0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Yeah but for how long?
I'm not sure what sort of personal standards you need to have to, without any evidence, accuse someone of deliberately lying on an issue as horrific and heartbreaking as this, but there you go.See the attached.
Quote from: belton rover on April 01, 2021, 06:10:27 pmYeah but for how long?They've found the body, they've convicted the perpetrator, how long do you expect it to be in the headlines when there's nothing new to say?
Quote from: BillyStubbsTears on April 01, 2021, 07:45:32 pmI'm not sure what sort of personal standards you need to have to, without any evidence, accuse someone of deliberately lying on an issue as horrific and heartbreaking as this, but there you go.See the attached.Nope, checked again. it's never been the leading story of either newspaper you claim? The point yet again the double standards of the press.
Web site front pages aren’t quite the same as traditional front page news though, are they?Yes it is on the first page, but after the Neo Nazi copper, George Floyd’s girlfriend and a Corona virus update.
Quote from: Glyn_Wigley on April 01, 2021, 08:43:42 pmQuote from: belton rover on April 01, 2021, 06:10:27 pmYeah but for how long?They've found the body, they've convicted the perpetrator, how long do you expect it to be in the headlines when there's nothing new to say?How long was the Everard story in the headlines?Wasnt exactly swept under carpet.
Quote from: Getridorit on April 01, 2021, 08:52:04 pmQuote from: Glyn_Wigley on April 01, 2021, 08:43:42 pmQuote from: belton rover on April 01, 2021, 06:10:27 pmYeah but for how long?They've found the body, they've convicted the perpetrator, how long do you expect it to be in the headlines when there's nothing new to say?How long was the Everard story in the headlines?Wasnt exactly swept under carpet. Dunno, because I don't know the story you're talking about. Shows how big that's been in the media, doesn't it?Just looked it up. I would imagine that was in the headlines for a long time because there kept on being new stuff to report.
Quote from: Glyn_Wigley on April 01, 2021, 08:57:18 pmQuote from: Getridorit on April 01, 2021, 08:52:04 pmQuote from: Glyn_Wigley on April 01, 2021, 08:43:42 pmQuote from: belton rover on April 01, 2021, 06:10:27 pmYeah but for how long?They've found the body, they've convicted the perpetrator, how long do you expect it to be in the headlines when there's nothing new to say?How long was the Everard story in the headlines?Wasnt exactly swept under carpet. Dunno, because I don't know the story you're talking about. Shows how big that's been in the media, doesn't it?Just looked it up. I would imagine that was in the headlines for a long time because there kept on being new stuff to report.Sarah everhard the woman murdered in London.You know.
Quote from: Getridorit on April 01, 2021, 08:48:28 pmQuote from: BillyStubbsTears on April 01, 2021, 07:45:32 pmI'm not sure what sort of personal standards you need to have to, without any evidence, accuse someone of deliberately lying on an issue as horrific and heartbreaking as this, but there you go.See the attached.Nope, checked again. it's never been the leading story of either newspaper you claim? The point yet again the double standards of the press. It sounds like you think that no other news story should have been deemed more important than the report of the conviction of someone who committed a murder that happened six months ago.
Quote from: Getridorit on April 01, 2021, 09:00:39 pmQuote from: Glyn_Wigley on April 01, 2021, 08:57:18 pmQuote from: Getridorit on April 01, 2021, 08:52:04 pmQuote from: Glyn_Wigley on April 01, 2021, 08:43:42 pmQuote from: belton rover on April 01, 2021, 06:10:27 pmYeah but for how long?They've found the body, they've convicted the perpetrator, how long do you expect it to be in the headlines when there's nothing new to say?How long was the Everard story in the headlines?Wasnt exactly swept under carpet. Dunno, because I don't know the story you're talking about. Shows how big that's been in the media, doesn't it?Just looked it up. I would imagine that was in the headlines for a long time because there kept on being new stuff to report.Sarah everhard the woman murdered in London.You know. To me, it was the 'Copper kills someone' case. Like I said, the name didn't register.
