24 Hours in Police Custody: Ch4
Discussion
BigBazza said:
You're absolutely hilarious. I don't care how old you are, I just wanted you to choose an age, any age.
Then pay £100 to charity and I'll pick one. I'll even send you a copy of my driving license after I've seen you have paid the money. Btw I'm flattered that you decided I was interesting enough to read all my posts! You keep chirping up, but whenever I offer you the information you want you seem unwilling to stand by your own convictions. If I'm not what I say I am then you don't have to pay a penny - I'm only repeating that as you seem a bit simple.
As you are so sure I'm living an internet fairy tale you shouldn't have any concerns. With those cars you have in your profile £100 to a good cause shouldn't be a stretch. And remember - you are the clever sod who exposed an internet fibber, so your cash is safe.
P.S - saying you don't care after going on about it (and deleting posts) and then again say you wan't me to say my age doesn't really work. Please make your mind up. I've made the offer to reveal all that information, at a price to a good cause.
I only deleted the post as it was on the wrong thread - its the identical post to the one above.
I'm not asking for proof of anything. I'm asking you to explain why your story has varied. A photocopy of a drivers licence/passport doesn't tell me anything.
I do plenty for McMillan & The NSPCC so I sleep easy at night.
I'm not lowering myself to name calling, just simply interested why someone would change their age to suit when discussing different topics.
I'm not asking for proof of anything. I'm asking you to explain why your story has varied. A photocopy of a drivers licence/passport doesn't tell me anything.
I do plenty for McMillan & The NSPCC so I sleep easy at night.
I'm not lowering myself to name calling, just simply interested why someone would change their age to suit when discussing different topics.
BigBazza said:
I only deleted the post as it was on the wrong thread - its the identical post to the one above.
I'm not asking for proof of anything. I'm asking you to explain why your story has varied. A photocopy of a drivers licence/passport doesn't tell me anything.
I do plenty for McMillan & The NSPCC so I sleep easy at night.
I'm not lowering myself to name calling, just simply interested why someone would change their age to suit when discussing different topics.
Show me where I am meant to have changed my age? I'm not asking for proof of anything. I'm asking you to explain why your story has varied. A photocopy of a drivers licence/passport doesn't tell me anything.
I do plenty for McMillan & The NSPCC so I sleep easy at night.
I'm not lowering myself to name calling, just simply interested why someone would change their age to suit when discussing different topics.
Unless you don't think someone in their mid 20's (23-27) could have been drinking for about 10 years (7-13).
However removing the maths, just for one moment - why on Earth would anybody come onto a car forum and post what I did? It's hardly bigging myself up is it... And more importantly, if someone really was pretending to be the wrong age or anything else on the internet why do you care? I can see why someone would get upset about people trying to rip of charities, take advantage of the vulnerable and a few other things... But you seem to have genuinely spent time and energy into looking into someone who might have lied about their age???
Just enjoy a bit of amateur psychology and your posts fascinate me.
Obviously there is a bit of fantasy in there (hence forgetting how old you are) and there is LOTS of legal advice on shaky footings along with LOTS of self deprecation (always talking yourself down etc) and then there are the hints to big stories that you'd rather not talk about (even though you mention them on a public forum) which suggests you DO want to talk about them, real or not.
You make interesting reading, it helped pass an hour at a very dull part of my week.
Cheers
Obviously there is a bit of fantasy in there (hence forgetting how old you are) and there is LOTS of legal advice on shaky footings along with LOTS of self deprecation (always talking yourself down etc) and then there are the hints to big stories that you'd rather not talk about (even though you mention them on a public forum) which suggests you DO want to talk about them, real or not.
You make interesting reading, it helped pass an hour at a very dull part of my week.
Cheers
BigBazza said:
Just enjoy a bit of amateur psychology and your posts fascinate me.
