Police in search for missing 5 year old
Discussion
TheSnitch said:
Jefferies was never charged, remember?
Here's the thing. Bridger has been charged. The CPS will not recommend charging him unless they believe there is sufficient evidence to have a realistic chance of a conviction. At the moment, however, he is charged with several offences, not guilty of them. That remains to be decided at his trial.
I am baffled by the need people have to start looking for other explanations and scenarios - it's only a step away from winding tinfoil around your head and gibbering about missiles and holographic planes imo.
Can't you just wait until the trial? You have no idea how much evidence they may already have. I think if it was my child I wouldn't be keen on people speculating that he ran her over and couldn't deal - especially not when witnesses saw her get into the car. No-one is pinning a guilty badge on him yet - but there sure as hell is no reason to be going around pinning ''innocent'' ones to him either
My thoughts eactly and well put.Here's the thing. Bridger has been charged. The CPS will not recommend charging him unless they believe there is sufficient evidence to have a realistic chance of a conviction. At the moment, however, he is charged with several offences, not guilty of them. That remains to be decided at his trial.
I am baffled by the need people have to start looking for other explanations and scenarios - it's only a step away from winding tinfoil around your head and gibbering about missiles and holographic planes imo.
Can't you just wait until the trial? You have no idea how much evidence they may already have. I think if it was my child I wouldn't be keen on people speculating that he ran her over and couldn't deal - especially not when witnesses saw her get into the car. No-one is pinning a guilty badge on him yet - but there sure as hell is no reason to be going around pinning ''innocent'' ones to him either
TheSnitch said:
Jefferies was never charged, remember?
. No-one is pinning a guilty badge on him yet - but there sure as hell is no reason to be going around pinning ''innocent'' ones to him either
. No-one is pinning a guilty badge on him yet - but there sure as hell is no reason to be going around pinning ''innocent'' ones to him either
but as was discussed yesterday for a couple of pages, others have been, & convicted. Jeffries however had a similar 'hang him' pages set up on FB.
look on FB - there are thousands that have pinned him as guilty.All I & others are saying is, like you, wait until the trial to decide!
ali_kat said:
but as was discussed yesterday for a couple of pages, others have been, & convicted. Jeffries however had a similar 'hang him' pages set up on FB. look on FB - there are thousands that have pinned him as guilty.All I & others are saying is, like you, wait until the trial to decide!
Erm, I haven't put any theories up
I've said innocent until proven guilty, queried things that have been said as evidence now changed, confirmed points but no theories, other than I can't understand how a parent could do this to one of his child's friends & that was agreeing with someone else.
But no reasons based on inconclusive evidence.
I've said innocent until proven guilty, queried things that have been said as evidence now changed, confirmed points but no theories, other than I can't understand how a parent could do this to one of his child's friends & that was agreeing with someone else.
But no reasons based on inconclusive evidence.
rich1231 said:
ali_kat said:
but as was discussed yesterday for a couple of pages, others have been, & convicted. Jeffries however had a similar 'hang him' pages set up on FB. look on FB - there are thousands that have pinned him as guilty.All I & others are saying is, like you, wait until the trial to decide!
Plenty of comment, but no speculation as to his guilt or innocence.
ali_kat said:
TheSnitch said:
Jefferies was never charged, remember?
Here's the thing. Bridger has been charged. The CPS will not recommend charging him unless they believe there is sufficient evidence to have a realistic chance of a conviction. At the moment, however, he is charged with several offences, not guilty of them. That remains to be decided at his trial.
I am baffled by the need people have to start looking for other explanations and scenarios - it's only a step away from winding tinfoil around your head and gibbering about missiles and holographic planes imo.
