Still think Two Tier justice does not exist?

[rubicustellitall]

Ricky Jones found not guilty..my flabber has never been so ghasted!
Anyone have any views..

How fucking dare you insinuate that those racist thugs who attempted to burn hotels full of people and drag people from cars just because they weren't white are representative of the working class!

Grow up.

Brilliant 🤣

I think that's unfair as not all right wing voters are racist.

Whilst that is true, it doesn't change the fact that there is a contingent of people whose racism has been emboldened by finding a party like Reform, or the New Tories who are openly and unashamedly racist. And are even as I type almost sexually aroused by feeling they can say "those people" and "you know - that lot" and claim "concern for women" which takes the curse of the fact that they really don't like foreigners.

I', hardly a cut and dyed leftie. I'm comfortable on that side, but it's full of some absolute hogwash. And by the same token there have been some great things done by the Tories in the past.

We return to the problem that in a world of finite parties, one will never find the perfect fit (even if you found your own party, as Farage is finding out). So some level of compromise is needed. For now, Labour are the least-worst option. Ideally with Reform and the New Conservatives scrapping over the extreme fringes of the electorate, the LibDems will sneak ahead. Especially if we have electoral reform to iron out the current dangers of FPTP.

The British working class have a long history of siding with minorities (it almost like an underclass can spot a kindred oppressed people).

From the mill workers who raised money for the former slaves (despite the fact the US civil war put them out of work), through the locals who fought the US Army at Bamber Bridge (in Yorkshire) during WW2 to the union members who came from all over the UK to support the immigrant workers at Grunwick.

These are the people that make up England and the English. And if they are happy to allow their name to be taken and perverted by a bunch of robber barons, then it would be a sorry way to end.

.

I think your let himself / herself down line in pp is a good one. That could work for both.

So you're engaging selectively with the facts that suit your narrative and choosing to disregard the facts that challenge your narrative. Can you see why people might take issue with this?

Works both ways, no?
People just completely denying there are any similarities and faux misunderstanding my point.

I’m not having someone put words in my mouth and ask me to argue a point I didn’t make.

I can’t help that people don’t understand the difference between alike and identical.

These objects are alike.

How so

They are both the same size, and both spheres.

But given that one is glass, and one is rubber, how are they alike.

Because they’re both balls.

You haven’t answered my question, how are they similar given one is glass and one is rubber.

I’m sure people might take issue that I refuse to engage in debate that glass is like rubber, but that’s their issue, not mine.

You re talking in riddles now.

I’m really not.

I’m taking the same logic and applying it to a less emotive subject, that’s all.

Of course there are similarities but so what?

Taking your analogy, what you seem to be saying is that the two balls are alike because they're both the same size and they're both spheres. So given that they're both alike in these ways, how can it be right that the outcomes were so different when the balls were dropped.

What we're saying is that the outcomes are different because of the differences between the balls. The glass one smashed because it was made of glass. The rubber one bounced because it was made of rubber.

Of course you're right that they are both balls, but you seem fixated on the superficial similarities and unwilling to engage with the fundamental differences which led to different outcomes.

Because people were literally denying there were any similarities?

I'm arguing that they're not similar and have explained why

I'm asking you, given the obvious differences, why they're similar

What am I supposed to say?
‘You’re right, there’s absolutely ZERO similarities, I don’t know what I was thinking?’

Come on

The issue with this is most can see the actions are similar.

Let's stay focused on your analogy of the balls.

Two balls were dropped. The glass one smashed and the rubber one bounced.

People are assessing why the outcomes were so different between the two balls.

Some people think the different outcomes are inexplicable, because the balls were both the same shape and size. They determine that there must be some sort of conspiracy afoot which caused one ball to smash when the other ball bounced.

Some people think it's pretty obvious that the differences between the balls - one being made of glass and the other being made of rubber - explain the different outcomes when they are dropped, and that no further explanation is needed.

Which camp would you be in and why?

The issue is that’s it’s peoples perception is that the balls were dropped from different heights.

So the rubber ball was dropped an inch off the floor, the glass one from 2 metres.

(Being refused bail etc).

Therefore they feel it was unfair before the smash/bounce even occurred - then the outcome fits with the perception they had at the drop - that it was unfair.

Ultimately, you could have two identical cases, which received different verdicts based different judges/juries. I’m not misunderstanding the point.

But if people genuinely feel like the balls were dropped from different heights, saying the glass one broke because it’s glass doesn’t do anything to make it feel less unjust.

There’s a good quote about justice being seen to be done, by the public that is. Not really mn threads although the yanbu vote is still higher.

One alleged case of calling for violence against people who put razors in stickers
Vs 100s of alleged racist and hate filled tweets over many months, even before the Stockport murders, then called for he murder of innocent people, based only on heir skin colour to burnt alive, together with the Government of the day, which she pleaded guilty too.

So no longer Alleged.

Very similar....

That makes no sense though. The rubber ball could have been dropped at twice the height of the glass ball, and it still wouldn't have smashed. Because rubber doesn't smash.

I do get it. You don't want to engage with the differences between the two cases because you are so invested in the narrative that it is unfair. I don't know why you're so invested in that narrative, but it is clearly getting in the way of your ability to engage with the facts.

We know that both individuals were initially remanded in custody, which suggests that both were initially denied bail. Lucy Connolly subsequently decided to plead guilty whereas Ricky Jones made the opposite decision. We really have no way of knowing whether Connolly would subsequently have been granted bail if she had plead not guilty and ended up waiting months for a trial. That's just a hypothetical question. I prefer to focus on facts.

I said 1 is similar to 2.

And it has been made clear to you, many times, why 1 is not similar to 2. So you are arguing from a false premise.

I perfectly understand the differences. Feel free to quote me if I’ve said there are none.

If you don’t understand why people are angry, then that’s you.

If someone understands the points, and disagrees, that’s one thing.

But if they genuinely don’t or won’t understand then there’s no point continuing

Here we go again.

If I say 1 is similar to 2, it means they share similarities. They can also share differences.

Those differences do not negate the similarities.
And vice versa

If I say 1 is identical to 2, that means there a no differences

Arguing I said 1 is identical to 2 is the false premise here.

Agreed, and FWIW I don't think Ricky Jones should have been found not guilty. But that's the risk you take with juries. There's no two tier justice here, there's different paths with different outcomes within the framework of the law as it is.

What people on this thread are complaining about is essentially that they don't like the current justice system. That's a fair enough opinion, other systems are available though none are ideal. So maybe they should stop whinging about how it's two tier (because it isn't) and start talking about how they'd like it changed...

I agree that's what he was doing

but why isn't that incitement? You'd have people assuming that people are NF and doing god knows what.

this verdict isn't right. It certainly isn't justice.

I know you didn't say they were identical. However, pp asked you in what ways you think the cases are similar and you haven't answered that question.