Sixteen year old rapist and murderer is publicly named.

First topic message reminder :

A judge has revealed the identity of the killer of six year old Alesha MacPhail today, after the 16 year old was tried anonymously due to his age.
Underage killers have received anonymity in the UK after the James Bulger case, and the problems that ensued when his underage killers Thompson and Venables were named.

Should Aaron Campbell, the 16 year old who lives on the Isle of Bute have been named?


"The depraved 16-year-old boy who raped and murdered Alesha MacPhail was caught out by his own mother's CCTV as he came home in the middle of the night after killing the six-year-old girl, it emerged today.
Chilling footage revealed Aaron Campbell arriving and leaving twice outside his Isle of Bute family home on the night Alesha was abducted before her naked body was dumped in the woods with 117 injuries on July 2 last year.
His mother believed her teenage son might have seen something relevant to the investigation - and contacted police after reviewing the CCTV footage, despite her son being adamant he had nothing to do with the 'barbaric and wicked' murder on the Scottish holiday island.
The cat-torturing, adrenaline junkie teenager - who was obsessed with gaining YouTube followers, playing violent video games such as Fortnite and recording himself performing acrobatic moves on a trampoline - had received anonymity due to his age, but a judge unmasked him today."






https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6733191/Alesha-MacPhails-killer-named-pictured-time.html

Let me point this out again

You can speculate to the cows come home

Ho was his DNA all over the victim and her clothes

How was he seen out at this time between her death

How was his semen found inside her?

Now if the view he was set up, how based on the timeframe of death and location. Based on her grand mother being the last to see her. And no other person being caught on CCTV during this whole time. Do you not see the mountain of evidence against the convicted criminal here?

It all seems very odd to me...

Tommy Monk wrote:

It all seems very odd to me...

Why this single case and not others when the suspect is non-white?

Ful off dodge... it's nothing to do with race you idiot!

Tommy Monk wrote:

Ful off dodge... it's nothing to do with race you idiot!

It has everything to do with race with you Tommy

You actually believe this was someone non-white who is guilty. Is so obvious that you are so racist its beyond belief

When the evidence is so damning here

So show me any case that has a non-white suspect convicted that you have questioned?

And latino's do not count, as i know what case you will use for that

Can you name any case where you have questioned, where the convicted is Asian or black?

Have you questioned their conviction the crimes they were convicted for?

Thor wrote:

Tommy Monk wrote:

Ful off dodge... it's nothing to do with race you idiot!

It has everything to do with race with you Tommy

You actually believe this was someone non-white who is guilty. Is so obvious that you are so racist its beyond belief

When the evidence is so damning here

So show me any case that has a non-white suspect convicted that you have questioned?

And latino's do not count, as i know what case you will use for that

Can you name any case where you have questioned, where the convicted is Asian or black?

Have you questioned their conviction the crimes they were convicted for?

In fact , can you name me one grooming sex abuse case you have challenged, where the suspects were Asians?

Yawn...!

Tommy Monk wrote:

Yawn...!

I guess that is your answer

How many grooming cases that involved asians, have you questioned Tommy?

I never have

You took the verdict, as I did,. but you question, when the convicted is white

Its so easy to see how racist you are

Nobody picked up on this, but I always do

So again, show me how many cases you have challenged when the suspect is black or asian?

Or have you instead been adamant the guilty party was black or asian?

So lets put this into perspective

The evidence is damning with this case and yet when ever the suspect is white. Tommy always questions

Case example, the Soham murders. He thinks its a conspiracy, even though the guilty party has so much evidence against him and he confessed. Tommy argues in his defense.

Take any grooming case and Tommy automtacially takes the position they are guilty, without a second thought

I have seen time and again Tommy questions the evidence when rapists and murderers are white. As it does not fit his racial view point.

I have never seen him question any convicted criminal when black or asian

Hence people need to wake up to the fact, Tommy, is inherantly racist

Tommy does not care about victims, he only cares about racism and would try to get off white convicted criminals

You are talking absolute shit didge!


The victims of the Pakistani Muslim child rapists were able to name their attackers because they were alive...


However, in this case the victim is dead so unable to say who did it to her...


I've said why I think things are odd about this case.


So either stay on topic or piss off to bore other posters on another thread!

Tommy Monk wrote:You are talking absolute shit didge!


The victims of the Pakistani Muslim child rapists were able to name their attackers because they were alive...


However, in this case the victim is dead so unable to say who did it to her...


I've said why I think things are odd about this case.


So either stay on topic or piss off to bore other posters on another thread!

How am I talking bullshit?

Show me a case where you have defended a suspect or convicted criminal that is black or asian?