Can't you just wait until the trial? You have no idea how much evidence they may already have. I think if it was my child I wouldn't be keen on people speculating that he ran her over and couldn't deal - especially not when witnesses saw her get into the car. No-one is pinning a guilty badge on him yet - but there sure as hell is no reason to be going around pinning ''innocent'' ones to him either
Here's the thing. Bridger has been charged. The CPS will not recommend charging him unless they believe there is sufficient evidence to have a realistic chance of a conviction. At the moment, however, he is charged with several offences, not guilty of them. That remains to be decided at his trial.
I am baffled by the need people have to start looking for other explanations and scenarios - it's only a step away from winding tinfoil around your head and gibbering about missiles and holographic planes imo.
Can't you just wait until the trial? You have no idea how much evidence they may already have. I think if it was my child I wouldn't be keen on people speculating that he ran her over and couldn't deal - especially not when witnesses saw her get into the car. No-one is pinning a guilty badge on him yet - but there sure as hell is no reason to be going around pinning ''innocent'' ones to him either
but as was discussed yesterday for a couple of pages, others have been, & convicted. Jeffries however had a similar 'hang him' pages set up on FB. look on FB - there are thousands that have pinned him as guilty.All I & others are saying is, like you, wait until the trial to decide!
I have restored my post in full. I felt that you cropped it in such a way as to alter the meaning of it entirely, and without indicating that you had cropped it, in order to make it look as if I was agreeing with you, when I certainly wasn't.
Not really sure why you have included a reference to FB and various ''hang him '' pages, as it has no relevance whatsoever to my post.
A couple of pages ago you appeared to me to be speculating on the case, saying that you couldn't find reasons why he would have done such a thing, and agreeing with another poster when they were suggesting other scenarios. That was exactly the kind of behaviour I was illustrating in the part of my post you saw fit to crop. Please don't. We are not in agreement, and I would rather you did not attempt to make it appear that we are.
TheSnitch said:
Sorry, but I find this answer rather disengenuous.
I have restored my post in full. I felt that you cropped it in such a way as to alter the meaning of it entirely, and without indicating that you had cropped it, in order to make it look as if I was agreeing with you, when I certainly wasn't.
Not really sure why you have included a reference to FB and various ''hang him '' pages, as it has no relevance whatsoever to my post.
A couple of pages ago you appeared to me to be speculating on the case, saying that you couldn't find reasons why he would have done such a thing, and agreeing with another poster when they were suggesting other scenarios. That was exactly the kind of behaviour I was illustrating in the part of my post you saw fit to crop. Please don't. We are not in agreement, and I would rather you did not attempt to make it appear that we are.
I have restored my post in full. I felt that you cropped it in such a way as to alter the meaning of it entirely, and without indicating that you had cropped it, in order to make it look as if I was agreeing with you, when I certainly wasn't.
Not really sure why you have included a reference to FB and various ''hang him '' pages, as it has no relevance whatsoever to my post.
A couple of pages ago you appeared to me to be speculating on the case, saying that you couldn't find reasons why he would have done such a thing, and agreeing with another poster when they were suggesting other scenarios. That was exactly the kind of behaviour I was illustrating in the part of my post you saw fit to crop. Please don't. We are not in agreement, and I would rather you did not attempt to make it appear that we are.
I haven't agreed with any scenarios, as I replied to Rich earlier, the only thing I've agreed with is a poster saying it is beyond my comprehension that a Father would do this to his daughter's classmate.I referred to FB because you said no one was pinning him as guilty, yet there are thousands of people doing just that on FB, which makes it relevant as your statement is incorrect. I also pointed out that there are people that have done time for crimes that they are innocent of, so CPS DO get things wrong.
I cropped your post in a fairly obvious way, not to make it look like you agreed with me, but to answer your Jeffries query & because I agreed with your last point.
I believe in innocent until proven guilty, and even that is not clear cut.
People speculate, that is human nature, most want to believe that others are not as evil as they are being made out to be.
ali_kat said:
TheSnitch said:
Sorry, but I find this answer rather disengenuous.
I have restored my post in full. I felt that you cropped it in such a way as to alter the meaning of it entirely, and without indicating that you had cropped it, in order to make it look as if I was agreeing with you, when I certainly wasn't.
