|
Michael Stone is scheduled to begin his new appeal today; please visit
the website and sign the guestbook with something intelligent.
|
| |
| |
Michael Stone is scheduled to begin his new appeal today; please visit
the website and sign the guestbook with something intelligent.
"Second word is '...off'"
--
JackH
|
| |
| |
"Second word is '...off'"
is first Fuck or Piss????
|
| |
| |
Michael Stone is scheduled to begin his new appeal today; please visit
the website and sign the guestbook with something intelligent.
"Second word is '...off'"
is first Fuck or Piss????
"Prace bets now!"
--
JackH
|
| |
| |
How long is the appeal going to last for?
A week, less than that or more than that?
And do you think he'll win the appeal? I have a feeling he won't, but reading
your site, it shows he should have a chance, it sounds like he was fitted up
for what he was accused of...
Correction, the appeal starts Wednesday, Stone's "'orrible
'andwriting" - little in-joke. I spoke to Counsel today; the appeal is
expected to last until Friday. I have posted a news article from "Kent
On Sunday" to the website - it's at the bottom of the index.
My view as I have told Stone is that the Court of Appeal will produce
a semantic nonsense in dismissing the appeal but grant leave to appeal
to the House of Lords.
On the face of things Stone is a very unpleasant character, but he has
tried sincerely to reform himself. He has thoroughly detoxed,
practises martial arts and is currently doing a City & Guilds in motor
mechanics.
This conviction is a stain on British justice.
|
| |
| |
On the face of things Stone is a very unpleasant character, but he has
tried sincerely to reform himself. He has thoroughly detoxed,
practises martial arts and is currently doing a City & Guilds in motor
Martial Arts....MARTIAL FUCKING ARTS.
What are the prison service trying to do.... give them extra @$#*ing
training!!!!
Next time he murders a family, i guess there'll be no survivors as he'll
"sort 'em out right" - little in joke there. Bit like giving a pyromaniac
explosives training.
Why try to reform... ? He wouldn't hurt a fly, would he?
|
| |
| |
Martial Arts....MARTIAL FUCKING ARTS.
What are the prison service trying to do.... give them extra @$#*ing
training!!!!
Yes, because murderers in the UK routinely resort to judo, karate,
tae-kwon-do and so on in order to commit their crimes.
F A
|
| |
| |
Hi Mat
On the face of things Stone is a very unpleasant character, but he has
tried sincerely to reform himself. He has thoroughly detoxed,
practises martial arts and is currently doing a City & Guilds in motor
Martial Arts....MARTIAL FUCKING ARTS.
What are the prison service trying to do.... give them extra @$#*ing
training!!!!
Next time he murders a family, i guess there'll be no survivors as he'll
"sort 'em out right" - little in joke there. Bit like giving a pyromaniac
explosives training.
Why try to reform... ? He wouldn't hurt a fly, would he?
Why reform if he's innocent?? and why not weapons training as a pastime!!!
--
Regards, Steve S.
|
| |
| |
"Alexander Baron" <A_Baron@ABaron.Demon.Co.UK> wrote >
Stone is a very unpleasant character,
He certainly is. An anti-social, violent, drug-taking schizophrenic..
Michael Stone. In prison? Or walking down your street?
What would you prefer?
Come on Mr Baron. Devote your obvious talent to someone more deserving than
this anti-social thug.
Don`t let him free to victimise Kent residents again.
Vince
--
Truck Driving In Russia- www.coventon.co.uk
|
| |
| |
Yes, because murderers in the UK routinely resort to judo, karate,
tae-kwon-do and so on in order to commit their crimes.
Do they?... well then its an even worse idea than I first thought. Thanks
for clarifying that for me. You should inform the prison service of this.
You're happy that a man that is capable of vicious assaults and murder is
learning how to attack individuals more efficiently?
|
| |
| |
Do they?... well then its an even worse idea than I first thought. Thanks
for clarifying that for me. You should inform the prison service of this.
You're happy that a man that is capable of vicious assaults and murder is
learning how to attack individuals more efficiently?
Which one of us is having an irony failure here?