The Soham girls are dead and you have defended the murderer, as he is white

This thread is not about me... stay on topic or piss off to bore others on another thread!

Tommy Monk wrote:This thread is not about me... stay on topic or piss off to bore others on another thread!

Why are you so sacred of being exposed Tommy?

Have you or have you not defended Ian Kevin Huntley?

You are so sure of his innocence

Why?

Is it because he is white?

Why have you not taken such a stance on any gromming gang case and always taken the stance they are guilty?

Okay happy to debate this case

How is it he has his DNA all over her body and clothes and his semen in her?

Over to her

Yawn...

Thor wrote:

Tommy Monk wrote:This thread is not about me... stay on topic or piss off to bore others on another thread!

Why are you so sacred of being exposed Tommy?

Have you or have you not defended Ian Kevin Huntley?

You are so sure of his innocence

Why?

Is it because he is white?

Why have you not taken such a stance on any gromming gang case and always taken the stance they are guilty?

Okay happy to debate this case

How is it he has his DNA all over her body and clothes and his semen in her?

Over to her

The questons will not go away Tommy

How was it that none of the boys DNA was found anywhere in the place where aleisha was staying...?


There was also none of the girls DNA found in the boys home...


There was no traced of any blood found belonging to the girl... no evidence that the boy had showered to get rid of any blood...


https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/scottish-news/alesha-macphail-murder-accuseds-dna-14020371

Tommy Monk wrote:


How was it that none of the boys DNA was found anywhere in the place where aleisha was staying...?


There was also none of the girls DNA found in the boys home...


There was no traced of any blood found belonging to the girl... no evidence that the boy had showered to get rid of any blood...


https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/scottish-news/alesha-macphail-murder-accuseds-dna-14020371

Weell there ois a simple answer for the above

He took off the clothes he was wearing and put on the second clothes he had

Now how does tommy explain his racist reason to how his dna was all over her body and clothers and his semen was in her?

How does he explain that nobody else left the house and CCTV can explain this?

Has tommy actually shown me a case he questioned when the suspect or convicted was black or asian he defended?

Nope

There is your reasoning and even in my last post, he looks to defend a sexual rapist murderer, simple because he is white

What does that say about Tommy?

Answers on a postcard

He defends convicted peadophiles when white

So I will ask again

In what ever grooming case did Tommy question the findings?

Or did he take this as fact?

Ouch

Where did Tommy go?

Can you imagine anyone defending the Muslim grooming gangs?

Yet here we have Tommy defend a white peado murderer?

And people are silent on this

This shows Tommy does not care about child abuse or the victims

He only cares about using this as a measure to use against people non-white

He has just made a mockery of the grooming gang scandal.

Thor wrote:

Tommy Monk wrote:


How was it that none of the boys DNA was found anywhere in the place where aleisha was staying...?


There was also none of the girls DNA found in the boys home...


There was no traced of any blood found belonging to the girl... no evidence that the boy had showered to get rid of any blood...


https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/scottish-news/alesha-macphail-murder-accuseds-dna-14020371

Weell there ois a simple answer for the above

He took off the clothes he was wearing and put on the second clothes he had

Now how does tommy explain his racist reason to how his dna was all over her body and clothers and his semen was in her?

How does he explain that nobody else left the house and CCTV can explain this?

That does not answer why none of his DNA was found in aleishas home... and why none of her DNA was found in the boys home...


If he had crept into her top floor flat, and crept around the place... then he would have left DNA there... but the fact that none of his DNA was found there means he had never been in the flat and given that he'd never been in the flat, how would he know which room to look in to find the little girl...!?


If he had showered to try to get rid of any traces then there would still be traces left in the bathroom of his home...


Plus... loads of people left the boys home that night as he had had an exam party... lots of his friends had been there that night...!

Tommy Monk wrote:

Thor wrote:


Weell there ois a simple answer for the above

He took off the clothes he was wearing and put on the second clothes he had

Now how does tommy explain his racist reason to how his dna was all over her body and clothers and his semen was in her?

How does he explain that nobody else left the house and CCTV can explain this?

That does not answer why none of his DNA was found in aleishas home... and why none of her DNA was found in the boys home...
..!

Zero relevance and you fail to ask a view as to why it would have any relevance?

You fail to exaplin  how his DNA was all over her body and clothes and his semen was inside her body

How about you answer that 

All the rest is nothing more than speculative babble, made up by a far right Nazi, that defends white peadophiles that murder

You need to discount the first aspect, as all other bullshit by you does not matter

In your own time peadophille defender

Again i will ask

Out of the many grooming gang cases has Tommy questioned where the suspects were Asian Muslims. To a view he thinks they are innocent?

