The Great Divide

[Hartley]

We've all poured over the facts, half truths and outright lies regarding this case, presented on this forum and elsewhere.

A common phrase which is often typed with exasperation into a forum reply is "I can't understand why you can't see that", which is often preceded by a document or image which a person believes beyond doubt proves their take on a particular issue to be the correct and accurate one.

I've come to the conclusion that there are intelligent people on both sides of the argument, there isn't an intellectual divide, so it can't be the case that somebody doesn't agree with somebody else because one person has the intelligence to see the truth and the other doesn't.

So what is it?

I've witnessed over the last year or so a clear divide on peoples opinions of the police, the courts, judges, the CCRC and in fact nearly all aspects of the state.
The clear divide is that those who believe Jeremy to be innocent, generally have a poor opinion of these groups (for want of a better word) and see them as undesirable or even harmful, they are often very emotional about their view although that emotion often manifests itself in a negative or critical way.
Then there are those who believe in Jeremy's guilt, who generally have a good opinion of the police, courts, judges, the CCRC etc, they also seem to be more willing to support and accept the actions and decisions of these groups, and less able to accept criticism of them.

That's a very loose and by no means exclusive description, with various extremes and exceptions within each camp.

Some people may have guessed where I'm going with this by now, but the description above of the two camps, seems to quite neatly fit into two opposing political spectrums, a left (Camp Innocent) and a right (Camp Guilty), with the fence sitters propping up the centre.

I often wonder if the same group of people on this forum were tasked with discussing another, but equally emotive subject, whether the divides would be identical.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sorry, just random musings whilst it was quiet. 

[ngb1066]

We've all poured over the facts, half truths and outright lies regarding this case, presented on this forum and elsewhere.

A common phrase which is often typed with exasperation into a forum reply is "I can't understand why you can't see that", which is often preceded by a document or image which a person believes beyond doubt proves their take on a particular issue to be the correct and accurate one.

I've come to the conclusion that there are intelligent people on both sides of the argument, there isn't an intellectual divide, so it can't be the case that somebody doesn't agree with somebody else because one person has the intelligence to see the truth and the other doesn't.

So what is it?

I've witnessed over the last year or so a clear divide on peoples opinions of the police, the courts, judges, the CCRC and in fact nearly all aspects of the state.
The clear divide is that those who believe Jeremy to be innocent, generally have a poor opinion of these groups (for want of a better word) and see them as undesirable or even harmful, they are often very emotional about their view although that emotion often manifests itself in a negative or critical way.
Then there are those who believe in Jeremy's guilt, who generally have a good opinion of the police, courts, judges, the CCRC etc, they also seem to be more willing to support and accept the actions and decisions of these groups, and less able to accept criticism of them.

That's a very loose and by no means exclusive description, with various extremes and exceptions within each camp.

Some people may have guessed where I'm going with this by now, but the description above of the two camps, seems to quite neatly fit into two opposing political spectrums, a left (Camp Innocent) and a right (Camp Guilty), with the fence sitters propping up the centre.

I often wonder if the same group of people on this forum were tasked with discussing another, but equally emotive subject, whether the divides would be identical.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sorry, just random musings whilst it was quiet. 

I think there is some merit in your hypothesis.  Those who believe JB to be a MOJ victim tend to have a more critical attitude towards the police and the legal system.  Those views tend to be more associated with those on the left of the political spectrum.  On the other hand I do not believe that JB's supporters can be generally labelled as left wing.  To give an example one of his most staunch supporters is the former MP Andrew Hunter, who is on the far right of the conservative party.  Some of JB's supporters on this forum have indicated that their political views are conservative rather than left wing. 

 

[nugnug]

that doesnt take in to account people who have changed sides.

[Hartley]

that doesnt take in to account people who have changed sides.

I said there were exceptions.

[vidvic]

that doesnt take in to account people who have changed sides.

Maybe they are floating voters! lol

[Hartley]

Maybe they are floating voters! lol

 

[lonny]

"I can't understand why you can't see that"

I really really can't see how anyone can think he is guilty when there is simply no hard evidence against him. Take away all the evidence from people with a financial interest in him being found guilty and there is nothing left to convict him with....it's that simple for me 

[ngb1066]

Maybe they are floating voters! lol

Maybe we should have a poll.

[Hartley]

I think there is some merit in your hypothesis.  Those who believe JB to be a MOJ victim tend to have a more critical attitude towards the police and the legal system.  Those views tend to be more associated with those on the left of the political spectrum.  On the other hand I do not believe that JB's supporters can be generally labelled as left wing.  To give an example one of his most staunch supporters is the former MP Andrew Hunter, who is on the far right of the conservative party.  Some of JB's supporters on this forum have indicated that their political views are conservative rather than left wing. 

Yes, it was just an observation, I wasn't trying to label anybody.

[JackiePreece]

I find an argument that has been used too much on this forum by guilty posters is JB was found guilty by a majority jury and has had two appeals turned down

I do not think that is an arguement when JB has protested his innocence from day 1 and still does

We are really here to debate if this case should go to the appeal court

Juries and Appeal Court Judges have made numerous mistakes in the past and will do in the future

Then we go to the PII evidence still being held. I think if this evidence was all released we would all feel more comfortable which side of the fence we are on

[DV8]

I really really can't see how anyone can think he is guilty when there is simply no hard evidence against him. Take away all the evidence from people with a financial interest in him being found guilty and there is nothing left to convict him with....it's that simple for me 

Colin Cafell. The murdered  twins father.

[DV8]

Could I ask Hartley and Vic if you think the case should go to the CoA for a third time. I would imagine you don't want it to but giving the recent McKay evidence, do you think it should?

[vidvic]

I haven't seen the evidence presented to the CCRC so have no idea how strong it is.

If it is strong enough then they will refer if it's not then so be it.

[Hartley]

Could I ask Hartley and Vic if you think the case should go to the CoA for a third time. I would imagine you don't want it to but giving the recent McKay evidence, do you think it should?

Hi DV8, I've made no secret of my opinion that Jeremy is guilty and it is my gut feeling that this case has little to no chance of being referred, based on what information I have seen.

However, as per a reply to Jackie yesterday, I would also like to emphasise that I have no idea what is contained within the defences submission to the CCRC and I am certainly not in any position where I am any more informed of the likely outcome,than anybody else.

[DV8]

Thank's Vic and Hartley. Could I ask do the relatives get a pre-warning by the CCRC of their decisions or do they find out  when the decision is made public?