Quote from: Glyn_Wigley on April 01, 2021, 08:54:36 pmQuote from: Getridorit on April 01, 2021, 08:48:28 pmQuote from: BillyStubbsTears on April 01, 2021, 07:45:32 pmI'm not sure what sort of personal standards you need to have to, without any evidence, accuse someone of deliberately lying on an issue as horrific and heartbreaking as this, but there you go.See the attached.Nope, checked again. it's never been the leading story of either newspaper you claim? The point yet again the double standards of the press. It sounds like you think that no other news story should have been deemed more important than the report of the conviction of someone who committed a murder that happened six months ago.Sounds like your saying it doesn't matter, and not worth reporting because the murderer didn't fit the right profile.
Quote from: Glyn_Wigley on April 01, 2021, 09:02:20 pmQuote from: Getridorit on April 01, 2021, 09:00:39 pmQuote from: Glyn_Wigley on April 01, 2021, 08:57:18 pmQuote from: Getridorit on April 01, 2021, 08:52:04 pmQuote from: Glyn_Wigley on April 01, 2021, 08:43:42 pmQuote from: belton rover on April 01, 2021, 06:10:27 pmYeah but for how long?They've found the body, they've convicted the perpetrator, how long do you expect it to be in the headlines when there's nothing new to say?How long was the Everard story in the headlines?Wasnt exactly swept under carpet. Dunno, because I don't know the story you're talking about. Shows how big that's been in the media, doesn't it?Just looked it up. I would imagine that was in the headlines for a long time because there kept on being new stuff to report.Sarah everhard the woman murdered in London.You know. To me, it was the 'Copper kills someone' case. Like I said, the name didn't register.Well, in this "illegal immigrant kills someone" case. The press coverage, and public outcry has been a fraction of the "copper kills someone" case.Why?
Quote from: Getridorit on April 01, 2021, 09:06:11 pmQuote from: Glyn_Wigley on April 01, 2021, 09:02:20 pmQuote from: Getridorit on April 01, 2021, 09:00:39 pmQuote from: Glyn_Wigley on April 01, 2021, 08:57:18 pmQuote from: Getridorit on April 01, 2021, 08:52:04 pmQuote from: Glyn_Wigley on April 01, 2021, 08:43:42 pmQuote from: belton rover on April 01, 2021, 06:10:27 pmYeah but for how long?They've found the body, they've convicted the perpetrator, how long do you expect it to be in the headlines when there's nothing new to say?How long was the Everard story in the headlines?Wasnt exactly swept under carpet. Dunno, because I don't know the story you're talking about. Shows how big that's been in the media, doesn't it?Just looked it up. I would imagine that was in the headlines for a long time because there kept on being new stuff to report.Sarah everhard the woman murdered in London.You know. To me, it was the 'Copper kills someone' case. Like I said, the name didn't register.Well, in this "illegal immigrant kills someone" case. The press coverage, and public outcry has been a fraction of the "copper kills someone" case.Why? I keep telling you, it's a six months old story apart from the verdict!!
Quote from: Glyn_Wigley on April 01, 2021, 09:08:20 pmQuote from: Getridorit on April 01, 2021, 09:06:11 pmQuote from: Glyn_Wigley on April 01, 2021, 09:02:20 pmQuote from: Getridorit on April 01, 2021, 09:00:39 pmQuote from: Glyn_Wigley on April 01, 2021, 08:57:18 pmQuote from: Getridorit on April 01, 2021, 08:52:04 pmQuote from: Glyn_Wigley on April 01, 2021, 08:43:42 pmQuote from: belton rover on April 01, 2021, 06:10:27 pmYeah but for how long?They've found the body, they've convicted the perpetrator, how long do you expect it to be in the headlines when there's nothing new to say?How long was the Everard story in the headlines?Wasnt exactly swept under carpet. Dunno, because I don't know the story you're talking about. Shows how big that's been in the media, doesn't it?Just looked it up. I would imagine that was in the headlines for a long time because there kept on being new stuff to report.Sarah everhard the woman murdered in London.You know. To me, it was the 'Copper kills someone' case. Like I said, the name didn't register.Well, in this "illegal immigrant kills someone" case. The press coverage, and public outcry has been a fraction of the "copper kills someone" case.Why? I keep telling you, it's a six months old story apart from the verdict!!It wasn't 6 months old, 6 months ago.Where were the stories then?
