Graham Dwyer Verdict..

[fed up]

He didn't read my dinner invitation did he!

 

[SoundMan]

The law’s the law. It has to be done correctly and fairly. It makes no difference whether you or I agree with it or not, as we aren’t responsible for setting down those laws that are to be followed.

"The law's the law" is a circular argument. Legalistas in this country form, work with, and stand over laws that aren't always moral. Just as long as they get their extortionate rates they don't really care.

The rights of society not to have people fall victim to a murderer should take precedence over the data-protection rights of the murderer imho.

 

[Matlock]

"The law's the law" is a circular argument. Legalistas in this country form, work with, and stand over laws that aren't always moral. Just as long as they get their extortionate rates they don't really care.

The rights of society not to have people fall victim to a murderer should take precedence over the data-protection rights of the murderer imho.

Oh fuck off Soundy.

 

[SoundMan]

Oh fuck off Soundy.

Very cogently argued there by someone who claims to make money by er....cogently arguing

 

[Donald Trump]

Very cogently argued there by someone who claims to make money by er....cogently arguing

Just to be clear, are you going down the Mattie is not really a solicitor route again?

 

[stan ogden]

There’s still a lot of circumstantial evidence against Dwyer and when looked at together as multiple instances it may well be enough to maintain a conviction on a retrial. The evidence embedded in the handsets and the messages backed up onto the laptop are still admissible.

 

[Matlock]

Very cogently argued there by someone who claims to make money by er....cogently arguing

It is a perfectly cogent argument.

Fuck.
Off.

 

[Matlock]

Just to be clear, are you going down the Mattie is not really a solicitor route again?

Probably. It's been a while...

 

[fed up]

There’s still a lot of circumstantial evidence against Dwyer and when looked at together as multiple instances it may well be enough to maintain a conviction on a retrial. The evidence embedded in the handsets and the messages backed up onto the laptop are still admissible.

I doubt it, even Marie Cassidy said at the time she was surprised they got a conviction, take away the phone evidence and what they have is flimsy.
He'll win imo.

 

[SoundMan]

It is a perfectly cogent argument.

Fuck.
Off.

Do you actually charge people for such "cogency"?