Zdravko Mamic Jailed; Luka Modric Cleared of Perjury Charge

[Spike]

Of course it is a lot easier to post 'rattled' then any sort of counter-point with substance. 

[Cicero]

16 minutes ago, Spike said:

Of course it is a lot easier to post 'rattled' then any sort of counter-point with substance. 

The typical, especially in defeat.  It's a process I like to call  "Cicero's 5 steps of consecutive fallacies" 

1. Make an asinine claim from hasty generalisation

2. Get proven wrong and perform a red herring due to having no rational counter argument. 

3. Get called out on your red herring and resort to ad hominem. 

4. Get backed into a corner and claim you were only 'fishing' or state the other person has been "rattled"

5. Post the Jack Wilshere meme "Ok Mate" as the last final defence. 

 

Good showing by our "member of the month". Now just awaiting the Wilshere meme to complete the process. 

[Spike]

6 minutes ago, Cicero said:

The typical, especially in defeat.  It's a process I like to call  "Cicero's 5 steps of consecutive fallacies" 

1. Make an asinine claim from hasty generalisation

2. Get proven wrong and perform a red herring due to having no rational counter argument. 

3. Get called out on your red herring and resort to ad hominem. 

4. Get backed into a corner and claim you were only 'fishing' or state the other person has been "rattled"

5. Post the Jack Wilshere meme "Ok Mate" as the last final defence. 

 

Good showing by our "member of the month". Now just awaiting the Wilshere meme to complete the process. 

We've all been there. It happens to all of us.

[Storts]

1 hour ago, Spike said:

Insinuation being the key word. Giving a hypothetical example of one method of punishment doesn't mean it is going to happen, because that is all it was; a hypothetical example. I'm actually allowed to mention, debate, and say things that I don't necessarily believe in, just like you.

It's a touchy subject because someone died due to gross negligence, but it of course was an accident. Given a few inches, a few extra moments, the incident wouldn't have happened and people would still be alive. A very different scenario to premeditated murder. How does one properly punish that? It is moral to lock someone up with hardened criminals? Is it acceptable to simply remove the means of the accident? Is it better to punish or rehabilitation? These are all morally loaded questions that I cannot answer but that doesn't mean we can't discuss alternatives, and simply regress into 'lol ur a joke, I the mighty moral arbiter passes judgement'.

If we were to consider ourselves an enlightened society why would we automatically jump to the third most rudimentary measure of punishment (after death and torture)? 

Of course you are - but you were the clear insinuation you were making was that you didn't believe he deserved jail time, at least that's how I and others clearly have read it, and for that I completely disagree. On a wider point I actually don't believe in jail time as the most effective form of punishment. We send far too many people to prisons for crimes that do not warrant it and could be better served with rehabilitation and community service time. However, death by drink driving for me is up there with the worst crimes, it's so selfish and reckless and Alonso has got off so lightly whilst another and their family will serve a lifetime sentence.

I also disagree with the use of the word accident. Putting himself and others in that situation was a choice he made, he knows the consequences of drink driving, you see them every single day, and somehow he's escaped without any serious retribution. To place blame on the girl who was killed by Alonso does not sit comfortably with me, and whilst of course you have to take responsibility for your own actions, it doesn't change the fact that Alonso was the one driving the car, considerably over the drink driving limit, considerably over the speed limit, reckless, out of control and clearly not thinking about consequences for him, or more importantly for other human beings. I think his actions were reprehensible and whilst I believe in rehabilitation, I don't think justice has been done in this case, and I cannot be satisfied that he deserves his current place in society. 

[Stan]

8 minutes ago, Storts said:

Of course you are - but you were the clear insinuation you were making was that you didn't believe he deserved jail time, at least that's how I and others clearly have read it, and for that I completely disagree. On a wider point I actually don't believe in jail time as the most effective form of punishment. We send far too many people to prisons for crimes that do not warrant it and could be better served with rehabilitation and community service time. However, death by drink driving for me is up there with the worst crimes, it's so selfish and reckless and Alonso has got off so lightly whilst another and their family will serve a lifetime sentence.

I also disagree with the use of the word accident. Putting himself and others in that situation was a choice he made, he knows the consequences of drink driving, you see them every single day, and somehow he's escaped without any serious retribution. To place blame on the girl who was killed by Alonso does not sit comfortably with me, and whilst of course you have to take responsibility for your own actions, it doesn't change the fact that Alonso was the one driving the car, considerably over the drink driving limit, considerably over the speed limit, reckless, out of control and clearly not thinking about consequences for him, or more importantly for other human beings. I think his actions were reprehensible and whilst I believe in rehabilitation, I don't think justice has been done in this case, and I cannot be satisfied that he deserves his current place in society. 

this is the thing for me, too.

