Snoopy: Now that you've stereotyped Americans saying they sue for every little thing, I'm going to notify my attorney and you will be served shortly. I don't want to... but someone has to pay for that

(V): And from what I remember of my law classes at college, if someone breaks a leg, etc on the paths then the council is liable and can be sued. I remember this as my tutor sued the council over lack of maintenance regarding a broken paving slab that resulted in her breaking her ankle... she won.


i think were talking about very different issues here
firstly falling on a pavement due to lack of maintenance
is alot easier to prove has all you need do is take a pic of offending pavement and a hospital report and most councils pay up because they dont want the aggro of going to court
but theres still a lot of ppl who will do nothing and put it down to bad luck

geesh you keep telling everyone how much better the UK is from the rest of the world
yet if im reading you right your planning to sue your local council for not gritting a pavement
IMO if ppl start doing that we be even more in line with Americans who sue for any little thing

i think you find it very hard to prove in a court of law

(V): this is from my local council and i would think that most others follow these guidelines over gritting pavements

http://www.stockton.gov.uk/help/cfyafaqs/gritfaqs/pedestrianroutes/

(V): but you confuse me yet again because i thought in your eyes the councils and police etc can do no wrong

(V): and i also remember a case where someone sued the householder because they had cleared the pavement outside there house and someone had slipped the next morning on the ice that formed overnight
so its a no winner has far has im concerned

councils do grit round the homes of the elderly least they do in the NE

Snoopy: Not a case of clearing, just gritting them.

And from what I remember of my law classes at college, if someone breaks a leg, etc on the paths then the council is liable and can be sued. I remember this as my tutor sued the council over lack of maintenance regarding a broken paving slab that resulted in her breaking her ankle... she won.

(V): if the mod of the board thinks there is a good reason to remove the link im sure he will

(V): but has every council in the country is facing major cuts its goes without saying that having salt spread on footpaths is way down the list
surely its better spend on keeping the roads running free

i dont think clearing snow from footpaths is a good idea anyway unless said pavement is going to dry very quickly
which is very unlikely with this cold weather because next day it be a skating ring twice has bad

(V): you mean like this


http://petitions.number10.gov.uk/

Does anyone know (in the UK) how to start up a petition? This is in regards to the councils lack of concern to the dangerous conditions of the paths. They consider making paths safe for people to walk on a low priority!!

Snoopy: Yes.. but I didn't want to put the link up because of the way some of the civilians expressed their disgust language wise!!

(V): oh you mean this one
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sFC8mNdxV0c&feature=related

Snoopy: True... but it looked like (from the video) and comments that the detective was in his vehicle and got stuck in the snow whilst passing a snowball fight where everyone was just having fun with fresh snow.

I saw an incident last year where a soldier faced off some kids throwing snowballs at cars. The soldier just asked them to own up and stop it. When they didn't own up, he just called them cowards.

(V): or on the other hand it can be snow with rocks in
or snow with ice in so its not cool to have snowballs thrown at you for nothing

To see a policeman pull out a gun over a snowball fight is why we need to remember police are human and can err.

Yet in a UK similar incident.. the police join in the fun and throw snowballs back at the hoodies... It's just snow.

I see the climate conference has not control law.. well, there is always the idea of using SO2 as a cooling agent.

Snoopy: Not me carrying it on.

(V): thinking it was you who is replying to every post saying nothing new
same old same old that is dragging the subject on

Snoopy: And? I was replying originally to Czuch about any new news.. Not my problem that others on this board are dragging the subject on. We could all just wait till the IPCC inquiry is finished if you'd like and all stop having an opinion.

Artful Dodger: Makes a change!!

But as such going on about being arrested whilst armed is a different matter to a man with hands in his pocket being shoved/assaulted from behind.

that also is the opinion seemingly of the IPCC and the family lawyer.

(V): geesh that's old news we knew that in April/May
so has ive been saying for LAST 2 DAYS
we still have NO new evidence on the subject
all your ranting on about was disclosed to everyone in April/May

Snoopy:

......"The second examination was carried out by Dr Nat Carey, one of Britain's most eminent forensic pathologists, on behalf of the IPCC.

Mr Tomlinson's family solicitor, Jules Carey, said: "The video footage of the unprovoked and vicious assault on Ian by the police officer would easily justify charges of assault being brought against the officer. The findings of Dr. Nat Carey significantly increase the likelihood that the officer will now face the more serious charge of manslaughter".

"The family have been aware of the findings of the second pathology report for a week and have had to endure the holding back of this information despite continuing reports in the press that Ian died of a heart attack.

"The IPCC opposed the disclosure of Dr Carey's findings until they satisfied themselves that it would not prejudice their investigation of the officer. It is of some comfort to the family that the record is now being put straight, but they hope that the IPCC investigation will be expedited and thorough, and that there will be a prompt referral to the CPS for charge."

Paul King, Mr Tomlinson's stepson, said: "First we were told that there had been no contact with the police, then we were told that he died of a heart attack; now we know that he was violently assaulted by a police officer and died from internal bleeding. As time goes on we hope that the full truth about how Ian died will be made known". "

Is that better...

(V): did i ask for examples NOPE I DIDN'T

Snoopy: No.. I'm using examples of people having opinions. You think the Iraq/Afghan wars are wrong... isn't that an opinion as the inquiries ain't over yet.

By your words.. that's wrong!!

(V): and it better if you stuck to the subject in hand instead of trying to be clever all the time bringing things up to twist it to suit yourself

(V): here we go again changing the subject to suit yourself
ITS POINTLESS trying to have a argument with you you either change the subject or you twist things round to suit yourself HAS PER NORMAL

Artful Dodger: Yawn Be better if you didn't C&P

Snoopy: ... So? that he's not been charged means nothing.

Like with the Iraq inquiry.. not over, but many including relatives of the soldiers have an opinion. Are you saying they are wrong to have an opinion? Wrong to think it was a bad war?

When the Nimrod's started blowing up.. relatives had an idea something was wrong, and since then the evidence has proven they were right to suspect a MOD mess up.

(V): key words in that sentence UNDER SUSPICION
funny how 9 months down the line he hasnt been charged
and dont try and be clever everyone in the UK who gets a newspaper read the same flaming news DOH!!!

still isnt concrete evidence is it DOH!!!

Snoopy: Maybe I read the paper reports that say the policeman involved has been questioned under suspicion of manslaughter.

My bad, I read the news!!

(V): you didnt answer my question has per normal

Btw.. it wasn't a heart attack...

It was according to the second examination...."abdominal haemorrhage"

(V): apart from the 1 min video what other evidence have you for such claims
NONE whats so ever

Snoopy: People do though.. It's part of human nature.

(V): and has i said on the first day when the inquiry has finished i make my mind up
i dont like ppl who speculate on something they really know nothing about

Snoopy: The police still do not have the right to attack people from behind. Most would consider that cowardly, or at least taking out one's tension on another party beside those winding you up.

I spoke to an police inspector at the time of that event and he said it was wrong.

Czuch: First time you've seen it!!

Manslaughter.. not murder.

Artful Dodger: I'm not being dishonest... I'm asking a question/making a statement based on your posts.

Get over it!!

Bernice: still all speculation

has ive said since DAY 1 until all the facts are known before making a judgement

Jules wasnt there on that day so how can he possible know all the facts
there are hundreds of questions that need answering and until they are
Jules can only speculate that said policeoffericer should be charged with manslaughter

Snoopy: (V) knows the true story....just ask him ROFLMBO

Artful Dodger: at last someone else sees what i see
2 sides to the story

until all the evidence is laid out before the public i dont see how anyone can say this police officer should be charged with anything
he was doing his job in a very heated situtation
there was alot of anger on both sides of the coin that day
and until we know what was said by both parties
how can we possible know who was in the wrong

Bernice: He is not banned on this board nor does he have any site restrictions that I can see.
I removed aprox. 25 post as I described below that I would

Subject: just a question to the MODS??

in the BIG post of Starsky there is the following:-

Messages per page:
List of discussion boards
You are not allowed to post messages because you have been banned by BrainKing.com administrator.
Mode: Everyone can post
Search in posts:

***
how can he post if he isnt allowed to and has been hidden by the Brainking.com administrator??


also the post has now disappeared....all we have to do is findout who is banned by the Brainking.com administrator and we will know who it is. me thinks the person concerned copy/pasted to the wrong account, and then realised they were banned and reposted it, but missed the bit about being banned.....just a theory.

If anybody has a problem with a post, the best way to handle it is to bring it up to me or another global moderator, and put the person who offends you on hide

Please keep the conversation on topic, do not get personal or flame, failure to do so will result in posts having to be approved for a while.

Also don't be upset if some messages dissapear, I think I need to clan it up a little, except for the ducky song of coarse

ok. LOL

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QsjbEWKK8AU&feature=related

Pedro Martínez: hahahahahaha....oh that is too funny...

Artful Dodger: hot as hades here.......
wish it would rain, we have had no REAL rain since last May....everything is dead :(

Today is Monday isnt it or could it be Tuesday? in Australia anyway ROFLMBO

(V): Thanks for the link... thats the first time i have seen it, and it more than confirms what I was thinking... the guy was being obstinate, he was purposely obstructing their policing duties, maybe they could have simply wasted more time and effort, and arrested this guy, but they just wanted him to move along, as everyone else was doing.

It is also obvious that this shove in the back is not what killed him, as he got up and walked away on his own afterward... really? If you have contact with the police and end up having a heart attack later, its police murder???

The guy was far from "minding his own business"

btw, here in the US, we respect the police, and once you choose to ignore any command they give you, no matter what your personal feelings are about the command, you obay it, and when you dont, then anything that happens to you after this is all your own fault. You can always after the fact make some action if you think what they did was wrong, but if they tell you to get out of the way, for any reason, you take your hands out of your pockets and you move out of the way

These police will never be charged with murder, as you would have them