Extract Of Court Martial Trial Judgment From The Trial Of Marine "A"

Marine A executed the Afghan national by shooting him in the chest at close range with a 9mm pistol, saying “There you are. Shuffle off this mortal coil, you cunt". He then turned to comrades and said: “Obviously this doesn't go anywhere, fellas. I just broke the Geneva Convention.” 

This execution was filmed by a camera mounted on the helmet of Marine B. Marine A reported to superiors via radio that the insurgent was still alive and - to avoid the watching helicopter and observation balloon - he was manhandled to the side of the field, under the cover of trees. Marine A is then overheard asking "Anyone want to give first aid to this idiot?" before Marine B replies loudly "No". 

Marine C, standing over the insurgent pointing a pistol at his head, is heard asking Marine A if he should shoot the man in the head, which is refused as "that would be too fucking obvious". Footage shows the injured man, whose top had been pulled up exposing his bloodied torso, suffering kicks from the servicemen before being flipped over from his back to front. As Marine B gives the pretence to the watching helicopter or balloon of administering first aid, he is heard to say "For fuck's sake, I cannot believe I'm doing this". Marine C replies: "Don't - just - don't - yeah, wait a minute, just pretend to do it until he's behind them trees."Two minutes later, Marine A shoots the insurgent at close range in the chest.

Marine C stated in the court martial that his offer to shoot the man in the head and the heart was "banter" and "black humour". Marine C told the court martial he walked away from the insurgent, judging the man was dead, before he heard a shot ring out: "I wasn't there, you know, I wasn't any part of it. I wasn't asked if I wanted or if we should shoot. As far as I knew, when I walked off he was dead". 

This turned out to be untrue when the court saw the footage and later heard extracts from Marine C's journal which he wrote on the evening of the killing: "So there I was, pistol drawn, waiting for [Marine A] to get off the net so I could pop this little wanker and be done with it, when [Marine A] came back over, and thinned me out, to take up ARCS with the others. As I walked off [Marine A] popped him one himself! I felt mugged off, but job done - little fuck was dead at the end of the day."

Yeah, But How Can You Represent Them When You KNOW They're Guilty?

Ah, the question everyone asks when they find out what I do for a living.

It used to irk me. I wondered why ostensibly smart people couldn't work out the answer for themselves - but then I have always been a defence lawyer so it makes sense to me, but I have come to learn it really isn't apparent to a lot of people and nor should it be.

There are some myths and some truths in the beliefs people hold about us caniving tricksters who get the bad guys off (often "on a technicality") but most people who ask me and listen to my answer seem fairly satisfied that what I do is justified and necessary.

So - first to dispel a couple of myths:

I cannot put forward a defendant as "not guilty" if they admit the offence to me. Although what they tell me is absolutely confidential and I can advise them to make "no comment" so as not to further incriminate themselves beyond the evidence the police already have, I cannot help them fabricate a story - nor would I want to - in order to "get them off".

Secondly - most people plead guilty.

Most defendants are faced with a decent weight of evidence and offer a guilty plea - and, quite rightly, get sentenced for it. Others come to me and say "I ain't done it" and for the majority of these people the evidence is stacked against them and I advise them as such.

The CPS are not daft - they don't charge cases (ie send them to court) unless they have a decent amount of evidence. So often it is a case of me being an objective assesser of the evidence and advising the client if I think they are likely to be convicted that they should plead guilty.

They often want to take the risk and fight it, but where there is overwhelming evidence I advise them firmly of this. My advice is usually taken because my clients trust me to look after their interests. Police, court clerks or prosecutors telling them they're stuffed falls on deaf ears. They're 'the man' - the voice of authority. I am their legal counsel - I am paid exclusively to look after their best interests. If I think it is in their best interests to plead guilty because they're stuffed (and thus get a reduction in sentence for a guilty plea) I will tell them - and they tend to listen.

So, my advice spares hundreds (yes hundreds) of victims each year from having to give evidence about the crime itself and be cross-examined and saves thousands of hours of court time and tens of thousands of pounds of taxpayers' money in avoided trials. Many people who tell me they want to plead not guilty will accept my advice and plead guilty when I have finished explaining my reasoning to them.

But what of the ones that say they haven't done it and either (a) they have a good case or (b) they're stuffed but won't listen to my advice?

Well, obviously in case (a) we have a potentially/possibly/probably (depending on the circs) innocent person. I am going to fight tooth and nail to get them acquitted - as I'm sure you would want and expect me to. That seems fair, right?

So....that leaves the tiny minority of people I deal with, but the ones that form the topic of the question I quoted at the beginning - those defendants who face apparently overwhelming evidence but maintain their denial despite my advice that they are likely to be convicted.

[Note: I never tell them I don't believe them or I think they have done it if they say they haven't - it is NOT my job to call them a liar and they woulds lose all trust in me if I did so. It is my job to tell them objectively if I think the court will believe them or not].

In these cases I.....fight tooth and nail to get them acquitted. Of course I do. Why/how could I do anything else?

"Yeah, but if you KNOW they did it?"

I don't.

I wasn't there so I don't know they did it.

They have not admitted it to me so I don't know they did it. I can strongly suspect they did it, I could even believe they did it, but I don't know and more importantly what I believe doesn't matter one bit.

Am I the Judge or the jury? No. So it is absolutely not my job to decide the fate of my client. If they insist they are innocent (and let's not forget the hundreds of widely reported miscarriages of justice where all circumstantial evidence pointed firmly at the defendant and DNA or other evidence later categorically exonerated them) then who am I to decide they aren't and so shouldn't get a proper case put forward?

Would it not be usurping the role of the courts altogether and supremely arrogant of me to say "Weeeell - I reckon he's done it, so fuck 'im - I'm not going to put up much of a fight"?

If you were in the wrong place at the wrong time, if some ex-friend went psycho and fabricated an allegation of assault or harassment or rape (it does happen) against you - if you ended up in court charged with a crime you hadn't committed and were pleading your innocence and put all your faith in someone with years of training and even more years of experience in the criminal courts to help prove your innocence - someone paid purely to do that - wouldn't you be disgusted if they did a half-arsed job because they didn't believe you?

And it is precisely because I don't know and can never know for sure whether someone did or did not commit an offence that I cannot make myself the Judge and decide a defendant doesn't deserve defending.

Yes, that can make this job gut-wrenchingly unpleasant at times. I have had to view photographic and video evidence that has turned my stomach and even brought tears to my eyes involving harm done to children, adults and animals - and then stood up and defended the alleged perpetrator of those horrific acts.

It is not an easy job and it is much maligned, but when someone who has never been in trouble before (and particularly if they are well educated, articulate and "middle class") gets charged and has to go to court they are always horrified at how they are "treated like a criminal" and everyone "assumes I'm guilty before I've even had my say".

We live in a "no smoke without fire" society. Why do we have all those vile headlines about the landlord alleged to have killed Jo Yeates before any charge was laid (never mind a conviction)?

Why do people throw rocks at prison vans with SUSPECTS inside who are on their way to TRIAL (ie they are denying the crime)? We assume if someone is charged they are guilty. We see it more than ever in the reporting of "terror" arrests. My firm has dealt with numeorus arrests under the Terrorism Act. Not one had sufficient evidence to get to trial.

Rumour, suspicion, innuendo, anonymous tip-offs based on misheard snippets of conversation and the fact that he's a Muslim with one of those big long beards etc etc.

We live in a civilised society but we still lock people up for months whilst awaiting trial and then drop the case due to lack of evidence. They then have to face the world with that stain on their character.

I know a man who was charged with rape. The lady who accused him later admitted to fabricating it and it transpired she had made false allegations before. He lost his job, his wife and his friends shunned him. He spent 9 months in jail awaiting trial.

He hanged himself about three months after he got out.

Many others have had their lives ruined even though they have been acquitted because the whole neighbourhood saw them carted off by police and saw their photo on the front page of the local evening news "Man Charged With Murder" and if they get found not guilty? Well, let's just avoid him just in case. I mean I'VE never been arrested for murder. YOU'VE never been arrested for murder. He must've done something to attract suspicion!

Those may be extreme examples but they hold the key to the reason I do this job. What if it was me? What if it was you? What if the entire weight of the CPS and the police was coming down on you trying to get you jailed for something you know you didn't do?

You'd want a lawyer who would do their job properly wouldn't you?

Defence lawyers have seen a freeze in legal aid rates for 11 years, followed by substantial cuts. I work 10-12 hours a day most days and evenings and weekends on top. If I am out all night at a police station I am in court the next morning. I get no time off in lieu.

When I am not working (or listening to heavy metal) I am reading the reams of cases published each week and new legislation coming along every month as I need to be up to date on all of it. Criminal law changes faster than any other area of law and requires constant training and I also have to train many of the staff at my firm and others as new legislation is so badly worded these days that it takes 12 months of case law to establish how the higher courts will interpret some of it.

It's no good you saying to me "I did x and y, but not z" in a police station before the police interivew you and me saying "Hmmmmm, well I'm not sure that technically is an offence, but it might be".

So - if you think I do it for the money then think again - I could get paid double what I do now in almost any other area of law. I don't get respect from most people for doing this job like I would in some circles if I were a doctor or a fireman - and on the whole I don't get much in the way of thanks from many of the people I represent - but what I do get is a tiny bit of satisfaction in knowing that I help the wheels of justice keep turning.

The guilty are more likely to put their hands up to it if a good lawyer that they trust gives them sound advice. The avoided trials save us millions of pounds a a year. The innocent few who end up in court by a combination of bad luck or bad judgment or over-zealous policing, get given a slightly better chance against the weight of prosecution against them and a chance of acquittal (slim chance: of those that actually plead not guilty, over 80 percent are convicted at trial according to the most recent figures from 2010).

I don't set any of this out to make myself sound noble or deserving of praise - far from it - I get paid a reasonable wage to do a job that is occasionally enjoyable, often interesting and always challenging. I simply hope that a few more people who wonder how us defence lawyers can bring ourselves to "represent scumbags", or however they see it, appreciate that there is a value to society in having defence lawyers around.

As for "getting off on a technicality" that happens so very rarely, but is a topic for another blog post another day.

I am now getting down off my high horse and if you have bothered to read this, thank you for taking the time.

Chris Brown, Waste of Oxygen

This unrepentant dick continues to show no remorse for his frenzied attack on Rihanna and moreover his first account to police was not one of contrition, rather he set out a number of reasons why she had "provoked" and "annoyed" him.

Nice move fella.

Beat a woman senseless and then set about telling the cops whys she asked for it.

He now feels all the "haters" have been taught a lesson by him winning a grammy.

http://cdn.uproxx.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/chris-brown-tweet-640-e13292614414141.jpg

Chris - we didn't hate you because of your lack of musical talent (although everyone from James Brown to Jimi Hendrix will be rolling in their graves if your "talent" merits a Grammy win). We hate you because you are cowardly piece of shit who savagely beats his girlfriend, shows no regret and even tries to blame her for the incident. A Grammy doesn't undo that. Repeatedly expressing remorse, regret and seeking forgiveness in a humble and very public manner MAY go some way towards redeeming you. A little metal horn on a piece of wood does not.

And for those girls who have been popping up all over twitter recently saying they'd let Chris Brown "beat" them.....this is what he did - this is, verbatim, the police report.

This is what was read out in court. This is what he pleaded guilty to.

This is what Chris Brown did to Rihanna (aka Robyn F.):

"Brown was driving a vehicle with Robyn F. as the front passenger on an unknown street in Los Angeles. Robyn F. picked up Brown's cellular phone and observed a three-page text message from a woman who Brown had a previous sexual relationship with.

"A verbal argument ensued and Brown pulled the vehicle over on an unknown street, reached over Robyn F. with his right hand, opened the car door and attempted to force her out. Brown was unable to force Robyn F. out of the vehicle because she was wearing a seat belt. When he could not force her to exit, he took his right hand and shoved her head against he passenger window of the vehicle, causing an approximate one-inch raised circular contusion.

"Robyn F. turned to face Brown and he punched her in the left eye with his right hand. He then drove away in the vehicle and continued to punch her in the face with his right hand while steering the vehicle with his left hand. The assault caused Robyn F.'s mouth to fill with blood and blood to splatter all over her clothing and the interior of the vehicle.

"Brown looked at Robyn F. and stated, 'I'm going to beat the sh-- out of you when we get home! You wait and see!' "

The detective said "Robyn F." then used her cell phone to call her personal assistant Jennifer Rosales, who did not answer.

"Robyn F. pretended to talk to her and stated, 'I'm on my way home. Make sure the police are there when I get there.'

"After Robyn F. faked the call, Brown looked at her and stated, 'You just did the stupidest thing ever! Now I'm really going to kill you!'

"Brown resumed punching Robyn F. and she interlocked her fingers behind her head and brought her elbows forward to protect her face. She then bent over at the waist, placing her elbows and face near her lap in [an] attempt to protect her face and head from the barrage of punches being levied upon her by Brown.

"Brown continued to punch Robyn F. on her left arm and hand, causing her to suffer a contusion on her left triceps (sic) that was approximately two inches in diameter and numerous contusions on her left hand.

"Robyn F. then attempted to send a text message to her other personal assistant, Melissa Ford. Brown snatched the cellular telephone out of her hand and threw it out of the window onto an unknown street.

"Brown continued driving and Robyn F. observed his cellular telephone sitting in his lap. She picked up the cellular telephone with her left hand and before she could make a call he placed her in a head lock with his right hand and continued to drive the vehicle with his left hand.

"Brown pulled Robyn F. close to him and bit her on her left ear. She was able to feel the vehicle swerving from right to left as Brown sped away. He stopped the vehicle in front of 333 North June Street and Robyn F. turned off the car, removed the key from the ignition and sat on it.

"Brown did not know what she did with the key and began punching her in the face and arms. He then placed her in a head lock positioning the front of her throat between his bicep and forearm. Brown began applying pressure to Robyn F.'s left and right carotid arteries, causing her to be unable to breathe and she began to lose consciousness.

"She reached up with her left hand and began attempting to gouge his eyes in an attempt to free herself. Brown bit her left ring and middle fingers and then released her. While Brown continued to punch her, she turned around and placed her back against the passenger door. She brought her knees to her chest, placed her feet against Brown's body and began pushing him away. Brown continued to punch her on the legs and feet, causing several contusions.

"Robyn F. began screaming for help and Brown exited the vehicle and walked away. A resident in the neighborhood heard Robyn F.'s plea for help and called 911, causing a police response. An investigation was conducted and Robyn F. was issued a Domestic Violence Emergency Protective Order."

At the end of his statement, Andrews said Brown sent a text message nine days later apologizing"

Tell me that piece of shit deserves to be celebrated simply because he can "sing" (with a little help from auto-tune) material written for him by other people and he can't even play a musical instrument.

A firm of bailiffs who specialise in forced evictions and repossessions have sent the company I work for a Christmas card in the hope of getting business from us. My firm doesn't do work that would require their services so I am baffled why they would send it to us (we are more likely to be helping people with debt problems) - but the card itself left me speechless (briefly of course, back in ranting gear again).

It shows three people 'disguised' as Carol Singers trying to batter a front door down, with a large Christmas tree, whilst two people appear to peek nervously from behind the curtains. The bailiffs are clearly labelled as such and on the front door is a handwritten note saying "No Carol Singers...or XXXX Bailiffs". XXXX being the name of this firm of suckbags.

In the background is a passer-by grinning at the scene of forced eviction taking place and another passer-by grinning and saying "Well, they should've complied".

Where do I start.....

1. The joke doesn't even work you fucking morons. If they have a sign saying no bailiffs OR CAROL SINGERS - why "disguise" yourself as carol singers? Because you are stupid idiots? Is that the message?

No - I know the message is you are tough and resourceful and get the job done, but that "joke" doesn't work because only idiots would disguise themselves as carol singers to get someone to answer the door when there is a sign on the door saying "no carol singers".

2. You heartless, soulless, money-grabbing arseholes. You are making fun of people losing their homes at Christmas in order to make your card seem humourous. You think the average Joe in the street would grin at the sight and have a "Well, serves them right" attitude. We are in a recession and you are making a profit from people's misery. Ok - I deplore what you do but I accept that you do it for a living and it is none of my business.....BUT - to joke about it? You utter pricks.

Do vivisectionists send comedy Christmas cards showing rabbits being blinded with chemicals in a supposedly humourous way? Of course not.

I cannot fathom on what level someone functions that they think this is funny or suitable for a Christmas card. OR that you even think it would drum up business? I know firms who do need to use the services of bailiffs at times and they (from the few I know) see it as a necessary but unpleasant part of the job. Their morals aside...I can't see any of them wanting to glorify that part of the job or receive a card gloating about people BEING MADE HOMELESS AT CHRISTMAS.

You despicable wastes of oxygen. I hope your firm goes bust and there are bystanders laughing at you when your home is repossessed you money-grabbing filth. I shall pass the offending card to the two firms I know who do use bailiffs pointing out what an ugly sense of humour you have and imploring them to never use your services. If I can persuade even one firm to sack you and use a different firm it will be a wonderful irony seeing as it all stems from your card sent out to drum up business.

Have a shitty Christmas, lots of love, Dewie

Best Records I Got Since Last Christmas

On the basis that approximately none people care, but I like making lists and am obsessive about music, I decided to do a top 20 albums for 2011. Rather than spending ages assessing comparative creative worth of different styles of music or agonising deeply over the relative merits of each, I simply put together a list of the 20 albums I played most frequently this past 12 months (in order of frequentlyness).

And then I added 5 more because I am incapable of being concise.

1. Turbid North - Orogeny
2. Machine Head - Unto The Locust
3. Anthrax - Worship Music
4. Fair To Midland - Arrows & Anchors
5. Alice Cooper - Welcome 2 My Nightmare
6. Vader - Welcome To The Morbid Reich
7. Cormorant - Dwellings
8. Vektor - Outer Isolation
9. Ana Kefr - Burial Tree
10. Skindred - Union Black

11. D-A-D - Dic.Nii.Lan.Daft.Erd.Ark
12. Devin Townsend Project - Deconstruction
13. While Heaven Wept - Fear Of Infinity
14. The Black Dahlia Murder - Ritual
15. Decapitated - Carnival Is Forever
16. Vomitory - Opus Mortis VIII
17. Benighted - Asylum Cave
18. Hammers Of Misfortune - 17th Street
19. Vallenfyre - A Fragile King
20. Opeth - Heritage

Special mentions:
Black Widow - Sleeping With Demons
Trivium - In Waves
Mastodon - The Hunter
Edguy - Age Of The Joker
Devin Townsend Project - Ghost

Someone will now remind me of a crucial album (that I have no doubt listened to loads) but have forgotten because I have done this list hurriedly and late at night.

Thank you for reading this. I am sorry you have wasted three minutes of your life.

BONFIRE NIGHT

(Re-posted)

Goes on for weeks

There's a family across the road from us who have been standing in their garden for TWO HOURS watching rocket after rocket go up and go BANG BANG BANG BANG BANG BANG BANG BANG BANG BANG BANG BANG BANG BANG BANG BANG BANG BANG BANG BANG BANG continuously.

No pretty flashes - just deafening bangs.

How retarded are you? To be impressed by loud bangs repeatedly for two hours. Jesus - I could hit them repeatedly with a hammer around the head and it would have a similar effect.

Then we'd all be happy

Second Extract From The Journal Of Gant Ericsson

It hit me very hard in the face. The Frisbee that is.

As I stood in the park enjoying the warm weather and admiring the delightful sight of two dogs fucking, I was knocked back as it whistled into my face cracking hard on the bridge of my nose.

I staggered back and felt blood began to trickle down onto my top lip. It was a bit like the time I pointed out to one of the doormen at a club in Worcester that, no, I wasn’t “looking for trouble” - I genuinely had slept with his mother once and paid for the privilege. I was merely commenting on the quality and value she provided and hoped he would pass on my regards as it was some years since I had seen her.

As the pain began to rise from my nose into my forehead I began laughing. I’m not sure why, but I laughed quite intensely.

I carried on laughing - harder and harder. The teenagers who owned the Frisbee had begun to approach me to retrieve their toy and check if I was alright, but as my laughter increased in volume they started to slowly back off.

And then I realised what I had done. Quite by accident of course. It wasn’t the laughter that caused them to back off.

Must remember to put my cock away before going to the park.

It could be misconstrued.

Diary Of Gant Ericsson

I found an old notebook at a second hand stall on the market at the end of the Portobello Road in and amongst a tressle table load of old tat that I am guessing came from a house clearance. It was 25p and I have no idea why it was for sale rather than binned but scrawled inside the hard cover was "My Words" and it appears to be a journal or diary of sorts. You know - before they invented "blogs" - when people wrote it on paper.

I don't know whether he ever intended it to be public or published or shared with a single soul.

I wonder if it is right or wrong for me to even blog about it, but it intrigues me so I have (as best as I can, with the scrawly writing and frequent scribbles and crossing-out of words) typed out some extracts here for you to have a gander at.

Based on the writing on the third page in, his name is (was? I don't know if he is still alive) Gant Ericsson.

These are some of his thoughts:



People say they recycle. But they don’t do it properly.

Sure, they recycle newspapers, cans, bottles - some even mulch their food scraps and tea-bags in a compost bin. But they don’t make use of everything they can.

They don’t recycle themselves.

I’ve been recycling myself for approximately four years now.

Much of our body is wasted and we can re-use our own by-products to great effect.

I shave my head and beard every seven weeks and have done so since I began my bodily recycling programme. So far I’ve stuffed eight pillows, two cushions and am halfway towards my first duvet.

My ear wax has been collected in pots and provided several large candles in a rather attractive earthy orange/dark brown speckled finish.