F A
|
| |
| |
"The Farmer Returns" <oooh@arrrr.com> wrote
Which one of us is having an irony failure here?
It`s him.
Vince--
Truck Driving In Russia- www.coventon.co.uk
|
| |
| |
Why try to reform... ? He wouldn't hurt a fly, would he?
Why reform if he's innocent?? and why not weapons training as a pastime!!!
When I first wrote to Stone he made a big point of his non-cooperation
with the authorities. I told him that he could still address his other
problems while continuing to protest his innocence. He was a drug
addict to begin with, which led to most of his other anti-social
behaviour. He has cleaned up his act.
He practised martial arts before he was gaoled and in fact believed he
might have had an alibi of sorts because he was at or about to attend
a lesson at the time of the murders. I tried to check this out but had
no response. There is evidence that he was elsewhere at the time of
the murders, but his witnesses have been dismissed as unreliable.
Unlike police officers who always tell the truth of course.
This case stinks to high heaven.
|
| |
| |
Stone is a very unpleasant character,
Not as unpleasant as he used to be.
He certainly is. An anti-social, violent, drug-taking schizophrenic..
Schizophrenia is a mental illness. Are you saying people should be
punished for being ill? He isnt' schizophrenic anyway.
Michael Stone. In prison? Or walking down your street?
What would you prefer?
A guilty Michael Stone in prison, an innocent one at liberty.
Come on Mr Baron. Devote your obvious talent to someone more deserving than
this anti-social thug.
Don`t let him free to victimise Kent residents again.
And don't re-open the Chillenden murder case? What about the real
guilty man or men?
|
| |
| |
Why try to reform... ? He wouldn't hurt a fly, would he?
Why reform if he's innocent?? and why not weapons training as a
pastime!!!
When I first wrote to Stone he made a big point of his non-cooperation
with the authorities. I told him that he could still address his other
problems while continuing to protest his innocence. He was a drug
addict to begin with, which led to most of his other anti-social
behaviour. He has cleaned up his act.
He practised martial arts before he was gaoled and in fact believed he
might have had an alibi of sorts because he was at or about to attend
a lesson at the time of the murders. I tried to check this out but had
no response. There is evidence that he was elsewhere at the time of
the murders, but his witnesses have been dismissed as unreliable.
Unlike police officers who always tell the truth of course.
This case stinks to high heaven.
I'd take my chances with the word of a copper as oppossed to Stone's any day
G---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.752 / Virus Database: 503 - Release Date: 03/09/2004
|
| |
| |
On 7 Sep 2004 02:02:34 -0700, A_Baron@ABaron.Demon.Co.UK (Alexander
Baron) uttered:
This case stinks to high heaven.
What's your involvement with Stone?
Why are YOU so keen on defending Stone?
--
Dewi,
(remove spin for email)
|
| |
| |
Hi there
Why try to reform... ? He wouldn't hurt a fly, would he?
Why reform if he's innocent?? and why not weapons training as a
pastime!!!
When I first wrote to Stone he made a big point of his non-cooperation
with the authorities. I told him that he could still address his other
problems while continuing to protest his innocence. He was a drug
addict to begin with, which led to most of his other anti-social
behaviour. He has cleaned up his act.
He practised martial arts before he was gaoled and in fact believed he
might have had an alibi of sorts because he was at or about to attend
a lesson at the time of the murders. I tried to check this out but had
no response. There is evidence that he was elsewhere at the time of
the murders, but his witnesses have been dismissed as unreliable.
Unlike police officers who always tell the truth of course.
This case stinks to high heaven.
Well i personally think he's a scheming skum @$#*.
I work for a funeral director and so have to carry these little mites to
their resting places while the whole world collapses around their parents.
If there are no volunteers to pull the trigger on this fukkers skull I'm
stepping up to the plate, I'll even buy the bullet if necessary.
--
Regards, Steve S.
|
| |
| |
"Alexander Baron" <A_Baron@ABaron.Demon.Co.UK> wrote
What about the real
guilty man
It seems the real guilty man has only managed to pull the wool over *one*
person`s eyes, Alexander..............
