If we didn't have it, Christopher Jeffries would have been lynched by the tabloid-reading mob for the crime of looking like the sort of creep who would (but didn't) murder his tenant Jo Yeates.

It's inconvenient, but the alternative is a very dark place indeed.

I'm specifically talking -- let me quote myself -- "sexual assault, grooming etc. of a young woman", so kindly leave the genocide comparisons elsewhere. This is talking about ensuring women's voices are heard where historically they haven't; to applaud bravery in coming forward with cases; to believe women when they say they are the victims of assault. By saying "innocent until proven guilty" in circumstances like these, you marginalise women, you place no trust in their words, and you perpetuate a problem.

 

Please note I'm not encouraging any sort of behaviour, a boycott, whatever - just the stance "innocent until proven guilty" doesn't sit well with me.

Edited June 11, 2019 by Tuna

[gherkin8r]

1 minute ago, Tuna said:

I'm specifically talking -- let me quote myself -- "sexual assault, grooming etc. of a young woman", so kindly leave the genocide comparisons elsewhere. This is talking about ensuring women's voices are heard where historically they haven't; to applaud bravery in coming forward with cases; to believe women when they say they are the victims of assault. By saying "innocent until proven guilty" in circumstances like these, you marginalise women, you place no trust in their words, and you perpetuate a problem.

Wow

[Magma]

Out to everyone who was in the circle pit for Lostprophets in 2002 and now can't tell anyone about it ever again.

?

[ivan]

3 minutes ago, Magma said:

Out to everyone who was in the circle pit for Lostprophets in 2002 and now can't tell anyone about it ever again.

?

That reminds of V Festival years back when LP played.  I was stood with a group of loyal fans who lived in the same area of Wales as the band , followed them all over and treat the band as close friends.  I do feel for em .  LP were rubbish that day , mainly due to Watkins just swanning about on stage being a diva.  And it just so happens he is now about 1/2 mile from where my office is in Wakey nick !  

[Matt - Ed Banger Records]

16 minutes ago, Magma said:

Out to everyone who was in the circle pit for Lostprophets in 2002 and now can't tell anyone about it ever again.

?

At Reading in 2009 the entire group of people I was camped with, so around 12 people or so, went to go and watch LP instead of Radiohead, and it's something I give them shit about to this day (which, lets face it, would have been the case irrespective of Watkins crimes being uncovered)

[Homer]

50 minutes ago, ivan said:

That reminds of V Festival years back when LP played.  I was stood with a group of loyal fans who lived in the same area of Wales as the band , followed them all over and treat the band as close friends.  I do feel for em .  LP were rubbish that day , mainly due to Watkins just swanning about on stage being a diva.  And it just so happens he is now about 1/2 mile from where my office is in Wakey nick !  

I still refuse to listen to Steps to this day - just to be extra vigilant (to clarify: I don’t really like Jim Davidson - though I do still find Allo Allo genuinely funny). 

[maelzoid]

1 hour ago, Tuna said:

Feel pretty uncomfortable with the "innocent until proven guilty" stance people on here are encouraging others to adopt with respect to sexual assault, grooming, etc. of a young woman.

Yes, I suppose 'Guilty until proven innocent' is a lot more comfortable...

[stuie]

1 hour ago, Tuna said:

Please note I'm not encouraging any sort of behaviour, a boycott, whatever - just the stance "innocent until proven guilty" doesn't sit well with me.

I guess it would if you were wrongly accused of a serious crime.

 

[ivan]

1 hour ago, Tuna said:

I'm specifically talking -- let me quote myself -- "sexual assault, grooming etc. of a young woman", so kindly leave the genocide comparisons elsewhere. This is talking about ensuring women's voices are heard where historically they haven't; to applaud bravery in coming forward with cases; to believe women when they say they are the victims of assault. By saying "innocent until proven guilty" in circumstances like these, you marginalise women, you place no trust in their words, and you perpetuate a problem.