Obviously there is a bit of fantasy in there (hence forgetting how old you are) and there is LOTS of legal advice on shaky footings along with LOTS of self deprecation (always talking yourself down etc) and then there are the hints to big stories that you'd rather not talk about (even though you mention them on a public forum) which suggests you DO want to talk about them, real or not.
You make interesting reading, it helped pass an hour at a very dull part of my week.
Cheers
You seem very keen on going on. So I'll refer you back, when have I forgotten or changed my age? Repeating the same thing doesn't change the fact that it never happened. Obviously there is a bit of fantasy in there (hence forgetting how old you are) and there is LOTS of legal advice on shaky footings along with LOTS of self deprecation (always talking yourself down etc) and then there are the hints to big stories that you'd rather not talk about (even though you mention them on a public forum) which suggests you DO want to talk about them, real or not.
You make interesting reading, it helped pass an hour at a very dull part of my week.
Cheers
Do you wish to tell me what shaky legal advice I have given? This could be true, but I try and generally limit myself to something I have half an idea about.
The hints of big stories... Really? I think you are a bit desperate now. Again when?
Sadly for you it's not an hour is it... Reading my posts might entrain you, and thats cool. But your dodgy analytical skills are way off the mark.
So far ONCE you have quoted me in a post with "evidence". And someone else spotted your mistakes before I had even read it. Your going to have to try harder.
Finally managed to see this last night, fascinating TV.
Personally, based on nothing but the TV I think he was up to his neck in it, but it is surprising given his background - perhaps he was a normal law abiding citizen prior to this, or perhaps he's just never been caught.
I bet he's still kicking himself for not throwing away that box - he might have forgotten about it! But the welcome finance connection and the cell tower thing really nailed him as using it, which also nailed him for calling the main players at crucial times.
Saying that I wasn't on the Jury and they're the ones who have to decide beyond reasonable doubt - I'm glad most of the conspirators got long sentences!
as for his Solicitor, he's done his job to the best of his abilities - we shouldn't go reaching for the pitchforks because he's a defender - once the Police decide they've got their man they will do everything in their power to show evidence of guilt - if they discover evidence that makes his guilt questionable they won't bring that up in interview, the solicitors job is mitigate and to protect his client as well as he can - after all the Police aren't above scare tactics, ambushes or intimidation (of sentence, not physical anymore).
Personally, based on nothing but the TV I think he was up to his neck in it, but it is surprising given his background - perhaps he was a normal law abiding citizen prior to this, or perhaps he's just never been caught.
I bet he's still kicking himself for not throwing away that box - he might have forgotten about it! But the welcome finance connection and the cell tower thing really nailed him as using it, which also nailed him for calling the main players at crucial times.
Saying that I wasn't on the Jury and they're the ones who have to decide beyond reasonable doubt - I'm glad most of the conspirators got long sentences!
as for his Solicitor, he's done his job to the best of his abilities - we shouldn't go reaching for the pitchforks because he's a defender - once the Police decide they've got their man they will do everything in their power to show evidence of guilt - if they discover evidence that makes his guilt questionable they won't bring that up in interview, the solicitors job is mitigate and to protect his client as well as he can - after all the Police aren't above scare tactics, ambushes or intimidation (of sentence, not physical anymore).
[quote=P-Jay- once the Police decide they've got their man they will do everything in their power to show evidence of guilt - if they discover evidence that makes his guilt questionable they won't bring that up in interview,
[/quote]
Wrong. Any information discovered by Police that would hurt the prosecution case has to be disclosed to the defence (it doesn't work the other way though)
[/quote]
Wrong. Any information discovered by Police that would hurt the prosecution case has to be disclosed to the defence (it doesn't work the other way though)
PurpleTurtle said:
Just watching on catch-up. The female custody Sgt is welcome to look disapprovingly at me over her glasses any time, before taking down my particulars! 
Glad I'm not the only one who thought she was a but sexy. The only one person in charge comment is gold. Fabulous programme. Can't belive how much weight he had lost. Wow. Have to say as an armchair jury he was guilty but I wasn't in court so he may have changed his story.