Quote from: Getridorit on April 01, 2021, 09:06:11 pmQuote from: Glyn_Wigley on April 01, 2021, 09:02:20 pmQuote from: Getridorit on April 01, 2021, 09:00:39 pmQuote from: Glyn_Wigley on April 01, 2021, 08:57:18 pmQuote from: Getridorit on April 01, 2021, 08:52:04 pmQuote from: Glyn_Wigley on April 01, 2021, 08:43:42 pmQuote from: belton rover on April 01, 2021, 06:10:27 pmYeah but for how long?They've found the body, they've convicted the perpetrator, how long do you expect it to be in the headlines when there's nothing new to say?How long was the Everard story in the headlines?Wasnt exactly swept under carpet. Dunno, because I don't know the story you're talking about. Shows how big that's been in the media, doesn't it?Just looked it up. I would imagine that was in the headlines for a long time because there kept on being new stuff to report.Sarah everhard the woman murdered in London.You know. To me, it was the 'Copper kills someone' case. Like I said, the name didn't register.Well, in this "illegal immigrant kills someone" case. The press coverage, and public outcry has been a fraction of the "copper kills someone" case.Why? I keep telling you, it's a six months old story apart from the verdict!!
Quote from: Glyn_Wigley on April 01, 2021, 09:02:20 pmQuote from: Getridorit on April 01, 2021, 09:00:39 pmQuote from: Glyn_Wigley on April 01, 2021, 08:57:18 pmQuote from: Getridorit on April 01, 2021, 08:52:04 pmQuote from: Glyn_Wigley on April 01, 2021, 08:43:42 pmQuote from: belton rover on April 01, 2021, 06:10:27 pmYeah but for how long?They've found the body, they've convicted the perpetrator, how long do you expect it to be in the headlines when there's nothing new to say?How long was the Everard story in the headlines?Wasnt exactly swept under carpet. Dunno, because I don't know the story you're talking about. Shows how big that's been in the media, doesn't it?Just looked it up. I would imagine that was in the headlines for a long time because there kept on being new stuff to report.Sarah everhard the woman murdered in London.You know. To me, it was the 'Copper kills someone' case. Like I said, the name didn't register.Well, in this "illegal immigrant kills someone" case. The press coverage, and public outcry has been a fraction of the "copper kills someone" case.Why?
Quote from: Getridorit on April 01, 2021, 09:02:59 pmQuote from: Glyn_Wigley on April 01, 2021, 08:54:36 pmQuote from: Getridorit on April 01, 2021, 08:48:28 pmQuote from: BillyStubbsTears on April 01, 2021, 07:45:32 pmI'm not sure what sort of personal standards you need to have to, without any evidence, accuse someone of deliberately lying on an issue as horrific and heartbreaking as this, but there you go.See the attached.Nope, checked again. it's never been the leading story of either newspaper you claim? The point yet again the double standards of the press. It sounds like you think that no other news story should have been deemed more important than the report of the conviction of someone who committed a murder that happened six months ago.Sounds like your saying it doesn't matter, and not worth reporting because the murderer didn't fit the right profile. It should have been reported. And it was. Quite rightly.It's you that's got a pencil up their arse about the size of the coverage not being big enough for your liking, despite there being only one new piece of information to tell. Go on, then, tell us how you would have filled a front page with just a guilty verdict about an old story.
Quote from: Glyn_Wigley on April 01, 2021, 09:07:45 pmQuote from: Getridorit on April 01, 2021, 09:02:59 pmQuote from: Glyn_Wigley on April 01, 2021, 08:54:36 pmQuote from: Getridorit on April 01, 2021, 08:48:28 pmQuote from: BillyStubbsTears on April 01, 2021, 07:45:32 pmI'm not sure what sort of personal standards you need to have to, without any evidence, accuse someone of deliberately lying on an issue as horrific and heartbreaking as this, but there you go.See the attached.Nope, checked again. it's never been the leading story of either newspaper you claim? The point yet again the double standards of the press. It sounds like you think that no other news story should have been deemed more important than the report of the conviction of someone who committed a murder that happened six months ago.Sounds like your saying it doesn't matter, and not worth reporting because the murderer didn't fit the right profile. It should have been reported. And it was. Quite rightly.It's you that's got a pencil up their arse about the size of the coverage not being big enough for your liking, despite there being only one new piece of information to tell. Go on, then, tell us how you would have filled a front page with just a guilty verdict about an old story.It's more the press coverage and lack of outcry 6 months ago that I'm referring.Just don't understand the difference between the cases, that warranted the marked difference in outcry and press coverage.