 

Please note I'm not encouraging any sort of behaviour, a boycott, whatever - just the stance "innocent until proven guilty" doesn't sit well with me.

Thankfully we do not live in North Korea where the Piranha tank awaits whether or guilty or not ! 

Innocent until proven guilty , No person is above the law , trial by jury  - that was enshrined in law at the dawn of our Kingdom and you cannot change that  

[Mark E. Spliff]

1 hour ago, Tuna said:

I'm specifically talking -- let me quote myself -- "sexual assault, grooming etc. of a young woman", so kindly leave the genocide comparisons elsewhere. This is talking about ensuring women's voices are heard where historically they haven't; to applaud bravery in coming forward with cases; to believe women when they say they are the victims of assault. By saying "innocent until proven guilty" in circumstances like these, you marginalise women, you place no trust in their words, and you perpetuate a problem.

 

Please note I'm not encouraging any sort of behaviour, a boycott, whatever - just the stance "innocent until proven guilty" doesn't sit well with me.

Your concerns seem to be around supporting marginalised victims to demand and get justice.  I'm absolutely on board with that.  However, criticising 'innocent until proven guilty' isn't helping that cause - any educated person who cares about human rights will put the shutters down immediately when they hear that kind of talk.  'Innocent until proven guilty' often results in very unpleasant people getting away with their crimes but, as others have pointed out above, the alternative is a dystopian nightmare.

 

[ivan]

2 minutes ago, Mark E. Spliff said:

Your concerns seem to be around supporting marginalised victims to demand and get justice.  I'm absolutely on board with that.  However, criticising 'innocent until proven guilty' isn't helping that cause - any educated person who cares about human rights will put the shutters down immediately when they hear that kind of talk.  'Innocent until proven guilty' often results in very unpleasant people getting away with their crimes but, as others have pointed out above, the alternative is a dystopian nightmare.

 

Yes -  and  despite how despicable the crime and how obviously guilty they are , the accused still have the right to have a barrister acting for them to try and get them found not guilty.  

[Winslow Leach]

2 minutes ago, ivan said:

Yes -  and  despite how despicable the crime and how obviously guilty they are , the accused still have the right to have a barrister acting for them to try and get them found not guilty.  

Tuna was clearly talking about continuing to support music acts/seeing them at a festival when they've been accused of something awful, that's a world away from false imprisonment. Different things are not the same.

[Tuna]

1 hour ago, Mark E. Spliff said:

 Your concerns seem to be around supporting marginalised victims to demand and get justice.  I'm absolutely on board with that.  However, criticising 'innocent until proven guilty' isn't helping that cause - any educated person who cares about human rights will put the shutters down immediately when they hear that kind of talk.  'Innocent until proven guilty' often results in very unpleasant people getting away with their crimes but, as others have pointed out above, the alternative is a dystopian nightmare.

My issues are not with the judiciary system. We as individuals are not the judiciary system.

2 hours ago, stuie said:

I guess it would if you were wrongly accused of a serious crime.

Nah. Bit #notallmen this.

2 hours ago, maelzoid said:

Yes, I suppose 'Guilty until proven innocent' is a lot more comfortable...

Also not what I said

1 hour ago, Winslow Leach said:

Tuna was clearly talking about continuing to support music acts/seeing them at a festival when they've been accused of something awful, that's a world away from false imprisonment. Different things are not the same.

^^^

[Abbathehorse]

2 hours ago, Homer said:

I still refuse to listen to Steps to this day - just to be extra vigilant 

 

[ivan]

2 hours ago, Winslow Leach said:

Tuna was clearly talking about continuing to support music acts/seeing them at a festival when they've been accused of something awful, that's a world away from false imprisonment. Different things are not the same.

Lord forbid if anything untoward was laid towards Michael Eavis.

So on accusations alone who would feel uncomfortable about going to G or just not attend ?  

[CaledonianGonzo]

Tricky bugger, context.

[gherkin8r]

4 minutes ago, CaledonianGonzo said:

Tricky bugger, context.

Trick buggery?