Author Topic: Silent Justice/ Internet Interceptors  (Read 51848 times)

Dash83

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 13
    • View Profile
Re: Silent Justice/ Internet Interceptors
« Reply #915 on: February 22, 2018, 08:18:29 PM »
Was Tony as vociferous in his support of the pursuit of priests? Iíve a vague memory of a thread suggesting not. Could be wrong

Tony Baloney

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13888
    • View Profile
Re: Silent Justice/ Internet Interceptors
« Reply #916 on: February 22, 2018, 08:31:22 PM »
Was Tony as vociferous in his support of the pursuit of priests? Iíve a vague memory of a thread suggesting not. Could be wrong
The children and their parents the main culprits.

Dash83

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 13
    • View Profile
Re: Silent Justice/ Internet Interceptors
« Reply #917 on: February 22, 2018, 08:43:26 PM »
I meant T Fearon by that. What do you mean by the kids and parents are the main culprits? Before I jump to the conclusion you meant the victims are to blame

Milltown Row2

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 18303
  • It was the Ref that did it!!
    • View Profile
Re: Silent Justice/ Internet Interceptors
« Reply #918 on: February 22, 2018, 08:54:29 PM »
Well they allowed the priests to rape them and ensured the parents were ok about it.... according to T
Anything I post is not the view of the County Board!! Nobody died in the making of this post ;-)

Dash83

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 13
    • View Profile
Re: Silent Justice/ Internet Interceptors
« Reply #919 on: February 22, 2018, 09:03:04 PM »
Of course, Iím up to speed. Cheers MR  ;)

T Fearon

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12605
    • View Profile
Re: Silent Justice/ Internet Interceptors
« Reply #920 on: February 22, 2018, 09:03:39 PM »
Complete bullshit.I merely queried one case where Sean Brady was hung drawn and quartered for not going to the Police while the parents of at least one of the victims also knew about the abuse but also did not go to the Police yet escaped censure.

Interesting to see here people condemning people who hunt down paedophiles yet condone the unwarranted the crucifixion of Sean Brady who never abused anyone

longballin

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2134
    • View Profile
Re: Silent Justice/ Internet Interceptors
« Reply #921 on: February 22, 2018, 09:27:32 PM »
Complete bullshit.I merely queried one case where Sean Brady was hung drawn and quartered for not going to the Police while the parents of at least one of the victims also knew about the abuse but also did not go to the Police yet escaped censure.

Interesting to see here people condemning people who hunt down paedophiles yet condone the unwarranted the crucifixion of Sean Brady who never abused anyone

Interesting to see you supporting loyalists with low IQs ruin any chance of convictions while supporting clergy who covered up for child rape.

Snapchap

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 196
    • View Profile
Re: Silent Justice/ Internet Interceptors
« Reply #922 on: February 22, 2018, 10:28:05 PM »
Why did a BBC reporter turn up uninvited and unannounced at a private law abiding citizen's home? No wonder the guy was upset and lost it

The BBC reporter may have tirned up uninvited amd unannounced but that is not illegal by any stretch of the imagination. Nor was is against journalistic regulations. So given that he broke no rules or laws, then the abusive reaction by the group was utterly over the top and by and rational standards, broke several laws. Now given those facts, is it fair to assume you no longer support that particular group since you stated yourself that you would only support them 'so long as they acted within the law'?

In your own time there, Tony.

If a BBC reporter and camera crew turned up at your house out of the blue would you be happy,unless it's a stunt on Michael Mc Intyre's show
1. If a BBC reporter and camera crew turned up at your house out of the blue and acted entirely lawfully, would you feel you have the right to break the law in response?
2. You clearly stated that you supported these groups "so long as they act within the law". Given that this group quite clearly broke several laws in response to them being 'unhappy' at something, is it not fair to assume that either you no longer support the group in question or else you were lying in saying your support was conditional on their law abiding behaviour?

Once again... in your own time, Tony.

I know I said 'in your own time' but let's not take the mickey here. Any chance of an answer or two?

Grow a pair and answer,Tony ffs.

RedHand88

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 962
    • View Profile
Re: Silent Justice/ Internet Interceptors
« Reply #923 on: February 22, 2018, 11:40:05 PM »
He was a big man for setting you up with a dodgy sky box too it seems...

smelmoth

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 972
    • View Profile
Re: Silent Justice/ Internet Interceptors
« Reply #924 on: February 23, 2018, 12:21:52 PM »
The fact is the police have done feck all to intercept these pedophiles. The set-ups to trap the pedophiles don't appear to be that complicated. If those self-publicist morons can  trap a pedophile and come close to doing it to a legal compliant standard, then why can't the police? Let me guess, they have not the resources or the will?
The police have now finally examined 15 of the 115 cases dropped onto their desk and we are told the cases are not 100% perfect.Well, stop the lights.
Now, they blame the hunters for not being able to prosecute those fiends.
I suspect the police would go out of their way to find fault in those 15 cases before being embarrassed by a bunch of self-publicist nutcases doing the work they should be doing.
The focus should be put on the police  to get up of their backsides and do the hunting on behalf of the community and quit deflecting blame onto the vigilante hunters.

That would appear to be a loose grasp on "fact"

What you mean by a legally compliant standard? What is your view on entrapment in a UK court? Get your head around that and you won't have to guess.


smelmoth

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 972
    • View Profile
Re: Silent Justice/ Internet Interceptors
« Reply #925 on: February 23, 2018, 12:24:11 PM »
I have watched many videos of stings.What exactly do people find objectionable? Any I've seen the person caught is obviously guilty. They are subjected to an aggressive humiliation,but hell slap it up them.The Police are informed and invariably arrive,there is no physical threat to the person caught unless he tries to do a runner.What is so objectionable? Do you object to the cops ramming suspected drug dealers doors? Or the showing of images on Crimewatch?

Would you find it objectionable if a  paedophile is outed by these guys, escapes prosecution because the hunters have prejudiced evidence and the paedophile goes to ground and pops up elsewhere and abuses there?

You mean after the Hunters as is customary,told the Police? Yes I would find it objectionable and would blame the useless police and rotten legal system that is unfit for purpose.

So when someone prejudices evidence it's the police's fault for not securing a conviction. Your stupidity is limitless.

The consequence of displacing the offender so they can offend elsewhere having covered their tracks is acceptable in your world. Your inanity and failure to grasp cause and effect is limitless

Still no answers from Tony. Just more of his moronic sputterings



T Fearon

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12605
    • View Profile
Re: Silent Justice/ Internet Interceptors
« Reply #928 on: February 24, 2018, 03:09:09 PM »
Answers to what?

thebar

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 263
    • View Profile
Re: Silent Justice/ Internet Interceptors
« Reply #929 on: February 24, 2018, 03:37:45 PM »
Answers to what?
Go have a nice evening with the woman fella