Chit Chat
Welcome to Live View – Take the tour to learn more
Start Tour
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
http://www.luton-dunstable.co.uk/Luton-policeman-Mohammad-Arshad-appears-court/story-28698967-detail/story.html
noncey moslem(with a name like that) copper. Hope someone fks him up properly in prison.
noncey moslem(with a name like that) copper. Hope someone fks him up properly in prison.
Show More
When questioned by the police, he gave a prepared statement saying he thought the girls were aged 16 or over.
Is this the correct answer for a not guilty verdict as has been seen very recently?
Richard said: “As you can see I'm in quite a lot of trouble. What if I thought she was over 16 but she was in fact under 16.”
The floodgates have opened.
Is this the correct answer for a not guilty verdict as has been seen very recently?
Richard said: “As you can see I'm in quite a lot of trouble. What if I thought she was over 16 but she was in fact under 16.”
The floodgates have opened.
The floodgates have opened
And children have been made more vulnerable as a result. Was a crazy judgement which every sleezeball will now hang their hat on.
And children have been made more vulnerable as a result. Was a crazy judgement which every sleezeball will now hang their hat on.
it won't though ,because the Dragons den guy met a girl who prentended to be 18 and signed to an ADULT site . That was the big difference.
If he used that same defence after meeting her outside say a school/youth club etc he would not have gotten away with it
If he used that same defence after meeting her outside say a school/youth club etc he would not have gotten away with it
Met the girl in the pub so obviously thought she was of age. What's the difference?
It's that excuse being put forward as a defence which I have a problem with irrespective of who it is that uses it. (There are 16+ year olds who attend schools & go to youth clubs Coach.)
Just to make myself clear I find the idea of a thought she was 16 defence reprehensible. Minors are supposed to be protected in law.
Just to make myself clear I find the idea of a thought she was 16 defence reprehensible. Minors are supposed to be protected in law.
Well with a name like that I'm guessing he's one of those, you know, multicultural peopl, begins with 'M'.
If you meet someone in a club or pub is it not reasonable to believe that they are over 16?
So are you saying we should scrap the law Eeter?
I think lots of things come into play but simply because someone is in a pub shouldn't be accepted as a defence.
I think lots of things come into play but simply because someone is in a pub shouldn't be accepted as a defence.
How she looks, how she acts etc etc maybe a defence but it's dangerous grounds.
yeah,but the dragons one was on an 18+ web site - that is the difference .
Youth club etc can be either/or = no defence
Youth club etc can be either/or = no defence
then thats not his fault is it ?
HE hasn't gone onto an under 18s site pretending to be under 18
HE hasn't gone onto an under 18s site pretending to be under 18
As minors by law children do not have autonomy or the right to make decisions on their own for themselves in any known jurisdiction of the world.
The floodgates have opened
And children have been made more vulnerable as a result. Was a crazy judgement which every sleezeball will now hang their hat on.
It wasn't a judgement it was a jury verdict. It is completely irrelevant to any future prosecution.
And children have been made more vulnerable as a result. Was a crazy judgement which every sleezeball will now hang their hat on.
It wasn't a judgement it was a jury verdict. It is completely irrelevant to any future prosecution.
Post Your Reply
Please login to post a reply.
Wonder
Instance ID: 13539