Elroy Blue said:
[quote=P-Jay- once the Police decide they've got their man they will do everything in their power to show evidence of guilt - if they discover evidence that makes his guilt questionable they won't bring that up in interview,
Wrong. Any information discovered by Police that would hurt the prosecution case has to be disclosed to the defence (it doesn't work the other way though)RemyMartin said:
PurpleTurtle said:
Just watching on catch-up. The female custody Sgt is welcome to look disapprovingly at me over her glasses any time, before taking down my particulars!
Glad I'm not the only one who thought she was a but sexy. The only one person in charge comment is gold. Fabulous programme. Can't belive how much weight he had lost. Wow. Have to say as an armchair jury he was guilty but I wasn't in court so he may have changed his story.
Lost soul said:
But if he changed his story that would make him appear more guilty
Possibly but that would depend on his reasoning for changing his story. If he sated that he only kept quite because he was in fear for his life or his children's, the court might accept that. It's all academic anyway - I don't know what happened. We only saw the police interviews and his arrest. You were never going to get the full story - apart from the chap himself and his colleagues, no one will probably ever know everything.
eddy02 said:
The Las Vegas detective will be nominated for the 'people you woud like to repeatedly punch in the face' thread.Annoying fat little prick.
You do realise that 24hrs have been edited don't you. They decided to show the half a dozen times he mentioned his holiday in that 24 hours. That makes him an 'annoying fat little prick' does it? I nominate the 'Las Vegas detective' for being an excellent interviewer and somebody clearly dedicated to his job.Elroy Blue said:
You do realise that 24hrs have been edited don't you. They decided to show the half a dozen times he mentioned his holiday in that 24 hours. That makes him an 'annoying fat little prick' does it? I nominate the 'Las Vegas detective' for being an excellent interviewer and somebody clearly dedicated to his job.
I agree. The way he remained civil and managed to pose his questioned was very very good. I think it's fair to say they wouldn't put someone who wasn't considered brilliant in for a conspiracy to murder gun crime, which had a lot of media attention. Really would not like to face him if I had done something naughty. What I was most impressed with is that he remained civil and didn't lower himself to getting personal.
His interview technique is not the issue (an interview in which he 'lost' anyway,the no comment answers were brought on by him/them not disclosing the evidence,the phones box,he took a chance and failed).
I just did not like his tone of voice (my wife took an instant dislike to him and she is a much more tolernt person than me).
I did not like his silly,brightly coloured lanyard.
He just sounded slightly patronising.
Sorry for having an opinion.
I just did not like his tone of voice (my wife took an instant dislike to him and she is a much more tolernt person than me).
I did not like his silly,brightly coloured lanyard.
He just sounded slightly patronising.
Sorry for having an opinion.
eddy02 said:
His interview technique is not the issue (an interview in which he 'lost' anyway,the no comment answers were brought on by him/them not disclosing the evidence,the phones box,he took a chance and failed).
I just did not like his tone of voice (my wife took an instant dislike to him and she is a much more tolernt person than me).
I did not like his silly,brightly coloured lanyard.
He just sounded slightly patronising.
Sorry for having an opinion.
I see where you are coming from.I just did not like his tone of voice (my wife took an instant dislike to him and she is a much more tolernt person than me).
I did not like his silly,brightly coloured lanyard.
He just sounded slightly patronising.
Sorry for having an opinion.
I think the interview was almost certainly going to be no comment - so really the best he could do is try and make him look a bit bad by the way he phrased his questions (which he did do IMO).
I think the interviewers attempt at trying to be all friendly would frustrate me if I was the suspect (and probably not in a way they want).
Its a shame we don't get to hear a detailed aco
of what his defence was in court so we can put the show into context.It may have been a case of well the main geezers have been foudn guitly and people just couldn;t be totally sure this was invovled and even if he was his aprt may have been relativley minor - even if he was the co-ordinator!
Gassing Station | TV, Film, Video Streaming & Radio | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff