Dreadlock wrote:Define "win".
Dean Clifford recently spent a couple of weeks in jail but all proceedings against him were stayed. It was the Crown's way of not fighting a case they knew they would loose, without
having to admit defeat.
Is that a win? I'd say yes.
I'd have to disagree with Mog. Any act of Parliament is most definitely not law - they are just acts and no man is responsible for the acts of another, regardless as to how many numpties in Parliament are doing the acting. Current legislation is not the law and I don't give a toss what it says. As for juries, give me a break. The average Joe Bloggs doesn't have a clue about the things we talk about on this fourm - there's no way I'd want 12 brainwashed muppets deciding my fate. I'd rather deal with a bunch of corrupt judges who at least know and understand what is going on.
Though occasionally you can beat them at their own game, it is far better to refuse to play the game in the first place.
do I really need to define "win" ?, I thought it was self evident at least in layman’s terms what I mean when I ask for evidence of a "win" ?
I wondered if or when somebody would bring up the Dean Clifford show, and jump on the band wagon of “you see he won, they stayed the proceedings”?
for a start he was locked up for more than a couple of weeks, and granted it's been claimed the charges were stayed, this is not unusual, for someone to be put in a cage and made to suffer at the their pleasure, only for the case to be dropped afterwards, they got the result they wanted, without having to go through due process, and that is likely why they decided to avoid a circus, than continue with the prosecution.
This does not prove Dean was right or he won anything, it did not stop them locking him up, or ignoring due process, his alleged constitutional rights? Or anything he had to bark at them during the alleged hearings.
So is that the message being spouted then? You will only be thrown in a cage for a few months, but in the end they may drop the case? so there you go you “a win”, answer me this what exactly did he win ?.
maybe the rest of us, would sooner not get locked up or be stupid enough to put ourselves in that situation to begin with, I mean think about it, did he really have to create such that situation in the first place, because he wanted to prove something ?, what did he expect, by telling a cop to F-off ?. you’re dealing with violent psychopaths, do you think a cop is just going to walk away after being spoken to in such a way ?, of course not, they will either physically attack you, usually with a weapon or torture devise or call for back up so they can do the same thing at no risk to themselves.
So what do you think is going to happen in reality? he turned what was otherwise just a cop acting like a typical bullyboy, and created a situation that escalated into having been thrown in a cage for a few months, if he had played it smart he could have just taken the ticket, gone to court, and beat it that way, and proved he was right.
But he in reality proved nothing more than these people are violent thugs, and nothing he had to say about his “rights” the “constitution” or “trusts” meant jack shit.
It made no difference
I listened to one of the interviews he did, shortly after getting out and I found he was talking complete bull.
Not only did he say he wanted people to stop asking him for proof, because his release from prison, was basically all the evidence he thinks he needs now, but he came across as an egotistical and childish idiot, he was even condoning violence by macho his bragging, and posturing about how he “owned the cop”, and “how lucky he was to have his teeth still intact, among other stupid comments he made.
This is not somebody I want to be associated or labelled along with, when they talk crap like that.