Feral nigger throws 8 year old boy into train (Germany)

1. 2019-07-29 at 6:43 PM UTC

   #21
   

   -SpectraL coward [the spuriously bluish-lilac bushman]

   Originally posted by itybit As a mother, I would think she would have saved the child before herself

   
   But she would have known both would have died if she tried to save her child.
2. 2019-07-29 at 6:43 PM UTC

   #22
   

   Speedy Parker Black Hole [my absentmindedly lachrymatory gazania]

   Originally posted by -SpectraL But she would have known both would have died if she tried to save her child.

   
   You have no way of knowing that.
3. 2019-07-29 at 6:50 PM UTC

   #23
   

   itybit African Astronaut [daze my amino pe-tsai]

   Originally posted by -SpectraL But she would have known both would have died if she tried to save her child.

   
   True Speedy. Why could she not have grab the child and they both jump/step to the place she saved herself.
4. 2019-07-29 at 6:51 PM UTC

   #24
   

   -SpectraL coward [the spuriously bluish-lilac bushman]

   Originally posted by itybit True Speedy. Why could she not have grab the child and they both jump/step to the place she saved herself.

   
   Not enough time? The guy must have pushed them just seconds before the train came in.
5. 2019-07-29 at 6:53 PM UTC

   #25
   

   itybit African Astronaut [daze my amino pe-tsai]
   LOL where in the story does it say they had so many seconds to get the hell out of the way. If she had enough time to save herself she had as much time to save the child
6. 2019-07-29 at 6:53 PM UTC

   #26
   

   Star Trek VI: The Undiscovered Country Dark Matter [my scoffingly uncritical tinning]
   I know bad things happen, but it is worth staying the course, in 100 years time Germany will be a beautiful brown country, which makes all of this worthwhile.
7. 2019-07-29 at 6:56 PM UTC

   #27
   

   Speedy Parker Black Hole [my absentmindedly lachrymatory gazania]

   Originally posted by itybit LOL where in the story does it say they had so many seconds to get the hell out of the way. If she had enough time to save herself she had as much time to save the child

   
   LOL, where in the story does it say the child landed close enough to her for her to grab as she jumped to safety?
8. 2019-07-29 at 6:57 PM UTC

   #28
   

   itybit African Astronaut [daze my amino pe-tsai]
   You have a point I assumed if she was a responsible mother with a child of that age on a crowded platform she would have ahold of the childs hand
9. 2019-07-29 at 7:24 PM UTC

   #29
   

   -SpectraL coward [the spuriously bluish-lilac bushman]
   They should put on the child's gravestone, "Mommy Let Me Get Run Over By the Big Train".
10. 2019-07-29 at 7:25 PM UTC

    #30
    

    vindicktive vinny Black Hole

    Originally posted by Star Trek VI: The Undiscovered Country I know bad things happen, but it is worth staying the course, in 100 years time Germany will be a beautiful brown country, which makes all of this worthwhile.

    
    like baltimore.
11. 2019-07-29 at 7:29 PM UTC

    #31
    

    Speedy Parker Black Hole [my absentmindedly lachrymatory gazania]

    Originally posted by itybit You have a point I assumed if she was a responsible mother with a child of that age on a crowded platform she would have ahold of the childs hand

    
    Being shoved.... Was she shoved first? Was the child shoved first? If you were shoved in front of train while holding a child's hand would you maintain grip or not? I don't know as I've never had that happen. There are factors the story can't convey to make a judgment on the mother.
12. 2019-07-29 at 7:30 PM UTC

    #32
    

    -SpectraL coward [the spuriously bluish-lilac bushman]
    ITT: we excuse the mother's actions/inactions
13. 2019-07-29 at 7:32 PM UTC

    #33
    

    Speedy Parker Black Hole [my absentmindedly lachrymatory gazania]

    Originally posted by -SpectraL ITT: we excuse the mother's actions/inactions

    
    Saying you can't judge based on the information at hand is not a condemnation nor an exoneration. So your opinion has no merit.
14. 2019-07-29 at 7:35 PM UTC

    #34
    

    -SpectraL coward [the spuriously bluish-lilac bushman]

    Originally posted by Speedy Parker Saying you can't judge based on the information at hand is not a condemnation nor an exoneration. So your opinion has no merit.

    
    That's the Mueller Defense.
15. 2019-07-29 at 7:42 PM UTC

    #35
    

    Speedy Parker Black Hole [my absentmindedly lachrymatory gazania]

    Originally posted by -SpectraL That's the Mueller Defense.

    
    What is your opinion on innocent until proven guilty?
16. 2019-07-29 at 7:46 PM UTC

    #36
    

    -SpectraL coward [the spuriously bluish-lilac bushman]

    Originally posted by Speedy Parker What is your opinion on innocent until proven guilty?

    
    If there's direct evidence, like fingerprints/DNA/multiple eyewitnesses, confession, then the presumption of innocence should be reversed, and the onus placed on the accused to prove his innocence.
17. 2019-07-29 at 7:53 PM UTC

    #37
    

    Speedy Parker Black Hole [my absentmindedly lachrymatory gazania]

    Originally posted by -SpectraL If there's direct evidence, like fingerprints/DNA/multiple eyewitnesses, confession, then the presumption of innocence should be reversed, and the onus placed on the accused to prove his innocence.

    
    In that case why even have a trial if you have fingerprints? If someone is presumed guilty why fuss things up with a pesky trial and slow the wheels of justice. Hell we can just replace the blind justice with the scales things with a fucking guy on a steamroller roller peaking through his fingers looking for fingerprints.
    
    

    IN 1984 KIRK BLOODSWORTH was convicted of the rape and murder of a nine-year-old girl and sentenced to the gas chamber—an outcome that rested largely on the testimony of five eyewitnesses. After Bloodsworth served nine years in prison, DNA testing proved him to be innocent. Such devastating mistakes by eyewitnesses are not rare…

    
    https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/do-the-eyes-have-it/
18. 2019-07-29 at 8:07 PM UTC

    #38
    

    -SpectraL coward [the spuriously bluish-lilac bushman]

    Originally posted by Speedy Parker In that case why even have a trial if you have fingerprints? If someone is presumed guilty why fuss things up with a pesky trial and slow the wheels of justice. Hell we can just replace the blind justice with the scales things with a fucking guy on a steamroller roller peaking through his fingers looking for fingerprints.
    
    
    
    https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/do-the-eyes-have-it/

    
    I meant when everything points to the guilt, like DNA, combined with fingerprints, combined with eyewitnesses. That's direct evidence. And I said the onus reverses, not that he's automatically guilty.
19. 2019-07-29 at 8:09 PM UTC

    #39
    

    Speedy Parker Black Hole [my absentmindedly lachrymatory gazania]

    Originally posted by -SpectraL I meant when everything points to the guilt, like DNA, combined with fingerprints, combined with eyewitnesses. That's direct evidence. And I said the onus reverses, not that he's automatically guilty.

    
    How do you establish that "evidence" without a trial? Who determines if the evidence is "direct"?
20. 2019-07-29 at 8:17 PM UTC

    #40
    

    Jiggaboo_Johnson Black Hole

    Originally posted by Speedy Parker How do you establish that "evidence" without a trial? Who determines if the evidence is "direct"?

    
    You don't need a trial for evidence, evidence comes before a trial. If it's credible evidence the trial will take place, if it's not it wont. The Grand Jury look at the evidence before indicting.