assetrichcashpoor

Members
  • Content count

    369
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About assetrichcashpoor

  • Rank
    Advanced Member

Recent Profile Visitors

427 profile views
  1. assetrichcashpoor

    Westmister car of peace

    I know but I’d like someone in authority to explain why he was in receipt of housing and benefits.
  2. assetrichcashpoor

    Westmister car of peace

    At some point I would like an explanation as to why the perpetrator of yesterdays attack was allowed to live in Britain 5 years ago, how did he obtain his citizenship, how did he fund his lifestyle and how he obtained a council flat.
  3. assetrichcashpoor

    Never, ever take responsibility. For anything.

    On a similar vein. I live in oxford where about 5 years ago some guardian reading fascists succeeded in their 20s plenty campaign. This brought in 20 mph limits nearly everywhere within the ring road. An unintended consequence is a greater number of pedestrians getting hit by low speed buses. This has been speculated to be due to an increased level of pedestrian confidence leading to them walking out in front of buses possibly thinking the bus will stop in time.
  4. assetrichcashpoor

    Tommy Robinson thread

    There’s a freedom of information request which explains why some sentancing remarks are published on judicary.uk, it depends on the expected level of public interest and whether the judge has written them down. Search for FOI 89214. In this case the level of public interest is known to be high so the judge probably didn’t write them down. Which given the speed of the trial isn’t hard to believe.
  5. assetrichcashpoor

    Tommy Robinson thread

    I think you may have misunderstood the terminology. That search brings up sentencing remarks, can you point me to a link that shows entire court transcripts? The sentancing remarks are the judge’s decision on sentencing and reasons for imposing the sentence. They’re useful but only a very small part of the court process. Are you saying the sentencing remarks are not available for the case? If you want to find out what someone actually said in court you would need to request the specific part of the case to have that transcribed at your own cost or if you didn’t know at which stage it was said you could pay for it whole hearing to be transcribed.
  6. assetrichcashpoor

    Tommy Robinson thread

    Tommy’s team may well have got a copy but that doesn’t mean they’ve put it on the internet. I’m not sure who put the other case transcripts online maybe they should try getting this case transcript and then putting online. Cases aren’t transcribed by the courts automatically as the state would have to pay for the service, but the option is there for those who have an interest and pay the fee. Lookup form ex107, which is the form that needs I be completed.
  7. assetrichcashpoor

    Tommy Robinson thread

    I think it’s more to do with cost. Cases are recorded but not transcribed unless someone pays for it. I think Tommy or his solicitor need to request and pay for a full transcript.
  8. assetrichcashpoor

    Tommy Robinson thread

    My understanding of court transcripts is that they aren’t automatically prepared or released. Someone has to apply and then pay for the recording to be transcribed, and then it’s not necessarily released to the public domain.
  9. assetrichcashpoor

    Finding Money on Street

    When I was about 10 years old I was cycling on my push bike and my shoe lace got caught in the chain which caused me to fall off in a supermarket car park. As I picked myself up from the ground I saw a £10 note on the ground. There was a quad bike track not too far away and I was able to use the money to go when my friends went next. My mum and dad never had any money and if they had it wouldn’t have gone on quad biking.
  10. assetrichcashpoor

    Trump's progress

    Failing that what about a Tommy Robinson blimp? People can’t claim it would be wacist.
  11. assetrichcashpoor

    Trump's progress

    I heard a sound bite from that interview. I wonder what would happen if someone applied to float a blimp of Muhammad through London? Would he still defend freedom of speech and the right to offend?
  12. assetrichcashpoor

    What are u doing to keep cool?

    Truckloads of cider with ice cubes.
  13. assetrichcashpoor

    Overrated Design Icons

    He’s only a brexiter because the eu made his hoovers even shitter.
  14. assetrichcashpoor

    Overrated Design Icons

    James fucking Dyson
  15. assetrichcashpoor

    UK University Bans Straight People from Housing

    I went to Sheffield University at the turn of the millennium. In those days it was one of the more gay friendly universities and used to run a monthly gay night. So I'm surprised it's less gay friendly now considering how much society has changed since then. As someone pointed out it might be another minority taking pot shots at the gays. It was being turned into a SJW basket case when i was there. There were big issues facing students such as the introduction of fees nationally and at Sheffield the privatisation of the halls etc. but our student representatives didn't give a fuck about that. They managed to get Nestle banned as 'they kill babies.' Although when pressed for details on the subject no one could explain it coherently or repeatedly any challenge was met with 'they kill babies!' All they succeeded in doing was stopping the union shop selling kitkats. In my final year they went through a particularly cuntish phase when some feminazi became offended by the women in bikinis on lads mags such as Loaded. They managed to make the shop sell them in opaque wrappers to stop the offence. Someone made a counter claim saying that the gay magazines such as attitude had men in skimpy clothes on the front cover and so in turn they were covered up in plastic. Some of the gays were mightily offended that their culture was being restrained. In the end as a compromise no more opaque wrappers were applied to magazines although the gay magazines were displayed normally, but the lads mags were displayed spine pointing out so people wouldn't be offended by the cover. No one I knew really cared but it made the Guardian which might been the real intention.