Yes, a drunk girl may not have been in the wisest frame of mind to get in the car with a driver who is intoxicated as well.

But a sober driver 1) probably doesn't crash the car and 2) has more care for his passengers and is more aware of the dangers that come with driving. 

You'd rather have a sober driver/drunk passenger as opposed to drunk driver/drunk passenger. To me that's common sense and it baffles me how Alonso doesn't get more blame for what happened or the fact that there's any blame for the passenger, drunk or not. 

[Spike]

4 minutes ago, Storts said:

Of course you are - but you were the clear insinuation you were making was that you didn't believe he deserved jail time, at least that's how I and others clearly have read it, and for that I completely disagree. On a wider point I actually don't believe in jail time as the most effective form of punishment. We send far too many people to prisons for crimes that do not warrant it and could be better served with rehabilitation and community service time. However, death by drink driving for me is up there with the worst crimes, it's so selfish and reckless and Alonso has got off so lightly whilst another and their family will serve a lifetime sentence.

I also disagree with the use of the word accident. Putting himself and others in that situation was a choice he made, he knows the consequences of drink driving, you see them every single day, and somehow he's escaped without any serious retribution. To place blame on the girl who was killed by Alonso does not sit comfortably with me, and whilst of course you have to take responsibility for your own actions, it doesn't change the fact that Alonso was the one driving the car, considerably over the drink driving limit, considerably over the speed limit, reckless, out of control and clearly not thinking about consequences for him, or more importantly for other human beings. I think his actions were reprehensible and whilst I believe in rehabilitation, I don't think justice has been done in this case, and I cannot be satisfied that he deserves his current place in society. 

So in affect, we've argued over nothing because at the meat and potatoes of it we agree. I do however disagree with your rejection of the word 'accident'. While of course, Alonso knew the risks of drink driving, the crash wasn't intentional, ergo it was an accident. The events leading up to the crash are no accident, but the crash in itself is. By it's very nature an 'accident' is defined as an 'phenomenon that is unintentional and preventable'. I also don't subscribe to the black and white concept of 'blame' and 'culpability'. There was more than one active participant in this accident, this wasn't an unfortunate occurrence of a pedestrian death, it was someone actively putting their life in danger; and unfortunately the paid the price of it. In another world, it could be that Alonso is dead and the girl alive, but that isn't what happened. All in all this is something that happened, but shouldn't have and I don't believe that Alonso is inherently a despicable person for it (he may be, I don't know him). Ultimately the punishment of jail time would be best for the greater public, it would hopefully deter others from putting themselves in the same situation but on a small scale does jail time 'fix' the problem of Alonso? I think on a broader sense jail time is the correct answer but in a vacuum rehabilitation is correct. 

[Stan]

Just now, Spike said:

So in affect, we've argued over nothing because at the meat and potatoes of it we agree. I do however disagree with your rejection of the word 'accident'. While of course, Alonso knew the risks of drink driving, the crash wasn't intentional, ergo it was an accident. The events leading up to the crash are no accident, but the crash in itself is. By it's very nature an 'accident' is defined as an 'phenomenon that is unintentional and preventable'. I also don't subscribe to the black and white concept of 'blame' and 'culpability'. There was more than one active participant in this accident, this wasn't an unfortunate occurrence of a pedestrian death, it was someone actively putting their life in danger; and unfortunately the paid the price of it. In another world, it could be that Alonso is dead and the girl alive, but that isn't what happened. All in all this is something that happened, but shouldn't have and I don't believe that Alonso is inherently a despicable person for it (he may be, I don't know him). Ultimately the punishment of jail time would be best for the greater public, it would hopefully deter others from putting themselves in the same situation but on a small scale does jail time 'fix' the problem of Alonso? I think on a broader sense jail time is the correct answer but in a vacuum rehabilitation is correct. 

would you not agree that Alonso did this by driving a car while over the limit, regardless of passenger status (or whether there was a passenger anyway)?

[Spike]

6 minutes ago, Stan said:

would you not agree that Alonso did this by driving a car while over the limit, regardless of passenger status (or whether there was a passenger anyway)?

He did, that is true. He put himself in a dangerous position. He could have avoided it by calling a taxi. The same applies for the passenger, as they became an active component when they entered the car. For me anyway there is a difference between someone getting in a car as a passenger and dying, and someone being hit by a car as a pedestrian ultimately had no influence over their decision. Of course we could be pedantic to say 'well they shouldn't have been a pedestrian' but that is different as they didn't have the previous knowledge of Alonso's intoxication unlike the passenger. Anyway, neither people thought or wanted anyone to do that night, I'd wager that Alonso didn't want to kill the woman, and the woman herself didn't want to die. 

