portlock seagull
Well-known member
- Jul 28, 2003
- 17,666
It seems that one or two people have had one quick look at the vid (or none) and have launched into a game of hypotheticals, and pontification, based upon guesswork, what they have learned about the laws from a flatmate or someone down the pub, and then run with it like it is a discussion about whether or not Skalak can do anything more than cross the ball. FFS - look at the video again a few times, engage the brain, and take note - through a desire to cause serious injury or merely through the sort of 'instinct' that has the odd person pushing glasses into people's faces in a wine bar (other news, passim), someone's life was put deliberately at risk. It may or may not be hard to prove the point in court (especially if there is a jury and it is populated by likeminded 'only need one look and I can make up my mind' types) but, FFS, sometimes I can't believe the stuff I read on here
This this and this again. I truly worry what planet people are on, the sort of rationale being offered up on here is why evil *******s get off Scott free on numerous occasions. Why are SO many people's brains wired SO utterly wrongly? That question to any of the joggers defendants seeking to explain away how this might have accidentally happened? Sake...