Quote from: Getridorit on April 01, 2021, 08:48:28 pmQuote from: BillyStubbsTears on April 01, 2021, 07:45:32 pmI'm not sure what sort of personal standards you need to have to, without any evidence, accuse someone of deliberately lying on an issue as horrific and heartbreaking as this, but there you go.See the attached.Nope, checked again. it's never been the leading story of either newspaper you claim? The point yet again the double standards of the press. I said it was the lead UK story in the Guardian. The very attachment I posted shows it as the lead story in the UK News section of The Guardian website. I said it was the lead story on the Independent webpage. It was but it had slipped down a few hours later when I took that screen grab.You said it wasn't on the front page of either the Independent or Guardian site. This two screen grabs in that attachment are of the front pages of the Guardian and Independent websites.Wilts said it was carried on the BBC News page. You contradicted him. But it was and still is on the main BBC News webpage.I'll ask again. What precisely are you trying to achieve here?
Quote from: BillyStubbsTears on April 01, 2021, 09:14:15 pmQuote from: Getridorit on April 01, 2021, 08:48:28 pmQuote from: BillyStubbsTears on April 01, 2021, 07:45:32 pmI'm not sure what sort of personal standards you need to have to, without any evidence, accuse someone of deliberately lying on an issue as horrific and heartbreaking as this, but there you go.See the attached.Nope, checked again. it's never been the leading story of either newspaper you claim? The point yet again the double standards of the press. I said it was the lead UK story in the Guardian. The very attachment I posted shows it as the lead story in the UK News section of The Guardian website. I said it was the lead story on the Independent webpage. It was but it had slipped down a few hours later when I took that screen grab.You said it wasn't on the front page of either the Independent or Guardian site. This two screen grabs in that attachment are of the front pages of the Guardian and Independent websites.Wilts said it was carried on the BBC News page. You contradicted him. But it was and still is on the main BBC News webpage.I'll ask again. What precisely are you trying to achieve here?I said it wasn't the lead story on either website, or the BBC, and it wasn't.My point is the huge difference in coverage, and more so, the outcry between the Cox and everhard murders.
It's more the press coverage and lack of outcry 6 months ago that I'm referring.
Quote from: Getridorit on April 01, 2021, 09:12:59 pmQuote from: Glyn_Wigley on April 01, 2021, 09:07:45 pmQuote from: Getridorit on April 01, 2021, 09:02:59 pmQuote from: Glyn_Wigley on April 01, 2021, 08:54:36 pmQuote from: Getridorit on April 01, 2021, 08:48:28 pmQuote from: BillyStubbsTears on April 01, 2021, 07:45:32 pmI'm not sure what sort of personal standards you need to have to, without any evidence, accuse someone of deliberately lying on an issue as horrific and heartbreaking as this, but there you go.See the attached.Nope, checked again. it's never been the leading story of either newspaper you claim? The point yet again the double standards of the press. It sounds like you think that no other news story should have been deemed more important than the report of the conviction of someone who committed a murder that happened six months ago.Sounds like your saying it doesn't matter, and not worth reporting because the murderer didn't fit the right profile. It should have been reported. And it was. Quite rightly.It's you that's got a pencil up their arse about the size of the coverage not being big enough for your liking, despite there being only one new piece of information to tell. Go on, then, tell us how you would have filled a front page with just a guilty verdict about an old story.It's more the press coverage and lack of outcry 6 months ago that I'm referring.Just don't understand the difference between the cases, that warranted the marked difference in outcry and press coverage.Lack of press coverage? I've just put 'lorraine cox newspaper reports' into Google. You do the same and then tell us all how little coverage it's had.