Thor wrote:Again i will ask

Out of the many grooming gang cases has Tommy questioned where the suspects were Asian Muslims. To a view he thinks they are innocent?

Then ask Tommy if he thinks this is a cover up and that he thinks a asian or black person did this?

As why else does he only ever question such cases when the convicted criminal is white?

Didge... I repeat... the Pakistani Muslim child rapists were directly identified by the victims!!!


The only questions I have around all that is why the authorities ignored the victims for so long as well as actively trying to cover it all up and protect the perpetrators...!?


But... I will also repeat that none of this has anything to do with this thread... and this thread is not about me either!!!


So stop derailing this thread with your bullshit!!!

Tommy Monk wrote:

Didge... I repeat... the Pakistani Muslim child rapists were directly identified by the victims!!!


The only questions I have around all that is why the authorities ignored the victims for so long as well as actively trying to cover it all up and protect the perpetrators...!?


But... I will also repeat that none of this has anything to do with this thread... and this thread is not about me either!!!


So stop derailing this thread with your bullshit!!!

Copout alert

I am going to continue to expose you as a defender of murder, rape and a pedophile that killed a child

As you are yet to explain how he had his DNA all over the victim, her clothes and his semen was inside her

Hence its about as clear cut as it comes and yet you question this, but not any grooming gang case, which is based on the word of mouth of others.

I mean I back the word of mouth of victims, but here you dont back scientific evidence, when the suspect is white

The DNA of a 16-year-old boy accused of killing a girl, six, was found on her clothes and inside her, a court heard.

Forensic scientist Stuart Bailey said semen linked to the accused was discovered in Alesha MacPhail’s private parts. He confirmed genetic material matching the suspect was also found on her thighs, wrists, right hand, ankles, face, underarms, areas of bruising, her pants, neck, shorts and vest.

Questioned if the accused’s DNA could have been found on Alesha though secondary transfer from a third party, Mr Bailey said: ‘I can’t rule it out...'

Tommy Monk wrote:

The DNA of a 16-year-old boy accused of killing a girl, six, was found on her clothes and inside her, a court heard.

Forensic scientist Stuart Bailey said semen linked to the accused was discovered in Alesha MacPhail’s private parts. He confirmed genetic material matching the suspect was also found on her thighs, wrists, right hand, ankles, face, underarms, areas of bruising, her pants, neck, shorts and vest.

Questioned if the accused’s DNA could have been found on Alesha though secondary transfer from a third party, Mr Bailey said: ‘I can’t rule it out...'

How did it get there then Tommy?

I mean how was his DNA transfered all over her body and her clothes and his own semen

Take your time

Why wasn't his DNA found in her home or bedroom!?


Why wasn't her DNA found in his home or on other clothes there!?


If he had done what is thought... then surely the DNA evidence would be found in both locations too...!?

Tommy Monk wrote:

Why wasn't his DNA found in her home or bedroom!?


Why wasn't her DNA found in his home or on other clothes there!?


If he had done what is thought... then surely the DNA evidence would be found in both locations too...!?

Why would it be found in her home?

Why would it be found there

You offer no tanigle reasons, just speculative crap

Taking a person from her room does not mean he touched anything in her home, mainly as he was clothed you thick dummy

So again lets get back to some basic science

How the fuck was his DNA all over her body and her clothes and semen

I will tell you, because he raped and murdered her whilst he was clearly naked

DNA is easily transferred...


If he was in her home and grabbed her from her bedroom... firstly there would have been loads of noise made to alert the rest of the family... secondly, his DNA would have been left all over the place!!!

Tommy Monk wrote:


DNA is easily transferred...


If he was in her home and grabbed her from her bedroom... firstly there would have been loads of noise made to alert the rest of the family... secondly, his DNA would have been left all over the place!!!

How is it easily transfered when he claims not to even have met her?

So how did his semen end up in her vagina, on her body and clothes?

Why would there be lots of noise?

That again is simple conjective babble

Why again would his DNA be over the house, when he was clothed?

Its clear why it was over her body

Because he raped her and murdered her

Come on mr amateur dummy scientist

Expand on your piss poor claims with science?

DNA is easily transferred and his DNA would be in her home and her DNA would be in his home...


Do you not think that the little girl would have made a bit of noise if she was being grabbed by a stranger in the middle of the night!!!???

Tommy Monk wrote:


DNA is easily transferred and his DNA would be in her home and her DNA would be in his home...


Do you not think that the little girl would have made a bit of noise if she was being grabbed by a stranger in the middle of the night!!!???

How did his DNA get all over her body and clothes and his semen in her vagin, for the fifth time asking?

Why would a girl frightened make a noise when someone is threatening her?

Or placing her hand over her mouth and her throat?