Vince
--
Truck Driving In Russia- www.coventon.co.uk
|
| |
| |
Alexander Baron wrote:
Michael Stone practised martial arts before he was gaoled and in fact
believed he might have had an alibi of sorts because he was at or about to
attend
a lesson at the time of the murders.
It would be almost impossible for most people to know what they did on a
particular day one year ago or even in a particular month, so the lack of an
alibi is not important.
Stone's conviction rests entirely on a garbled jail confession allegedly
made to a fellow convict Damien Daley.
The 'confession' began while Daley was lying on his bed in the adjacent
cell, and was then continued between the crack in the wall surrounding the
pipe - so that the confession was very private and could not be overheard.
However, the confession contains nothing of any substance that only the
murderer could have known, and which had not already been published in the
newspapers or on television, which Daley had probably seen. ("I might have
seen something on the TV about the case")
Daley did not report the "confession" to prison officers the following
morning, but made a statement to the police two days later, after receiving
a public visit from his uncle.
The other jail 'confession' to fellow-convict Thomson has subsequently been
proved false when Thomson admitted the confession allegation was a
cock-and-bull story. One can only wonder at the naivety of the Kent police
in allowing themselves to be fooled into accepting the evidence of this
confession.
One 'confession' has already bitten the dust, and the question remains as to
how long the other confession will hold good.
Stone was also picked out of an indentity parade by a witness who testified
that she picked him out because he looked familiar: when pressed for an
explanation, the witness agreed in court that he reminder her of one of her
relatives - so this particular piece of identification evidence is not
strong.
There is no doubt that the police were looking for a maniac, and evidently
Michael Stone fits the picture, but he should not be convicted of murder
simply because he is a maniac, unless there is some proper evidence to
connect him with the crime.
There have recently been other unprovoked hammer attacks in Twickenham - it
remains to be seen whether the perpetrator of these attacks has any
connection with the Chillenden Murders.
Yours faithfully,
John Aidiniantz
www.homepage-link.to/justice
|
| |
| |
In message <1094551268.41932.0@demeter.uk.clara.net>, Gaoler
<gaoler@NOPSPAM.co.uk> writes
I'd take my chances with the word of a copper as oppossed to Stone's any day
But it's not Stone's word we are talking about here, is it? It is the
words of his alibi witnesses.
Sorry, but I think you are being too credulous here. Stone was the local
nutter, who could easily be stitched up for this case *precisely
because* most people would have the attitude that you have demonstrated.
--
Richard Miller
|
| |
| |
In message <S7o%c.648$7O3.16@newsfe5-win.ntli.net>, Knight of the Road
<RussiaTrucking@Hotmail.com> writes
"Alexander Baron" <A_Baron@ABaron.Demon.Co.UK> wrote
What about the real
It seems the real guilty man has only managed to pull the wool over *one*
person`s eyes, Alexander..............
No, he has achieved it with you, the police and thousands of others.
If you had actually studied the case, you would see that there is
probably more evidence that *you* are the killer than that Stone is.
--
Richard Miller
|
| |
| |
Sorry, but I think you are being too credulous here. Stone was the local
nutter, who could easily be stitched up for this case *precisely
because* most people would have the attitude that you have demonstrated.
....what... well informed?
|
| |
| |
In message <S7o%c.648$7O3.16@newsfe5-win.ntli.net>, Knight of the Road
<RussiaTrucking@Hotmail.com> writes
No, he has achieved it with you, the police and thousands of others.
If you had actually studied the case, you would see that there is
probably more evidence that *you* are the killer than that Stone is.
.....except for that lawnmower thing.....
|
| |
| |
In message <chnlg8$5jg$1@sparta.btinternet.com>, Matt
<matt@nospamplease.com> writes
...what... well informed?
But you clearly are not well-informed about this case. If you were, it
is highly unlikely that you would believe Stone to be guilty.
To show you are well-informed rather than just prejudiced, perhaps you
would like to post here the evidence that was given in Court that leads
you to believe him to be guilty.