Quote from: Glyn_Wigley on April 01, 2021, 09:15:46 pmQuote from: Getridorit on April 01, 2021, 09:12:59 pmQuote from: Glyn_Wigley on April 01, 2021, 09:07:45 pmQuote from: Getridorit on April 01, 2021, 09:02:59 pmQuote from: Glyn_Wigley on April 01, 2021, 08:54:36 pmQuote from: Getridorit on April 01, 2021, 08:48:28 pmQuote from: BillyStubbsTears on April 01, 2021, 07:45:32 pmI'm not sure what sort of personal standards you need to have to, without any evidence, accuse someone of deliberately lying on an issue as horrific and heartbreaking as this, but there you go.See the attached.Nope, checked again. it's never been the leading story of either newspaper you claim? The point yet again the double standards of the press. It sounds like you think that no other news story should have been deemed more important than the report of the conviction of someone who committed a murder that happened six months ago.Sounds like your saying it doesn't matter, and not worth reporting because the murderer didn't fit the right profile. It should have been reported. And it was. Quite rightly.It's you that's got a pencil up their arse about the size of the coverage not being big enough for your liking, despite there being only one new piece of information to tell. Go on, then, tell us how you would have filled a front page with just a guilty verdict about an old story.It's more the press coverage and lack of outcry 6 months ago that I'm referring.Just don't understand the difference between the cases, that warranted the marked difference in outcry and press coverage.Lack of press coverage? I've just put 'lorraine cox newspaper reports' into Google. You do the same and then tell us all how little coverage it's had.Yes, it had coverage. But a fraction of the everhard murder.Also why no public outcry on the scale of the everhard murder?
Quote from: Getridorit on April 01, 2021, 09:18:54 pmQuote from: BillyStubbsTears on April 01, 2021, 09:14:15 pmQuote from: Getridorit on April 01, 2021, 08:48:28 pmQuote from: BillyStubbsTears on April 01, 2021, 07:45:32 pmI'm not sure what sort of personal standards you need to have to, without any evidence, accuse someone of deliberately lying on an issue as horrific and heartbreaking as this, but there you go.See the attached.Nope, checked again. it's never been the leading story of either newspaper you claim? The point yet again the double standards of the press. I said it was the lead UK story in the Guardian. The very attachment I posted shows it as the lead story in the UK News section of The Guardian website. I said it was the lead story on the Independent webpage. It was but it had slipped down a few hours later when I took that screen grab.You said it wasn't on the front page of either the Independent or Guardian site. This two screen grabs in that attachment are of the front pages of the Guardian and Independent websites.Wilts said it was carried on the BBC News page. You contradicted him. But it was and still is on the main BBC News webpage.I'll ask again. What precisely are you trying to achieve here?I said it wasn't the lead story on either website, or the BBC, and it wasn't.My point is the huge difference in coverage, and more so, the outcry between the Cox and everhard murders. Ahem.QuoteIt's more the press coverage and lack of outcry 6 months ago that I'm referring.Make your fecking mind up.It's because it's a six-months old story that it wouldn't get much coverage today, as I've explained.
Quote from: Getridorit on April 01, 2021, 09:21:06 pmQuote from: Glyn_Wigley on April 01, 2021, 09:15:46 pmQuote from: Getridorit on April 01, 2021, 09:12:59 pmQuote from: Glyn_Wigley on April 01, 2021, 09:07:45 pmQuote from: Getridorit on April 01, 2021, 09:02:59 pmQuote from: Glyn_Wigley on April 01, 2021, 08:54:36 pmQuote from: Getridorit on April 01, 2021, 08:48:28 pmQuote from: BillyStubbsTears on April 01, 2021, 07:45:32 pmI'm not sure what sort of personal standards you need to have to, without any evidence, accuse someone of deliberately lying on an issue as horrific and heartbreaking as this, but there you go.See the attached.Nope, checked again. it's never been the leading story of either newspaper you claim? The point yet again the double standards of the press. It sounds like you think that no other news story should have been deemed more important than the report of the conviction of someone who committed a murder that happened six months ago.Sounds like your saying it doesn't matter, and not worth reporting because the murderer didn't fit the right profile. It should have been reported. And it was. Quite rightly.It's you that's got a pencil up their arse about the size of the coverage not being big enough for your liking, despite there being only one new piece of information to tell. Go on, then, tell us how you would have filled a front page with just a guilty verdict about an old story.It's more the press coverage and lack of outcry 6 months ago that I'm referring.Just don't understand the difference between the cases, that warranted the marked difference in outcry and press coverage.Lack of press coverage? I've just put 'lorraine cox newspaper reports' into Google. You do the same and then tell us all how little coverage it's had.Yes, it had coverage. But a fraction of the everhard murder.Also why no public outcry on the scale of the everhard murder? Ask the fecking public.Still waiting to hear what you'd fill the front page with btw.