What you are not doing is showing how that could not be possible

You are throwing up babble

There has been countless young people abducted under their parents very noses and mainly because a threat is made to the child

I mean what planet are you on with such bullshit lame questions

Which again you are of the opinion she woke up

This is what I mean how you never make such claims, when the convicted is black or asian

You see this is why i cannot take you seriously, when you come out with such bullshit like this

Why wasn't any of his DNA found anywhere in the little girls home...!?


And why wasn't any of the girls DNA found anywhere in his home...!?


The forensic expert has already stated that it was possible that somebody else planted the boys DNA on the girls body... this could have easily been done by somebody if they had managed to get hold of a set of the boys underwear and tracksuit bottoms and rubbed them over the child... and is entirely possible as a set of the boys underwear and tracksuit bottoms was found on beach nearby...

Tommy Monk wrote:

Why wasn't any of his DNA found anywhere in the little girls home...!?


And why wasn't any of the girls DNA found anywhere in his home...!?


The forensic expert has already stated that it was possible that somebody else planted the boys DNA on the girls body... this could have easily been done by somebody if they had managed to get hold of a set of the boys underwear and tracksuit bottoms and rubbed them over the child... and is entirely possible as a set of the boys underwear and tracksuit bottoms was found on beach nearby...

1) Again why would it be?

2) Again why would it be when he ditched his clothes

3) Yes he said its possible and you offer no explanation how. All you are doing is offering speculative bullshit which is whnt the defendent did funnily enough and jury never believe him and do you know?

It shows you have not read the whole trial have you, as what did he do afterwards?

Sorry, I am bored with your bullshit defense of a peado murderer, just because of his skin colour

Do a bit of research on how easy it is to transfer DNA...


Then try thinking...


Her DNA would be all over his body if he did it... then it would also be transferred to any other clothes that you say he changed into... plus it would then be transferred to various locations inside his house too!!!


Especially as it is claimed that he would have been covered in blood... and that he later had a shower to try to wash it all off of himself... because there would be traces of her blood still present in his bathroom!!!


But no trace of her DNA or blood found anywhere in his home or on any of his clothes!!!


And no traces of any of his DNA or fingerprints found in her home either!!!


Although you would expect to find his DNA/fingerprints on doors or door handles in her home etc, and even more likely found his DNA in her bedroom where he would have made direct contact with her bed linen/sheets etc, plus the DNA he would have shed and left behind during the physical act of grabbing and picking up and abducting the girl from her bed...!


But none of his DNA was found anywhere in her home/bedroom... not a single bit!!!

Tommy Monk wrote:

Do a bit of research on how easy it is to transfer DNA...


Then try thinking...


Her DNA would be all over his body if he did it... then it would also be transferred to any other clothes that you say he changed into... plus it would then be transferred to various locations inside his house too!!!


Especially as it is claimed that he would have been covered in blood... and that he later had a shower to try to wash it all off of himself... because there would be traces of her blood still present in his bathroom!!!


But no trace of her DNA or blood found anywhere in his home or on any of his clothes!!!


And no traces of any of his DNA or fingerprints found in her home either!!!


Although you would expect to find his DNA/fingerprints on doors or door handles in her home etc, and even more likely found his DNA in her bedroom where he would have made direct contact with her bed linen/sheets etc, plus the DNA he would have shed and left behind during the physical act of grabbing and picking up and abducting the girl from her bed...!


But none of his DNA was found anywhere in her home/bedroom... not a single bit!!!

1) Well i am thinking and waiting for you to provide me with a feesible explanation. As to how his DNA was found all over her body and her clothes and his semen was found inside her vagina. Again he claims he never met her nd only knew the father to buy dope from

2) You then go onto her DNA on his body and again offer no explanation as to how, when he has had the chance to clean himself

That has to go down as one of the most dumbest points you have made

3) He left the clothes he was wearing at the scence and clearly had another set of clothes and then went on later on social media about the forensic evidence, bragging. Or did you not get past that stupidity of that point?

4) What if he was weraing gloves? How would you then expect to find any DNA in the house or why need to when his DNA is all over her body?

You do realise this was a cold calculated murder, premeditated?

Its so boring reading your drivel here, when you cannot even come up with any sound scienitific reasoning

Its simple subjective drivel

So for the sixth time, how was his DNA found all over her body and clothes and his semen inside her vagina?

I seriously wish you would start  thinking and stop defending a murdering peado

Tommy Monk wrote:

The DNA of a 16-year-old boy accused of killing a girl, six, was found on her clothes and inside her, a court heard.

Forensic scientist Stuart Bailey said semen linked to the accused was discovered in Alesha MacPhail’s private parts. He confirmed genetic material matching the suspect was also found on her thighs, wrists, right hand, ankles, face, underarms, areas of bruising, her pants, neck, shorts and vest.