Not really sure why you have included a reference to FB and various ''hang him '' pages, as it has no relevance whatsoever to my post.
A couple of pages ago you appeared to me to be speculating on the case, saying that you couldn't find reasons why he would have done such a thing, and agreeing with another poster when they were suggesting other scenarios. That was exactly the kind of behaviour I was illustrating in the part of my post you saw fit to crop. Please don't. We are not in agreement, and I would rather you did not attempt to make it appear that we are.
I have restored my post in full. I felt that you cropped it in such a way as to alter the meaning of it entirely, and without indicating that you had cropped it, in order to make it look as if I was agreeing with you, when I certainly wasn't.
Not really sure why you have included a reference to FB and various ''hang him '' pages, as it has no relevance whatsoever to my post.
A couple of pages ago you appeared to me to be speculating on the case, saying that you couldn't find reasons why he would have done such a thing, and agreeing with another poster when they were suggesting other scenarios. That was exactly the kind of behaviour I was illustrating in the part of my post you saw fit to crop. Please don't. We are not in agreement, and I would rather you did not attempt to make it appear that we are.
I haven't agreed with any scenarios, as I replied to Rich earlier, the only thing I've agreed with is a poster saying it is beyond my comprehension that a Father would do this to his daughter's classmate.I referred to FB because you said no one was pinning him as guilty, yet there are thousands of people doing just that on FB, which makes it relevant as your statement is incorrect. I also pointed out that there are people that have done time for crimes that they are innocent of, so CPS DO get things wrong.
I cropped your post in a fairly obvious way, not to make it look like you agreed with me, but to answer your Jeffries query & because I agreed with your last point.
I believe in innocent until proven guilty, and even that is not clear cut.
People speculate, that is human nature, most want to believe that others are not as evil as they are being made out to be.
This is what another poster had to say:
''Remember though those witnesses are also members of the public and my point about remembering how stupid they can be stands when dealing with what they saw.
I am not hanging the guy out to dry quite yet, I am sure he is involved and I am sure we will learn how involved in the fullness of time but I think he might also be uttery stupid and has done a stupid thing and tried to cover it up.
In a way I hope I am right, the idea of him taking the 5 year old playmate of his own kids from the street in his home town and killing her is a bit too nasty for me to understand, even accounting for stupidity.''
You then replied
''That's kinda summing up my thoughts & feelings, especially the bit I've put in bold''
( The bit you had put in bold was his last sentence)
So it certainly appeared that you were agreeing with speculation that he ''might also be uttery stupid and has done a stupid thing and tried to cover it up.''
As regards the FB reference, you introduced that. I was referring to PH, not to Facebook.
As regards this : ''People speculate, that is human nature, most want to believe that others are not as evil as they are being made out to be'' and reference to the fact that he was known to the family, maybe you need to do a bit of background reading? In cases like this, the overwhelming majority of murders are committed by either a family member or someone close to the family.
FFS - I was agreeing with the fact that witnesses can be unreliable (somethkng you said last night too!) & the bit in bold, which I have explained twice now, and yet you call me a liar 
I think you are being deliberately obtuse.
Yes, I did bring up FB because you said no one, not no one on PH
I think you are being deliberately obtuse.Yes, I did bring up FB because you said no one, not no one on PH
Edited by ali_kat on Sunday 7th October 14:46
ali_kat said:
FFS - I was agreeing with the fact that witnesses can be unreliable (somethkng you said last night too!) & the bit in bold, which I have explained twice now, and yet you call me a liar I think you are being deliberately obtuse.
Yes, I did bring up FB because you said no one, not no one on PH
Why don't you two take the childish squabble somewhere else? I think you are being deliberately obtuse.Yes, I did bring up FB because you said no one, not no one on PH
Edited by ali_kat on Sunday 7th October 14:46
ENOUGH Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff