On May 5, 10:29=A0pm, Periander <4rubb...@britwar.co.uk> wrote:
> "Janitor of Lunacy" wrote innews:RaHTj.15103$6a2.8901@n=
ewsfe17.ams2:
>
>
>
> > "Noel O'Gara" wrote in message
> > news:187130fa-f8c7-4c57-bcec-
>
> fc6847919...@a1g2000hsb.googlegroups.com..
>
>
>
>
>
> > . On May 5, 9:32 am, =AEi=A9ardo wrote:
> >> frediesm...@googlemail.com wrote:
> >> > On May 5, 1:53 am, "Noel O'Gara" wrote:
>
> >> >> The judge who presided over that case must be some plank but that
> >> >> doesnt surprise me having seen some British judges in action in
> >> >> the recent case of Ronald Castree
>
> >> > Hey Noel why is everyone a plank who disagrees with you...you
> >> > genius you.
>
> >> Well, at least the judge would have a role to play at a board
> >> meeting.
>
> >> --
> >> Moving things in still pictures!
>
> > -the todal periander and cynic seem to have shut up.
> > -maybe they have reread the reports.
>
> > Or have finally realised that you're a rubbish-spouting waste of
> > space?
>
> FFS, not that I am particularly bothered either way but I have read the
> actual judgement, as I pointed out to you on your last reply to one of
> my posts I am not content to let the bbc do my thinking for me. You it
> would appear are.
>
> The URL to the actual judgement has been posted twice, as I invited you
> to do before, feel free to read it, I'm sure someone will help you with
> any long words you don't understand.
>
> --
> Regards or otherwise,
>
> Periander- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
presumably that means you wouldnt look at the BBC reports and their
videos showing expert witnesses?
By the way I have read that judgment you refer to. Its only half the
story.
|