Questioned if the accused’s DNA could have been found on Alesha though secondary transfer from a third party, Mr Bailey said: ‘I can’t rule it out...'

I've already answered you... see above!



Now... why don't you answer my questions...!!!???


The lack of any of his DNA in her home/bedroom... and the lack of her DNA anywhere in his home... strongly suggests that he had never entered the girls home... and that he never had any contact with her to have her DNA on him either!!!


Which suggests that somebody else was responsible for her murder... and his DNA was planted on the girls body!!!


Also... the number of injuries would strongly suggest the murder was done by somebody close to her and during an outburst of extreme anger!


None of this fits with the boy being responsible!

Tommy Monk wrote:

Tommy Monk wrote:

The DNA of a 16-year-old boy accused of killing a girl, six, was found on her clothes and inside her, a court heard.

Forensic scientist Stuart Bailey said semen linked to the accused was discovered in Alesha MacPhail’s private parts. He confirmed genetic material matching the suspect was also found on her thighs, wrists, right hand, ankles, face, underarms, areas of bruising, her pants, neck, shorts and vest.

Questioned if the accused’s DNA could have been found on Alesha though secondary transfer from a third party, Mr Bailey said: ‘I can’t rule it out...'

I've already answered you... see above!
Now... why don't you answer my questions...!!!???
The lack of any of his DNA in her home/bedroom... and the lack of her DNA anywhere in his home... strongly suggests that he had never entered the girls home... and that he never had any contact with her to have her DNA on him either!!!
Which suggests that somebody else was responsible for her murder... and his DNA was planted on the girls body!!!
Also... the number of injuries would strongly suggest the murder was done by somebody close to her and during an outburst of extreme anger!


None of this fits with the boy being responsible!

OMG, so his DNA and semen found all over her body does not fit to tommy

WTF

I answered your subjective claims about DNA within her house

You just ignored my responses

Again, why would any of his DNA be in the house, whilst he is wearing clothes and possible wearing gloves, which i easily suspect he was.

Have you even checked wether they even checked for DNA in the house or needed to, based on his DNA being all over her body?

You see how you are simple offering up subective bullshit?

His DNA is at the scene of the crime, and so is his semen, which was found inside her vagina. Which the later you offer no resonable explanation how that is even possible.

This is why your argument falls apart

You look at possible subective holes, which have no substance and even worse, dont you think the defense would have also tried all these avenues as a defense?

I mean the worst aspect here and It makes me sick to the core, is you actually hold a belief that he is innocent and only again because of his skin colour

How you can even sit there and even possible be a person on a jury and ignore the countless damning evidence here and simple interject bullshit. Through an attempt to find him innocent. Is what is wrong with people like you

You have a racial motive for your views and what is even worse is his lies were exposed

How do you explain that Tommy?

I am glad this sick murdering peado is behind bars

I ill wait until the next criminal link you post up, where the guilty party is black or asian and ask you, why you are again never questioning the judgement

Maybe Tommy can explain this

The court heard DNA samples from the accused, his mother, Alesha's grandparents, her father and his girlfriend were taken for comparative purposes.

The jury was told various samples were taken from the child's body.

Mr Bailey said the accused's DNA was detected on the front of Alesha's neck.

The odds of it being from anyone else were more than one in a billion.

Traces from the accused were also found on the back of her neck and her face, but those samples were not subject to a statistical forecast.

A match for the accused's DNA was also detected on 14 parts of Alesha's body, including bruising.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-west-47280996

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-west-47291950

Why dont you actually read the evidence and how clearly he tried to cover his tracks

The one failing he did was to understand he could not remove his DNA from her body

He did everything else to remove his DNA from clothing and the knife, using salt water from the sea but being a clueless unscientific dummy like you. He never knew his DNA would match to the areas she was actually harmed

How you think that then could be a plant, shows how delusional you are

The "scene of the crime" starts at her home where she disappeared from and was allegedly abducted from...


And, yes, of course the home was thoroughly checked for forensic evidence...


But there was no DNA or fingerprint or any fibres or anything else found there that places the boy as ever being in the girls home!!!


Although... if he had of been in there that night and abducted the girl... he would most definitely have left some forensic evidence in there...!!!


But given that there was absolutely no trace of him ever being in the home ever... strongly suggests that he did not abduct the girl from her home at all!!!


Also... do you really think it possible for some pissed up teenager to have managed to enter the home and abduct a little girl from her bed, while bumbling and thumping about in the dark and not knowing the layout of the home or which door went where or where any furniture/obstacles might be to trip over etc, or made any noise from any creaky floor points or creaky doors etc, and also that the little girl wouldn't have made any noise either... and he was not only able to carry out all of this without making any sound that would have alerted anyone else there...!!!???