In affect I just see an unfortunate series of events that could have been prevented at multiple times during the day it occurred. Lots of bad decisions were made, someone's life ended, and there was no punishment for the person culpable for most of the even occurring. I just don't think it is wise to subscribe to a black and white mentality concerning culpability. 

This whole debate began because he was called a murderer, which I think is disingenuous to actual murder victims.

[Dr. Gonzo]

In England, if you're a drink driver and someone dies as a result of your drink driving... it's manslaughter. So he's not a murderer, but it is homicide (just lacking the necessary intent to make it murder). I don't know if Spain has similar laws... but it strikes me as a bit insane that he's walking away scot free. And it's even more insane to blame the drunk girl who got in the car with him - yes she was foolish in doing so, but that doesn't excuse the actual drink driver does it?

[Spike]

1 minute ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

In England, if you're a drink driver and someone dies as a result of your drink driving... it's manslaughter. So he's not a murderer, but it is homicide (just lacking the necessary intent to make it murder). I don't know if Spain has similar laws... but it strikes me as a bit insane that he's walking away scot free. And it's even more insane to blame the drunk girl who got in the car with him - yes she was foolish in doing so, but that doesn't excuse the actual drink driver does it?

But no one is blaming the girl. I have repeated ad nauseam that there are multiple levels of accountability. 

[Cicero]

4 minutes ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

In England, if you're a drink driver and someone dies as a result of your drink driving... it's manslaughter. So he's not a murderer, but it is homicide (just lacking the necessary intent to make it murder). I don't know if Spain has similar laws... but it strikes me as a bit insane that he's walking away scot free. And it's even more insane to blame the drunk girl who got in the car with him - yes she was foolish in doing so, but that doesn't excuse the actual drink driver does it?

No one is blaming the girl and no one is saying it excuses Alonso. 

What seems to be the reason why Alonso never step foot in prison, is the fact both were accountable. 

Spike pretty much summed it up perfectly. It's a scenario neither intended, but could of been avoided if both weren't negligent. 

[Dr. Gonzo]

3 minutes ago, Spike said:

But no one is blaming the girl. I have repeated ad nauseam that there are multiple levels of accountability. 

You said her getting into the car was suicide...

I think everyone can agree, it's not a good idea to get in a car with a drink driver. But ultimately, the person to blame is the drunk person who was, by all accounts, driving recklessly.

It's never a good idea to drink drive, but if you're going to do something that stupid you should at least try to avoid creating more trouble for yourself. And while it's a very cunty thing to do... I've fucking done it before in my younger, more careless, and idiotic days. It wasn't exactly suicide, it was just incredibly stupid. I'm less of a cunt now, so I'm not going to do something that stupid, reckless, and selfish - but calling it necessarily suicide is 100% blaming her.

It's saying she made a choice and she knew she would die from that choice. That's taking blame away from the drink driver.

Just now, Cicero said:

What seems to be the reason why Alonso never step foot in prison, is the fact both were accountable. 

She was negligent, he was even more reckless with his conduct. There's a reason why killing someone while you're driving drunk is a misdemeanor.

The reason he never step foot in prison is because either Spanish laws are insanely lax on drink driving or because he's got a lot of money.

[Cicero]

9 minutes ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

She was negligent, he was even more reckless with his conduct. There's a reason why killing someone while you're driving drunk is a misdemeanor.

The reason he never step foot in prison is because either Spanish laws are insanely lax on drink driving or because he's got a lot of money.

But ultimately, she knew what she was getting into, neither was her hand forced to do anything. She made the poor choice to get in a vehicle with a drunk driver. 

There needs to be accountability in every case. Like Spike mentioned, killing someone from drunk driving by crashing into them puts all accountability on the drunk driver. 

This scenario with Alonso and the girl, both are accountable. 

 

I feel for that reason is why he didn't go to jail. 

[Spike]

Just now, Dr. Gonzo said:

You said her getting into the car was suicide...

I think everyone can agree, it's not a good idea to get in a car with a drink driver. But ultimately, the person to blame is the drunk person who was, by all accounts, driving recklessly.

It's never a good idea to drink drive, but if you're going to do something that stupid you should at least try to avoid creating more trouble for yourself. And while it's a very cunty thing to do... I've fucking done it before in my younger, more careless, and idiotic days. It wasn't exactly suicide, it was just incredibly stupid. I'm less of a cunt now, so I'm not going to do something that stupid, reckless, and selfish - but calling it necessarily suicide is 100% blaming her.

