@toocold54
Your post was deleted @toocold54 because you persisted in making specific allegations about an active case, and you still are, albeit more obliquely.
It wasn’t me that brought up the case!
It was someone else and others were agreeing. Which is why I had an issue with them spreading false information about an active case - it’s funny how no one had an issue with others bringing the case up but as soon as someone said other relevant things about it which didn’t fit your narrative then posts started to get deleted and posters have an issue with the content.
The reasons I am talking about the case obliquely is to explain myself without doing anything ‘wrong’. You are also speaking about it.
These threads are funny. Surely these are meant to be forums that you can discuss and hold your own opinions. It seems some are you either hold the same opinion as everyone else or you don’t get a voice. I haven’t done anything that other posters haven’t.
If you can't see the difference between mentioning a case using information that is in the public domain and you asserting that
we know 'X' did this (hence asserting the guilt of 'X' prior to the case) then I can't help you.
The only one here spreading false and prejudicial information is you.
Surely these are meant to be forums that you can discuss and hold your own opinions.
Yes they are, and yes you can. What you cannot do is assert as fact something that is subject to be determined in a Court of Law.
It seems some are you either hold the same opinion as everyone else or you don’t get a voice
Rubbish. As has been explained repeatedly to you, you cannot assert as fact, (not opinion), something that is subject to a hearing in a Court of Law to determine said fact.
I haven’t done anything that other posters haven’t.
Yes you have hence your posts being deleted and not only is he did it too a very childish defence it is wholly inaccurate in your case.