But he was also able to do all this without leaving a single trace of him ever even being there...!!!???



Well... I find this initial part of the story to be completely beyond belief... and it raises huge question marks about everything about this case!!!



There's something very fishy about this case...!

The only thing fishy, is your defense of a peado Tommy

I am not going to entertain your stupidity anymore

Everything you claim, has already been presented by the defense and yet 12 sound minded people convicted this vile paedo murderer

You want to believe otherwise, be my guest, as you are not convincing anyone

As again you ignore the mountain of evidence that convicts him

All you have done is try to pick and poorly so, attempts to holes in the prosecution case, which the defense already tried

Nobody gives a shit, if you think its fishy

I only give a shit, that you seem to defend peados, when they have white skin

That makes me view you as a peadophile defender

I am sick to death of your bullshit poor subjective claims, because not once did you actually answer my questions,  when I actually answered yours

Hence why with you, its always a one sided debate, where you avoid everything. Just as you have with the evidence

Your claim he would have left some evidence at the home, is so weak, based on reality. Its only based on your delusions. Not once do you even contmplate how someone calaculated would have tried to ensure not leaving any evidence in the house. The evidence that convicted him, was the evidence he could never remove. His DNA on her injuries. The very point you constantly ignore

Your view on the layout is even more dumb, when we are talking about a calculated murderer. We are also talking about a father that smokes dope. Did you factor that and how this would make them less lilkely to be woken up?

You see everything you claim is based on your own subjective view, never once every thinking outside the box. You only see what seems to fit your narative.

Its why you have such a closeminded view point, because not once have you actual;ly challenged any view you claim. If you did, you would see the countless holes in your claim. If you looked skeptically at your own claims, you would see there is an eeasy explanation. You just dont want to open your mind to the possibility there is an easy explanation. You have yourself created a scenario, which you thinkj is full proof, but has far more holes than the defense story. Its simple made up bullshit. I mean you some lame wally on a forum, thinks he is better than defense lawyers? Who did their best to defend him and you think you know better than them?



That shows how much you are embarressing yourself

Now the best thing I suggest you do, is protest outside the victims house, that he is innocent and see how long you last before being ending up in hospital

Good luck with that and enjoy looking a dick defending a convicted murdering peado

The floor is all yours

I am done with your fucking stupidity

Interesting how you think this boy knew so much about DNA that he was so careful not to leave any of his DNA in the girls home, and was so careful to try to remove all of her DNA from himself and his clothes and his own home... but he didn't think that he would be leaving his DNA all over the victim...!?


And he was also clever enough to take a change of underpants and tracksuit bottoms with him while committing this terrible act, in an attempt to somehow hide his involvement... but stupid enough to leave his original clothes on the nearby beach to be so easily found...!!!???



None of this adds up to me...!!!

Tommy Monk wrote:

Interesting how you think this boy knew so much about DNA that he was so careful not to leave any of his DNA in the girls home, and was so careful to try to remove all of her DNA from himself and his clothes and his own home... but he didn't think that he would be leaving his DNA all over the victim...!?


And he was also clever enough to take a change of underpants and tracksuit bottoms with him while committing this terrible act, in an attempt to somehow hide his involvement... but stupid enough to leave his original clothes on the nearby beach to be so easily found...!!!???



None of this adds up to me...!!!

Do you think these people are guilty Tommy?

http://www.newsfixboard.com/t26149-today-s-news-from-london#501937

Does their skin colour add up to you?

Thor wrote:The only thing fishy, is your defense of a peado Tommy

I am not going to entertain your stupidity anymore

Everything you claim, has already been presented by the defense and yet 12 sound minded people convicted this vile paedo murderer

You want to believe otherwise, be my guest, as you are not convincing anyone

As again you ignore the mountain of evidence that convicts him

All you have done is try to pick and poorly so, attempts to holes in the prosecution case, which the defense already tried

Nobody gives a shit, if you think its fishy

I only give a shit, that you seem to defend peados, when they have white skin

That makes me view you as a peadophile defender

I am sick to death of your bullshit poor subjective claims, because not once did you actually answer my questions,  when I actually answered yours

Hence why with you, its always a one sided debate, where you avoid everything. Just as you have with the evidence

Your claim he would have left some evidence at the home, is so weak, based on reality. Its only based on your delusions. Not once do you even contmplate how someone calaculated would have tried to ensure not leaving any evidence in the house. The evidence that convicted him, was the evidence he could never remove. His DNA on her injuries. The very point you constantly ignore

Your view on the layout is even more dumb, when we are talking about a calculated murderer. We are also talking about a father that smokes dope. Did you factor that and how this would make them less lilkely to be woken up?