Of course, all murderers should be treated with equal contempt, and their victims should be given the same amount of sympathy and support, but they're not. Had the Murderer in this case been a White man, and the victim a Black girl, social media would have been flooded with outrage far more than it is, and that includes this forum.It is as though some people are frightened to comment on this particular act of evil in fear of being called a racist.
Quote from: Glyn_Wigley on April 01, 2021, 09:20:16 pmQuote from: Getridorit on April 01, 2021, 09:18:54 pmQuote from: BillyStubbsTears on April 01, 2021, 09:14:15 pmQuote from: Getridorit on April 01, 2021, 08:48:28 pmQuote from: BillyStubbsTears on April 01, 2021, 07:45:32 pmI'm not sure what sort of personal standards you need to have to, without any evidence, accuse someone of deliberately lying on an issue as horrific and heartbreaking as this, but there you go.See the attached.Nope, checked again. it's never been the leading story of either newspaper you claim? The point yet again the double standards of the press. I said it was the lead UK story in the Guardian. The very attachment I posted shows it as the lead story in the UK News section of The Guardian website. I said it was the lead story on the Independent webpage. It was but it had slipped down a few hours later when I took that screen grab.You said it wasn't on the front page of either the Independent or Guardian site. This two screen grabs in that attachment are of the front pages of the Guardian and Independent websites.Wilts said it was carried on the BBC News page. You contradicted him. But it was and still is on the main BBC News webpage.I'll ask again. What precisely are you trying to achieve here?I said it wasn't the lead story on either website, or the BBC, and it wasn't.My point is the huge difference in coverage, and more so, the outcry between the Cox and everhard murders. Ahem.QuoteIt's more the press coverage and lack of outcry 6 months ago that I'm referring.Make your fecking mind up.It's because it's a six-months old story that it wouldn't get much coverage today, as I've explained.Yes, I've literally repeated myself.So?
Quote from: Glyn_Wigley on April 01, 2021, 09:22:21 pmQuote from: Getridorit on April 01, 2021, 09:21:06 pmQuote from: Glyn_Wigley on April 01, 2021, 09:15:46 pmQuote from: Getridorit on April 01, 2021, 09:12:59 pmQuote from: Glyn_Wigley on April 01, 2021, 09:07:45 pmQuote from: Getridorit on April 01, 2021, 09:02:59 pmQuote from: Glyn_Wigley on April 01, 2021, 08:54:36 pmQuote from: Getridorit on April 01, 2021, 08:48:28 pmQuote from: BillyStubbsTears on April 01, 2021, 07:45:32 pmI'm not sure what sort of personal standards you need to have to, without any evidence, accuse someone of deliberately lying on an issue as horrific and heartbreaking as this, but there you go.See the attached.Nope, checked again. it's never been the leading story of either newspaper you claim? The point yet again the double standards of the press. It sounds like you think that no other news story should have been deemed more important than the report of the conviction of someone who committed a murder that happened six months ago.Sounds like your saying it doesn't matter, and not worth reporting because the murderer didn't fit the right profile. It should have been reported. And it was. Quite rightly.It's you that's got a pencil up their arse about the size of the coverage not being big enough for your liking, despite there being only one new piece of information to tell. Go on, then, tell us how you would have filled a front page with just a guilty verdict about an old story.It's more the press coverage and lack of outcry 6 months ago that I'm referring.Just don't understand the difference between the cases, that warranted the marked difference in outcry and press coverage.Lack of press coverage? I've just put 'lorraine cox newspaper reports' into Google. You do the same and then tell us all how little coverage it's had.Yes, it had coverage. But a fraction of the everhard murder.Also why no public outcry on the scale of the everhard murder? Ask the fecking public.Still waiting to hear what you'd fill the front page with btw.I'm asking you