--
Richard Miller
|
| |
| |
Richard Miller wrote:
In message <chnlg8$5jg$1@sparta.btinternet.com>, Matt
<matt@nospamplease.com> writes
But you clearly are not well-informed about this case. If you were, it
is highly unlikely that you would believe Stone to be guilty.
To show you are well-informed rather than just prejudiced, perhaps you
would like to post here the evidence that was given in Court that leads
you to believe him to be guilty.
Well... he's obviously a bit dodgy .... been in prison so he must be a bad
guy ... and the cops say he did it. Must be true then.
Paul Robson
CPS Lawyer.
|
| |
| |
In message <chnlg8$5jg$1@sparta.btinternet.com>, Matt
<matt@nospamplease.com> writes
But you clearly are not well-informed about this case. If you were, it
is highly unlikely that you would believe Stone to be guilty.
How's that clear? You don't know me or what I know. Looks like i'm not the
only one making unsubstantiated judgements here.
To show you are well-informed rather than just prejudiced, perhaps you
would like to post here the evidence that was given in Court that leads
you to believe him to be guilty.
Perhaps you would like to post the evidence that says he isn't.
|
| |
| |
On Thu, 9 Sep 2004 08:27:08 +0000 (UTC), "Matt"
<matt@nospamplease.com> wrote:
To show you are well-informed rather than just prejudiced, perhaps you
would like to post here the evidence that was given in Court that leads
you to believe him to be guilty.
Perhaps you would like to post the evidence that says he isn't.
What rubbish! The burden of proof is *always* on those who say a
person is guilty to prove their assertion. It is the only way that a
just criminal system could possibly work.
So if you are so certain that the man is guilty, it is for you to put
forward the evidence that has caused you to come to that conclusion,
not for others to find evidence as to why it is incorrect.
If you disagree with the above, then I will require proof that you
were not responsible for putting a dent in my car door sometime in the
past few days. If you cannot prove that you did not do it, I will
then expect you to pay for the repair.
--
Cynic
|
| |
| |
In message <chp44s$g7r$1@hercules.btinternet.com>, Matt
<matt@nospamplease.com> writes
How's that clear?
Because I am very familiar with the case, and everything you have posted
demonstrates that you are not basing your views on the actual evidence
that was presented.
You don't know me or what I know. Looks like i'm not the
only one making unsubstantiated judgements here.
Oh, this judgement is entirely substantiated by your own posts.
Perhaps you would like to post the evidence that says he isn't.
Err, there is no evidence that he *did* do it, so that would involve me
posting every fact from the beginning of the world.
--
Richard Miller
|
| |
| |
But you clearly are not well-informed about this case. If you were, it
is highly unlikely that you would believe Stone to be guilty.
How's that clear?
Because I am very familiar with the case, and everything you have posted
demonstrates that you are not basing your views on the actual evidence
that was presented.
The evidence that was presented resulted in him being found guilty.
Therefore, i'm basing my views on the evidence that was presented. You're
basing your views on a desired result which didn't happen, therefore your
views are imaginitive, but currently inaccurate.
To show you are well-informed rather than just prejudiced, perhaps you
would like to post here the evidence that was given in Court that leads
you to believe him to be guilty.
Perhaps you would like to post the evidence that says he isn't.
Err, there is no evidence that he *did* do it, so that would involve me
posting every fact from the beginning of the world.
If there was no evidence that he did it, then you are saying that he was
locked away, without trial or the trial that he had was rigged. OK, let's
assume that's the case.
On balance, considering his past, and in the public interest, wouldn't your
efforts be better spent uncovering the corrupt judge or jury, then arranging
for his release, as opposed to taking the risk of releasing a vicious,
heartless murderer and leaving corrupt legal officials in positions where
they can continue to abuse the rights of innocents. What's up.....? Too
much like hard work for you?
So are you saying that either the judge was corrupt, or the jury was bribed
or otherwise enticed into making a decision based on no valid evidence?
Either that or the entire courtroom was high, or lobotomised ... or they
drafted in primates to run the entire thing. There were no newspaper
reports of monkeys, drugs or antiquated medical procedures.
Cure the heart of the problem ... but then ... that's a big cash cow to
lose, isn't it? And a lot of hard work.
|
| |
| |
On Thu, 9 Sep 2004 22:00:47 +0000 (UTC), "Matt"
<matt@nospamplease.com> wrote:
But you clearly are not well-informed about this case. If you were, it
is highly unlikely that you would believe Stone to be guilty.
How's that clear?
Because I am very familiar with the case, and everything you have posted
demonstrates that you are not basing your views on the actual evidence
that was presented.
The evidence that was presented resulted in him being found guilty.
Therefore, i'm basing my views on the evidence that was presented.
What *was* that exactly? Do you even know, or does your argument
really boil down to "he was convicted so he must be guilty"?
Of course, innocent people never get convicted of things they didn't
do
Brian
|
| |
| |
"Gaoler" <gaoler@NOPSPAM.co.uk> wrote in message news:<1094551268.41932.0@demeter.uk.clara.net>...> "Alexander Baron" <A_Baron@ABaron.Demon.Co.UK> wrote in message
news:10503184.0409070102.47885496@posting.google.com...
Why try to reform... ? He wouldn't hurt a fly, would he?
Why reform if he's innocent?? and why not weapons training as a
pastime!!!
I'd take my chances with the word of a copper as oppossed to Stone's any day
G
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.752 / Virus Database: 503 - Release Date: 03/09/2004
Just hope you never have to
Barb
|
| |
| |
On Thu, 9 Sep 2004 22:00:47 +0000 (UTC), "Matt"
<matt@nospamplease.com> wrote:
But you clearly are not well-informed about this case. If you were,
it
is highly unlikely that you would believe Stone to be guilty.
How's that clear?
Because I am very familiar with the case, and everything you have
posted
demonstrates that you are not basing your views on the actual evidence
that was presented.
The evidence that was presented resulted in him being found guilty.
Therefore, i'm basing my views on the evidence that was presented.
What *was* that exactly? Do you even know, or does your argument
really boil down to "he was convicted so he must be guilty"?
ROTFLMAO!!!!
If he was convicted, then he must have been found guilty. Therefore, yes.
Correct. My argument boils down to just that... lol.
Of course, innocent people never get convicted of things they didn't
do
Most prisoners didn't do it. Most of the prison population is innocent.
They're all innocent until the appeals are all over or the money runs out.
Money, eh? What some people will say for the love of it. Now he's a
reformed character. They're all reformed characters, until they get out and
the money runs out...
Brian
And don't call me Brian ... its needless, uncalled for and offensive.lol
|
| |
| |
In message <chp44s$g7r$1@hercules.btinternet.com>, Matt
<matt@nospamplease.com> writes
Perhaps you would like to post the evidence that says he isn't.
The principle of criminal law in most civilised countries (and the UK)
is that a person is innocent until proven guilty. Therefore, in the
absence of evidence to prove guilt, he is innocent.
--
Mike
|
| |
| |
I'd take my chances with the word of a copper as oppossed to Stone's any
day
Just hope you never have to
Barb
Why?
|
| |
| |
In message <chqjqf$i3j$1@titan.btinternet.com>, Matt
<matt@nospamplease.com> writes
On balance, considering his past, and in the public interest, wouldn't your
efforts be better spent uncovering the corrupt judge or jury, then arranging
for his release, as opposed to taking the risk of releasing a vicious,
heartless murderer and leaving corrupt legal officials in positions where
they can continue to abuse the rights of innocents. What's up.....? Too
much like hard work for you?
The people who decided he was guilty have already been removed from
"office". It's unlikely they'll ever serve in that office again.
--
Mike
|
| |
| |
On Thu, 9 Sep 2004 22:00:47 +0000 (UTC), "Matt"
<matt@nospamplease.com> wrote:
So are you saying that either the judge was corrupt, or the jury was bribed
or otherwise enticed into making a decision based on no valid evidence?
Either that or the entire courtroom was high, or lobotomised ... or they
drafted in primates to run the entire thing.
Fuck - that sounds like my trial!
There were no newspaper
reports of monkeys, drugs or antiquated medical procedures.
None at mine either - but they were there alright.
http://www.injustice.org/nemo/
|
| |
| |
|