You see everything you claim is based on your own subjective view, never once every thinking outside the box. You only see what seems to fit your narative.

Its why you have such a closeminded view point, because not once have you actual;ly challenged any view you claim. If you did, you would see the countless holes in your claim. If you looked skeptically at your own claims, you would see there is an eeasy explanation. You just dont want to open your mind to the possibility there is an easy explanation. You have yourself created a scenario, which you thinkj is full proof, but has far more holes than the defense story. Its simple made up bullshit. I mean you some lame wally on a forum, thinks he is better than defense lawyers? Who did their best to defend him and you think you know better than them?



That shows how much you are embarressing yourself

Now the best thing I suggest you do, is protest outside the victims house, that he is innocent and see how long you last before being ending up in hospital

Good luck with that and enjoy looking a dick defending a convicted murdering peado

The floor is all yours

I am done with your fucking stupidity

Well... I won't take any lectures from an idiot like you... who doesn't even know enough about this case to actually know how many people were even on the jury...!!!


Also... if I was so motivated by race... and only backing whites suspected of involvement in such crimes... then why haven't you ever heard me sticking up for the McCanns, with me instead claiming that a non white person was really responsible for her disappearance...!!!???



I've told you many times before that if you want to try to get clever with me, then you have to back it up with intelligence... but... as usual... you show that you are really just an idiot who talks absolute shit!!!

Tommy Monk wrote:

Thor wrote:The only thing fishy, is your defense of a peado Tommy

I am not going to entertain your stupidity anymore

Everything you claim, has already been presented by the defense and yet 12 sound minded people convicted this vile paedo murderer

You want to believe otherwise, be my guest, as you are not convincing anyone

As again you ignore the mountain of evidence that convicts him

All you have done is try to pick and poorly so, attempts to holes in the prosecution case, which the defense already tried

Nobody gives a shit, if you think its fishy

I only give a shit, that you seem to defend peados, when they have white skin

That makes me view you as a peadophile defender

I am sick to death of your bullshit poor subjective claims, because not once did you actually answer my questions,  when I actually answered yours

Hence why with you, its always a one sided debate, where you avoid everything. Just as you have with the evidence

Your claim he would have left some evidence at the home, is so weak, based on reality. Its only based on your delusions. Not once do you even contmplate how someone calaculated would have tried to ensure not leaving any evidence in the house. The evidence that convicted him, was the evidence he could never remove. His DNA on her injuries. The very point you constantly ignore

Your view on the layout is even more dumb, when we are talking about a calculated murderer. We are also talking about a father that smokes dope. Did you factor that and how this would make them less lilkely to be woken up?

You see everything you claim is based on your own subjective view, never once every thinking outside the box. You only see what seems to fit your narative.

Its why you have such a closeminded view point, because not once have you actual;ly challenged any view you claim. If you did, you would see the countless holes in your claim. If you looked skeptically at your own claims, you would see there is an eeasy explanation. You just dont want to open your mind to the possibility there is an easy explanation. You have yourself created a scenario, which you thinkj is full proof, but has far more holes than the defense story. Its simple made up bullshit. I mean you some lame wally on a forum, thinks he is better than defense lawyers? Who did their best to defend him and you think you know better than them?



That shows how much you are embarressing yourself

Now the best thing I suggest you do, is protest outside the victims house, that he is innocent and see how long you last before being ending up in hospital

Good luck with that and enjoy looking a dick defending a convicted murdering peado

The floor is all yours

I am done with your fucking stupidity

Well... I won't take any lectures from an idiot like you... who doesn't even know enough about this case to actually know how many people were even on the jury...!!!


Also... if I was so motivated by race... and only backing whites suspected of involvement in such crimes... then why haven't you ever heard me sticking up for the McCanns, with me instead claiming that a non white person was really responsible for her disappearance...!!!???



I've told you many times before that if you want to try to get clever with me, then you have to back it up with intelligence... but... as usual... you show that you are really just an idiot who talks absolute shit!!!

ha ha ha

Is that your defense. A case where a white girl goes missing from white parents abroad, to claim you are not racist?

So in other words a case that is not ever defending someone black or asian then

I just used intelligence and showed you up

What did you say about Stephen lawrence a man murdered?

That he was a wrongun and what did you base this on?

Some white supremacists you knew in Ealing

I knew this racist wankers in ealing too and I used to get into rows with them. As my best mate was half Irish and Jamaican

So show me a case, where you have ever called into question where blacks or asians have been convicted?

You know why you cant, because you are a vile racist little scum bag that hides behind your pc spouting racist bullshit

In my youth, I would have beat the living shit out of youth for the scum you are.

Even now i could do it with both my hands tied behind my back

I would not even bother, because you simple are not worth it

You simple are racist scum and I only pity you and I know for a fact, you would shit yourself in any fight. I know because i have known racist idiots like you all my life. They are always generally all mouth

So big yourself up boy and come and see me anytime you like

I live in ashford and if you ever want to come and see me let me know, as i will happily ablidge you

I will post you my address and mobile number for you via PM

So let me know, as I will happily educate you, the old fashion way, I once left behind

I know you wont because you are all mouth

I gave up those days of violence but would happily open up that box, simple for you

You make me sick how you defend peado's

Thor wrote:

Tommy Monk wrote:



Well... I won't take any lectures from an idiot like you... who doesn't even know enough about this case to actually know how many people were even on the jury...!!!


Also... if I was so motivated by race... and only backing whites suspected of involvement in such crimes... then why haven't you ever heard me sticking up for the McCanns, with me instead claiming that a non white person was really responsible for her disappearance...!!!???



I've told you many times before that if you want to try to get clever with me, then you have to back it up with intelligence... but... as usual... you show that you are really just an idiot who talks absolute shit!!!

ha ha ha

Is that your defense. A case where a white girl goes missing from white parents abroad, to claim you are not racist?

So in other words a case that is not ever defending someone black or asian then

I just used intelligence and showed you up

What did you say about Stephen lawrence a man murdered?

That he was a wrongun and what did you base this on?

Some white supremacists you knew in Ealing

I knew this racist wankers in ealing too and I used to get into rows with them. As my best mate was half Irish and Jamaican

So show me a case, where you have ever called into question where blacks or asians have been convicted?

You know why you cant, because you are a vile racist little scum bag that hides behind your pc spouting racist bullshit

In my youth, I would have beat the living shit out of youth for the scum you are.

Even now i could do it with both my hands tied behind my back

I would not even bother, because you simple are not worth it

You simple are racist scum and I only pity you and I know for a fact, you would shit yourself in any fight. I know because i have known racist idiots like you all my life. They are always generally all mouth

So big yourself up boy and come and see me anytime you like

I live in ashford and if you ever want to come and see me let me know, as i will happily ablidge you

I will post you my address and mobile number

I wonder what Lord Foul will make of this...!?


Oh well...


Yawn...!


Sleep well dodge...!


And... don't forget to check under the bed to make sure there aren't any imaginary racists hiding under there...!

Thor wrote:

Tommy Monk wrote:



Well... I won't take any lectures from an idiot like you... who doesn't even know enough about this case to actually know how many people were even on the jury...!!!


Also... if I was so motivated by race... and only backing whites suspected of involvement in such crimes... then why haven't you ever heard me sticking up for the McCanns, with me instead claiming that a non white person was really responsible for her disappearance...!!!???



I've told you many times before that if you want to try to get clever with me, then you have to back it up with intelligence... but... as usual... you show that you are really just an idiot who talks absolute shit!!!

ha ha ha

Is that your defense. A case where a white girl goes missing from white parents abroad, to claim you are not racist?

So in other words a case that is not ever defending someone black or asian then

I just used intelligence and showed you up

What did you say about Stephen lawrence a man murdered?

That he was a wrongun and what did you base this on?

Some white supremacists you knew in Ealing

I knew this racist wankers in ealing too and I used to get into rows with them. As my best mate was half Irish and Jamaican

So show me a case, where you have ever called into question where blacks or asians have been convicted?

You know why you cant, because you are a vile racist little scum bag that hides behind your pc spouting racist bullshit

In my youth, I would have beat the living shit out of youth for the scum you are.

Even now i could do it with both my hands tied behind my back

I would not even bother, because you simple are not worth it

You simple are racist scum and I only pity you and I know for a fact, you would shit yourself in any fight. I know because i have known racist idiots like you all my life. They are always generally all mouth

So big yourself up boy and come and see me anytime you like

I live in ashford and if you ever want to come and see me let me know, as i will happily ablidge you

I will post you my address and mobile number for you via PM

So let me know, as I will happily educate you, the old fashion way, I once left behind

I know you wont because you are all mouth

I gave up those days of violence but would happily open up that box, simple for you

You make me sick how you defend peado's

Oh... I see you have added a bit more...


Just quoting it for the admin to see...

I guess Lord foul will make you out to be as i do

All mouth

I will sleep very well

I have a racist on this forum, who I know wants to hide behind his PC

He does not want to meet, which is a good thing, as I really do not want to end up in jail again.

I tested you and what did you do.

Clucked like a chicken

I would never ever really hurt you Tommy

What would be the point, when I already know violence never gets through to idiots like you?