Quote from: Getridorit on April 01, 2021, 09:22:58 pmQuote from: Glyn_Wigley on April 01, 2021, 09:20:16 pmQuote from: Getridorit on April 01, 2021, 09:18:54 pmQuote from: BillyStubbsTears on April 01, 2021, 09:14:15 pmQuote from: Getridorit on April 01, 2021, 08:48:28 pmQuote from: BillyStubbsTears on April 01, 2021, 07:45:32 pmI'm not sure what sort of personal standards you need to have to, without any evidence, accuse someone of deliberately lying on an issue as horrific and heartbreaking as this, but there you go.See the attached.Nope, checked again. it's never been the leading story of either newspaper you claim? The point yet again the double standards of the press. I said it was the lead UK story in the Guardian. The very attachment I posted shows it as the lead story in the UK News section of The Guardian website. I said it was the lead story on the Independent webpage. It was but it had slipped down a few hours later when I took that screen grab.You said it wasn't on the front page of either the Independent or Guardian site. This two screen grabs in that attachment are of the front pages of the Guardian and Independent websites.Wilts said it was carried on the BBC News page. You contradicted him. But it was and still is on the main BBC News webpage.I'll ask again. What precisely are you trying to achieve here?I said it wasn't the lead story on either website, or the BBC, and it wasn't.My point is the huge difference in coverage, and more so, the outcry between the Cox and everhard murders. Ahem.QuoteIt's more the press coverage and lack of outcry 6 months ago that I'm referring.Make your fecking mind up.It's because it's a six-months old story that it wouldn't get much coverage today, as I've explained.Yes, I've literally repeated myself.So? No, you've contradicted yourself.
Quote from: Getridorit on April 01, 2021, 09:23:47 pmQuote from: Glyn_Wigley on April 01, 2021, 09:22:21 pmQuote from: Getridorit on April 01, 2021, 09:21:06 pmQuote from: Glyn_Wigley on April 01, 2021, 09:15:46 pmQuote from: Getridorit on April 01, 2021, 09:12:59 pmQuote from: Glyn_Wigley on April 01, 2021, 09:07:45 pmQuote from: Getridorit on April 01, 2021, 09:02:59 pmQuote from: Glyn_Wigley on April 01, 2021, 08:54:36 pmQuote from: Getridorit on April 01, 2021, 08:48:28 pmQuote from: BillyStubbsTears on April 01, 2021, 07:45:32 pmI'm not sure what sort of personal standards you need to have to, without any evidence, accuse someone of deliberately lying on an issue as horrific and heartbreaking as this, but there you go.See the attached.Nope, checked again. it's never been the leading story of either newspaper you claim? The point yet again the double standards of the press. It sounds like you think that no other news story should have been deemed more important than the report of the conviction of someone who committed a murder that happened six months ago.Sounds like your saying it doesn't matter, and not worth reporting because the murderer didn't fit the right profile. It should have been reported. And it was. Quite rightly.It's you that's got a pencil up their arse about the size of the coverage not being big enough for your liking, despite there being only one new piece of information to tell. Go on, then, tell us how you would have filled a front page with just a guilty verdict about an old story.It's more the press coverage and lack of outcry 6 months ago that I'm referring.Just don't understand the difference between the cases, that warranted the marked difference in outcry and press coverage.Lack of press coverage? I've just put 'lorraine cox newspaper reports' into Google. You do the same and then tell us all how little coverage it's had.Yes, it had coverage. But a fraction of the everhard murder.Also why no public outcry on the scale of the everhard murder? Ask the fecking public.Still waiting to hear what you'd fill the front page with btw.I'm asking you As I haven't outcried anything, I'm the wrong person to ask!