Discussion
Smollet said:
George Smiley said:
NoNeed said:
I don't think anybody else has ever had the same efeect on me as Owen,When he is angry (even that fake outrage) it makes me smile or even laugh, every single time.
Is it just me?
NoIs it just me?
k for that
thought there was something wrong for a minute 
NoNeed said:
Smollet said:
George Smiley said:
NoNeed said:
I don't think anybody else has ever had the same efeect on me as Owen,When he is angry (even that fake outrage) it makes me smile or even laugh, every single time.
Is it just me?
NoIs it just me?
k for that thought there was something wrong for a minute NoNeed said:
I don't think anybody else has ever had the same efeect on me as Owen,When he is angry (even that fake outrage) it makes me smile or even laugh, every single time.
Is it just me?
nope. i find him hilarious, i can't understand why some seem to get wound up by him. i am a small scotsman, i can do angry as well as anyone, but watching jones faux outrage only makes me laugh.Is it just me?
i'm pretty sure if he was ranting and punching me in the face at the same time it would bring on a genuine roll on the floor while pissing myself laughing moment.
R Mutt said:
I love the idea of such people lurking on here. Except I can imagine, despite this place being quite balanced, it being held up among Guardian readers as some sort of Alt-Right outpost of the dark web.
Although I don't think he posts, he's such a narcisist it wouldn't surprise me at all if he has read this and other threads mentioning him
BlackLabel said:
I'd better be careful what I say here but while I get the violent disorder angle, the ABH dimension seems a bit OTT: ABH is normally only charged if the injuries are deemed serious. In practice, this may be the case if injuries require a number of stitches or a hospital procedure under anaesthetic. The maximum prison sentence for an assault resulting in ABH is five years. So it's quite serious. A few years ago I was attacked by a drug addled yoot in Islington and was badly injured enough to be hospitalised and to have had a couple of stitches in my scalp and blood drained from my eye socket. The CPS didn't feel that that damage was enough to justify an ABH charge. I've seen absolutely nothing from OJ's accounts of the incident to suggest he suffered anything near such serious injuries.
I really do hope that the Met isn't bowing to political pressure yet again. The obvious danger is that the only conclusion to draw if this is indeed another politicised inquiry is that the next time the thugs might as well give their victim a really thorough going-over as they'll have the book thrown at them, regardless, if that victim is an influential leftie.
psi310398 said:
I'd better be careful what I say here but while I get the violent disorder angle, the ABH dimension seems a bit OTT: ABH is normally only charged if the injuries are deemed serious. In practice, this may be the case if injuries require a number of stitches or a hospital procedure under anaesthetic. The maximum prison sentence for an assault resulting in ABH is five years. So it's quite serious.
A few years ago I was attacked by a drug addled yoot in Islington and was badly injured enough to be hospitalised and to have had a couple of stitches in my scalp and blood drained from my eye socket. The CPS didn't feel that that damage was enough to justify an ABH charge. I've seen absolutely nothing from OJ's accounts of the incident to suggest he suffered anything near such serious injuries.
I really do hope that the Met isn't bowing to political pressure yet again. The obvious danger is that the only conclusion to draw if this is indeed another politicised inquiry is that the next time the thugs might as well give their victim a really thorough going-over as they'll have the book thrown at them, regardless, if that victim is an influential leftie.
i kinda get what you are saying regarding the severity of the charge but i would expect it to be reduced by the time the case actually gets to court. i am glad they have caught them as i strongly suspect the type that would assault owen jones would also be the type to start on anyone for looking at their "bird" or just looking at them the wrong way.A few years ago I was attacked by a drug addled yoot in Islington and was badly injured enough to be hospitalised and to have had a couple of stitches in my scalp and blood drained from my eye socket. The CPS didn't feel that that damage was enough to justify an ABH charge. I've seen absolutely nothing from OJ's accounts of the incident to suggest he suffered anything near such serious injuries.
I really do hope that the Met isn't bowing to political pressure yet again. The obvious danger is that the only conclusion to draw if this is indeed another politicised inquiry is that the next time the thugs might as well give their victim a really thorough going-over as they'll have the book thrown at them, regardless, if that victim is an influential leftie.
wc98 said:
i kinda get what you are saying regarding the severity of the charge but i would expect it to be reduced by the time the case actually gets to court. i am glad they have caught them as i strongly suspect the type that would assault owen jones would also be the type to start on anyone for looking at their "bird" or just looking at them the wrong way.
As I understand it I doubt 'Looking at their bird' would be a factor here...psi310398 said:
BlackLabel said:
I'd better be careful what I say here but while I get the violent disorder angle, the ABH dimension seems a bit OTT: ABH is normally only charged if the injuries are deemed serious. In practice, this may be the case if injuries require a number of stitches or a hospital procedure under anaesthetic. The maximum prison sentence for an assault resulting in ABH is five years. So it's quite serious. A few years ago I was attacked by a drug addled yoot in Islington and was badly injured enough to be hospitalised and to have had a couple of stitches in my scalp and blood drained from my eye socket. The CPS didn't feel that that damage was enough to justify an ABH charge. I've seen absolutely nothing from OJ's accounts of the incident to suggest he suffered anything near such serious injuries.
I really do hope that the Met isn't bowing to political pressure yet again. The obvious danger is that the only conclusion to draw if this is indeed another politicised inquiry is that the next time the thugs might as well give their victim a really thorough going-over as they'll have the book thrown at them, regardless, if that victim is an influential leftie.
Let's see what they get charged with and/or if the CPS decide to go ahead.
psi310398 said:
BlackLabel said:
I'd better be careful what I say here but while I get the violent disorder angle, the ABH dimension seems a bit OTT: ABH is normally only charged if the injuries are deemed serious. In practice, this may be the case if injuries require a number of stitches or a hospital procedure under anaesthetic. The maximum prison sentence for an assault resulting in ABH is five years. So it's quite serious. A few years ago I was attacked by a drug addled yoot in Islington and was badly injured enough to be hospitalised and to have had a couple of stitches in my scalp and blood drained from my eye socket. The CPS didn't feel that that damage was enough to justify an ABH charge. I've seen absolutely nothing from OJ's accounts of the incident to suggest he suffered anything near such serious injuries.
I really do hope that the Met isn't bowing to political pressure yet again. The obvious danger is that the only conclusion to draw if this is indeed another politicised inquiry is that the next time the thugs might as well give their victim a really thorough going-over as they'll have the book thrown at them, regardless, if that victim is an influential leftie.
ABH is pretty common stuff.
Vanden Saab said:
wc98 said:
i kinda get what you are saying regarding the severity of the charge but i would expect it to be reduced by the time the case actually gets to court. i am glad they have caught them as i strongly suspect the type that would assault owen jones would also be the type to start on anyone for looking at their "bird" or just looking at them the wrong way.
As I understand it I doubt 'Looking at their bird' would be a factor here...Not his "mates" surely? Please let it be so.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff