Blog powered by Typepad

« Which of the four lying liars will you believe? | Main | One of Schrodinger's cats is out of the box! »

Friday, 05 October 2007


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Curious, Mr Duff, that you see fit to label these events as "murders", when in none (?) of these cases have there been a conviction, in many no charges have been laid, and in others, no arrests even made?

Surely the term "murder" becomes appropriate only after a trial and due process?

"Surely the term "murder" becomes appropriate only after a trial and due process?"

Well, obviously - that's why people are charged with 'I can't believe it's not murder' when they come to court, and not just 'murder'.....

The Stupid, it is strong in this one.


noun the unlawful premeditated killing of one person by another.

verb kill unlawfully and with premeditation.

I'm embarrassed for you, Mr. Gooseburger, but thankfully Julia was at hand to administer your daily dose of three and one half brain cells without which you would cease to function.

Incidentally, I recently had reason to inquire at your blog because of the mysterious disappearance of one of your posts. Now it has happened again. I'm sure I read this morning an opinion by you, based as your McCann opinions are based, on nothing so tedious as actual evidence, insinuating what I think you called a "scam" involving the theft, the insurance claim and now the recovery of the da Vinci painting stolen from the Duke of Buccleuch. Did you hear from Messrs. Whyte, Lippe and Tremblin acting on behalf of quite properly enraged litigants; or was it that you heard the news that four men had been arrested for the theft and that therefor your claim that "For my own part, I (together with many many others) instinctively know when something is wrong" was, er, wrong?

Or perhaps it was just a personal example of your favourite aphorism "a man of your evident intelligence lacks the perception skills to recognise a duck when it quacks, flaps, waddles and swims like a duck."

In English law, murder is considered the most serious form of homicide where one person kills another either intending to cause death or intending to cause serious injury in a situation where death is virtually certain.

See also Manslaughter.

Mr Duff

JuliaM's grasp of my point would appear to be considerably less than her grasp of the English language:

The Stupid, it is strong in this one.


She might do better than confine herself to reading and commenting on blogs only from whatever Dago/Kraut/Eyetie/Eskimo/Whatever 4th world badland she comes from.

You make quite a pair, actually.

My point, Mr Duff (and perhaps this is just me being picky - and if it is, then you should be able to take it, as well as give it) - is that these "murders" to which you refer, may result only in Inquests or Court cases which return verdicts of "unlawful killing", "manslaughter" and possibly even "accidental death".

It is not until the Coroners or Criminal courts return their verdicts that you might correctly ascribe these incidents as "murder".

Do you see?

To which I would add:

I have removed from my blog the post relating to the good Duke(s) of Buccleuch for one reason only; to allow Postman Patel the scoop, on the basis that he is a) way better informed than you or I, and b) he is a far more compelling and entertaining writer than myself.

It's called knowing your place, Mr Duff.

Mr Goosemeatball is not a 'Star Wars' fan I see, or he might have recognised my paraphrasing of Yoda. Ah well, everyone's a critic... :)

"...whatever Dago/Kraut/Eyetie/Eskimo/Whatever 4th world badland she comes from."

Shocking, the views some of these unenlightened bloggers have...!

"...perhaps this is just me being picky..."

Hmm, not the word I'd have chosen. Try 'wilfully ignorant'.

I think, Julia, it was "picky" with the silent 'r'!

Mr. Gooseburger, as I have made abundantly clear on several occasions, I have no interest, beyond contempt, for the semantic equivocations of the feebler elements who have infested the practice of law in this country for the last 50 years. I am quite clear what I mean by the term 'murder', and as this is my blog, my terms apply.

I see from your comment that it was not, after all, a sense of personal shame for having made yet another vile and baseless accusation of criminality that caused you to withdraw your putrid insinuations. Thank 'goodness' for that, at least you're consistent.

I know nothing about the law and I don't want to know - it sounds complicated, and might conflict with my childishly simplistic worldview.

I'll continue to crowbar the square shape of reality into the circular hole of my know-nothing resentment until the cows come home, because it's much easier and more satisfying than undertaking actual research.

'NIB' (for I suspect it is he), by "research" do you mean, say, compiling a day-by-day, detailed, statistical list of murders in this country over a year? That sort of thing ...?

You mean that reading, considering and understanding law and criminal justice is more complicated than typing "murder" into the search box on the BBC website?

Why, I don't think I like the sound of that - I'd far rather keep the conversation within my own terms of reference, whereby I don't actually have to deal with reality in any way.

"'NIB' (for I suspect it is he)"

Nope - wrong.

Not *really* the best thread to be making your 'suspicions' public, is it Commissar Duff?

So in contradiction to your earlier remark, I *am* doing research but not the research that *you* think I should do which will, I suspect, lead to the conclusions that *you* believe in.

Apologies, 'NIB', but he employed your irrelevant smart-arse style, er, nut not nearly as well as you!

I'm off for the rest of the day.

Apology accepted - in fact, I think I'm going to print it out and frame it.

a day-by-day, detailed, statistical list of murders

David you owe me a new computer-keyboard - I've just spat coffee all over mine, thanks to this.

Why, Larry, did I say something ...?

Well, "day-by-day", "detailed", "statistical", and "murders" each strike me as entirely inaccurate.

Which just leaves us with "a list". I suppose I can't quibble with that, though it's certainly not the noun I'd have chosen to describe this little game of yours...

I second Teabag on that.

Not for the first time, Dr. 'Teabag', I have difficulty understanding you. My murder stats are taken daily, they are as detailed as possible within the constraints of time and space with sex, age, location and cause of death, they are statistical in that I add them up (one of the few mathematical skills I mastered) and finally, they are without any shadow of a doubt - murders, that is, they are deaths caused by people with malice or as a result of illegal behaviour. You might care to join the pox doctors' clerks who infest the legal fraternity and come up up with some mitigating names for it, but I'm an old-fashioned chap who likes to stick to traditional words and their traditional meanings.

But let me disabuse you of any notion that my 'research' is a "game". On the contrary, I am deadly (no pun intended) serious. In four and a half months the pile of dead bodies already exceeds that for the whole of 1960. Unlike the 'liberalocracy', I think that is a fact that should be clearly understood and publicised because it indicates a problem. The 'liberalocracy' resolutely refuses to acknowledge that any problem exists which is understandable because were they to do so they might have to consider some repugnent (to them!) solutions.

Mr. Gooseburger, you have indeed 'seconded' the good Doctor's comment which is entirely right and proper, you being by nature, second-rate!

Mr Duff, you surprise me.

There was I thinking you only did "superior".

Never knew you did "smug" too.

"they are as detailed as possible within the constraints of time and space"

Now let's look at these constraints:

Time - you're retired, you have all the time in the world (or at least you would have if you didn't spend so much of it either poncing around playing the thesp in Twickenham or trawling round blogs adding snide comments under jokes you didn't understand in the first place).

Space - this is a blog, so extra space is free.

And anyway, you were content to publish a couple of numbers each week before someone (*cough*) nagged you. Oh, and still no links...

Care to tell us what the point of all this is yet, David? Don't make>ask you 25 times again.

Sorry, Mr. Hosehorse, I'm far too modest to have a point, I leave that to my erudite readers who may, and usually do, make of my scribblings what they will. Perhaps you should address yourself to my post above entitled "The morgues are overflowing and the liberals are beginnig to catch a whiff!"

The comments to this entry are closed.