It's saying she made a choice and she knew she would die from that choice. That's taking blame away from the drink driver.

She was negligent, he was even more reckless with his conduct. There's a reason why killing someone while you're driving drunk is a misdemeanor.

The reason he never step foot in prison is because either Spanish laws are insanely lax on drink driving or because he's got a lot of money.

I was being hyperbolic. It doesn't take away blame from the drunk driver at all, and I fully disagree with the statement 'It's saying she made a choice and she knew she would die from that choice'. Why can't it be 'girl made bad decision', 'Alonso made worse decision'? Why must the blame focus solely on one party? However she isn't a criminal, she did nothing wrong, Alonso did and he should be punished. Maybe I was a little harsh earlier when I said the blame is 50/50, maybe it is more like 90/10 with most of the blame on Alonso but there is an element of control that the woman seeded when she got into the car with Alonso. Giving up that 'self-determination' ultimately led to her death, she didn't know it was going to happen, but she had to be aware enough to know the risks. UNLESS of course both parties were absolutely stinking drunk and had no higher reasoning, which does happen, I've been that drunk, you've probably been that drunk, imagine the thought process of both parties, there would be none, so would that make both parties innocent? It's such a loaded question and I don't think there is necessarily a correct way of framing it.

I think in a way, being able to place full blame on something is a very 'human' thing to do. As it creates reasoning for death and removes culpability, making it easier to digest. For instance we see it all the time in football, a team plays poorly but the manager is the person to get the axe. It's a clumsy way phrasing it I know, but I trust you understand the idea behind it. 

[Dr. Gonzo]

1 minute ago, Cicero said:

But ultimately, she knew what she was getting into, neither was her hand forced to do anything. She made the poor choice to get in a vehicle with a drunk driver. 

There needs to be accountability in everything. Like Spike mentioned, killing someone from drunk driving by crashing into them puts all accountability on the drunk driver. 

This scenario with Alonso and the girl, both are accountable. 

 

I feel for that reason he didn't go to jail. 

Do the same thing in England and you'll most likely be guilty of manslaughter, which I think is the correct approach. She's not equally as culpable for her death despite her poor decision.

But back to Luca Modric... what a cunt as well.

[Panna King]

4 hours ago, Marc said:

Marcos Alonso is the worst example of a footballer being above the law.

Murdering bastard. I don't think I've ever seen the English media mention it either,

Patrick Kluivert killed someone in a car crash but he wasn't drunk, he was just at fault and it made world news he got 220 hours community service. 

[Toinho]

16 hours ago, Storts said:

Chelsea fans trying to defend that scumbag Alonso says it all about their club really. 

Agreed. Can't believe what I am reading. 

[Storts]

Scene from the courtroom

[Marc]

Glad we cleared that up anyway. 

 

[Cicero]

Really haven't seen any notable counter argument that refutes our point, but if that qualifies as cleared up well done lads. 

 

[Spike]

9 hours ago, Toinho said:

Agreed. Can't believe what I am reading. 

Me neither, cuz no one is defending him.

[6666]

On 02/03/2018 at 18:33, Marc said:

Marcos Alonso is the worst example of a footballer being above the law.

Murdering bastard. I don't think I've ever seen the English media mention it either,

It's harsh that people keep mentioning this and saying he didn't get punished. He gave up 2 weeks wages.

 

[Marc]

2 hours ago, 6666 said:

It's harsh that people keep mentioning this and saying he didn't get punished. He gave up 2 weeks wages.

 

Her family were lucky really. Considering  her getting in the car was ‘suicidal’ and the blame was ‘50/50’ between her and Alonso.

[Cicero]

On 3/2/2018 at 15:52, Dr. Gonzo said:

Do the same thing in England and you'll most likely be guilty of manslaughter, which I think is the correct approach. She's not equally as culpable for her death despite her poor decision.

But back to Luca Modric... what a cunt as well.

What the hell? How come I didn't get a notification for this? 

She's not equally as culpable, but she is still accountable for what had happened. 

I can almost gurantee Alonso's defence team pushed this piece of evidence considerably. 

[Spike]

https://thelawdictionary.org/article/what-happens-to-a-passenger-in-a-dui-arrest/

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/media/passengers-can-be-guilty-too-73249.html

https://www.dlgteam.com/drunk-driving-passenger-liability/

'As a passenger in the car with a drunk driver, the law assumes you gave your consent to the driver to get behind the wheel in an inappropriate condition.'

Consider that the last, I'll say on the matter. Maybe next time, we can have a discussion that doesn't devolve into a mongoloid shit slinging with the first several posts.