People are allowed to have opinions about cases that haven’t been fully investigated yet. Jimmy Savile never got convicted but I’m pretty sure he wasn’t innocent.
People are allowed to have opinions about cases that haven’t been fully investigated yet. Jimmy Savile never got convicted but I’m pretty sure he wasn’t innocent.
tegs_terry@feddit.uk 1 year ago
He probably would’ve been, had he been alive when the evidence came forward. At the same time, it probably only came to light because he was dead. Either way, it’s pretty weighty, but as you say, people are welcome to their doubts.
Mother Theresa thought suffering brought you closer to God - as such, many of her charges were kept in pain - that was her opinion. Let’s not pretend opinions can’t be dangerous. You, for example, are making passionate, prejudicial assertions in lieu of the full facts; out for blood, death by keyboard. Your ‘opinions’ and others like it are the papilloma pustule on the internet’s prick, infectious ooze from a massive wang.
Let’s see what comes out and draw conclusions in our turn and quit all this frothing at the gash.
cook_pass_babtridge@feddit.uk 1 year ago
I’m not out for blood, but if I was a woman working in the media I’d certainly not take any meetings with Russell Brand. That’s why it’s important to have this information out there even while it’s being investigated.
tegs_terry@feddit.uk 1 year ago
Yeah, no problem with any of that, but snarky schadenfreude propagated on a preemptive assumption of guilt should be avoided. At least, that’s my opinion.