I think soot fancies RC.
I read the news today oh boy! Page 869
Quote: Booo @ June 12 2012, 7:20 PM BSTI think soot fancies RC.
He is mostly only human. 
Quote: Stylee TingTing @ June 12 2012, 7:20 PM BSTI quite agree. I've got you right up there, RC.. you and Katie Price.
Woo, three giant tits in a row.
Quote: chipolata @ June 12 2012, 6:55 PM BSTYour true liberal isn't outraged by anything you say. They respect and value peoples different views and opinions. It's your faux liberals that get wound up.
So that's why you get bent out of shape when I say something negative about President Obama? 
Quote: DaButt @ June 12 2012, 7:24 PM BSTSo that's why you get bent out of shape when I say something negative about President Obama?
Because in British liberal eyes, Obama is the new messiah and above any kind of reproach.
Despite the number of heavily armed drones he sends into Pakistan to kill innocent people, repealing his promise to close Gitmo and his continuing support of the corrupt Karzai regime in Afghanistan.
Quote: Renegade Carpark @ June 12 2012, 7:37 PM BSTBecause in British liberal eyes, Obama is the new messiah and above any kind of reproach.
No it is just that he is not as jaw-droppingly outlandish as any of the car crash candidates fielded by the Republicans.
eh?
have you read any of the papers you're cussing out
Quote: Tursiops @ June 12 2012, 7:10 PM BSTAnd unless the attacker/victim (delta according to prejudice) shot his wad, which would actually be fairly conclusive in itself, DNA is not going to prove much more than that he was there, which his corpse has pretty much already established.
I'll try to put this delicately: there are parts of that girl's body that should not have that man's DNA on them.
I am not advocating either the man's guilt or innocence, I am only wondering why someone would be so absolutely convinced the police had called it right based on a press report which raise more questions than answers.
Have I said I was absolutely convinced? Again and again I've said that the authorities have said there is no evidence to cast doubt on the man's story. The simplest answer is usually the best answer, so I am ignoring the infinitesimal chance that this man decided to beat a man to death with his fists and then managed to coerce the witnesses, his 4-year-old daughter, an entire sheriff's department, detectives and hospital staff to lie about what happened.
Quote: DaButt @ June 12 2012, 7:45 PM BSTI'll try to put this delicately: there are parts of that girl's body that should not have that man's DNA on them.
Do you have any stats for that?
Quote: Tursiops @ June 12 2012, 7:42 PM BSTNo it is just that he is not as jaw-droppingly outlandish as any of the car crash candidates fielded by the Republicans.
I agree with you on that one matey. I like Obama and think he's done a good job for America, particularly repairing a lot of international relations.
Mitt Romney, an asset stripping Mormon who's flip flopped on almost every major political decision he's ever made in an effort to attract any and all members of the Republican party would make a bad President.
I thought Ron Paul was excellent and expressed many wise and thoughtful views on just about every subject - but Fox News and the Tea Party hated him, so his exposure was buried early on.
Quote: Stylee TingTing @ June 12 2012, 7:49 PM BSTDo you have any stats for that?
Yes: that was your 729th inane reply.
..to your 10,996th inane troll post.
730.
Quote: DaButt @ June 12 2012, 7:45 PM BSTI'll try to put this delicately: there are parts of that girl's body that should not have that man's DNA on them.
I am not sure that intimate contact is consistent with the girl being physically unharmed, and I am not sure how easy DNA from physical contact would be to gather in such circumstances.
Have I said I was absolutely convinced?
Pretty much.
Again and again I've said that the authorities have said there is no evidence to cast doubt on the man's story. The simplest answer is usually the best answer, so I am ignoring the infinitesimal chance that this man decided to beat a man to death with his fists and then managed to coerce the witnesses, his 4-year-old daughter, an entire sheriff's department, detectives and hospital staff to lie about what happened.
The witnesses apparently heard the girl scream. Nothing more. She could have screamed at a perceived threat rather than an actual one. There is no need to hypothesise that the man coerced anyone, not even intentionally his daughter. The sheriff accepted his version of events, and that, apparently is that. Now possibly the sheriff had good reason to do so. But saying there is no evidence to cast doubt on the man's story is not at all the same as saying that there is evidence to support the man's story. Which is the nub of the concern.
Quote: Tursiops @ June 12 2012, 8:02 PM BSTI am not sure that intimate contact is consistent with the girl being physically unharmed, and I am not sure how easy DNA from physical contact would be to gather in such circumstances.
Saliva, semen, blood, hair, sweat, skin flakes, etc.
The sheriff accepted his version of events, and that, apparently is that.
Have you not read the repeated mentions of the continuing investigation and the grand jury?
Quote: DaButt @ June 12 2012, 8:12 PM BSTHave you not read the repeated mentions of the continuing investigation and the grand jury?
Have you? Posted in answer to my query whether you understood the meaning of alleged:
Quote: DaButt @ June 11 2012, 10:48 PM BSTYes, it's a stupid word that stupid lawyers make stupid news outlets use to describe something someone saw with their own eyes.
The father walked in, saw the man molesting his 4-year-old daughter and managed to kill him with his fists. In another story I read, the police reported that the man didn't intend to kill him and was sorry that the man died. I wouldn't have been.