If ever I find myself sobbing uncontrollably, I collect my tears in a small jug and use it to water the Aspidistra on the window sill. Much of my wallpaper is affixed with mucus. Unfortunately this does mean I can only put one strip up every six to eight weeks.

Toe-nail and finger-nail clippings are kept in a large Tupperware tub in the garage. I haven’t determined what I shall use them for yet.

Now, it may seem unsavoury to some but in my flat there's a bucket instead of a toilet. Some of the faecal matter I collect is dried and used in the stove and the rest is used as fertiliser for the garden.

The human body produces so many useful substances from every region, but by far the most versatile has to be the penis - which regularly produces two entirely different substances which most people simply waste.

People may say it’s somewhat unpleasant to collect and keep my penile fluids - and they may be right. But every visitor that’s ever been to my flat comments on my home made lava lamp.

Football Match

"You're goin 'ome in a fackin' ambulance" they chanted.

I scoffed...."Surely, you foul and foolish young fellows, I would be going to hospital, not home, if I were indeed in an ambulance. Your daft little ditty makes no sense - if you actually took the time to think about it".

The stabbing I got in response did however result in me going in an ambulance shortly thereafter.

TO HOSPITAL though.

Yeah.

How I laughed as I proved them wrong.

Pink Or Brown

We had an argument the other day as to what was the best colour.

Yes, we had been drinking and no, it wasn't actually a debate as to our favourite colour but a debate as to which colour reflects the largest number of things that are awesome.

An early nomination was pink: boobs, fannies, strawberry milkshake....erm - and that was about it.

I scoffed at the suggestion and went straight for brown.

Booze is brown. Yes - all the best booze is bronze, nutty or amber. Rich bourbon, fine cognac, peaty single malt whisky, real ale.....it's all brown. Even Pimms is brown - which I know is a girl's drink and/or a toff's drink but it is quite nice with all that fruit and bits of nettles or whatever they put in it.

Chocolate is brown. That's a pretty heavy candidate for brown being the best colour right there.

Nuts are brown.

Leather is brown.

Mud is brown. The very earth that gives life to all plants and in turn to all living creatures is brown.

Coffee - oh sweet caffeinated boiling (well, ideally 90 degrees celsius and no hotter) nectar - how brown you are.

Tobacco - very brown and very lovely. Of course.

I could go on.

The Torrent Of Blah Continues Unabated

2007 saw the bullshit factory that is my brain continuing production at a steady rate with consistent levels of juvenility and impotent rage.

In 2008 more stuff fell out of my mind onto a keyboard and got soaked up by the internet.

In 2009 I still had the occasional thought that had no particular relevance to anything nor any great importance - yet I still had the audacity to think it may be worth posting it on a blog in case someone who has run out of things to do or indeed reasons to live has exhausted all possibilities for mental stimulation and decided to be one of few lost souls who venture onto this page.

Now it's 2010 and I have found the Twitter where I can spew my mind-dung more quickly into the consciousness of strangers. Still, I occasionally have something I need more than 140 characters to sum up. Occasionally....

GBL

Well the government has today announced they will definitely ban this "Dance Drug" due to increasing pressure after a person died from using it. A person. Singular.

One.

Any death is a tragedy but more people die from allergic reactions to aspirin for feck's sake. Why do we have to ban everything just because some fool kills themselves with it. What is GBL? It's not a 'dance drug'.

It's paint stripper. It is designed for cleaning alloy wheels, removing superglue and thinning paint. That's what most sane people use it for.

So, some bright spark dilutes it and markets it as a drug and some poor medical student dies from drinking it. One wonders how smart someone is if they are either (a) knowingly drinking paint stripper or (b) drinking some unkown chemical someone has given them without knowing what it is.

Either way - what is the point in banning it? Are we going to ban every solvent and chemical on the shelves in B&Q in case some tool drinks it and dies? Are we going to ban every single thing known to humanity that, if misused, can prove fatal? Why not ban cars and matches and hammers whilst we're at it?

I know the argument is "because it's legal people think it's safe" - and therefore making it illegal will stop people from thinking that, but that simply doesn't hold water. It is down to the ignorance of people who decide to take a "drug" not knowing what it is or the potential consequences that causes deaths. A little publicity as to the risks is sensible but banning it is pointless. All it means is that governement legislative time and money is used up when it could be better spent on passing useful laws (bearing in mind the limited amount of bills that can be passed in any parliamentsary session).

Still we believe making it illegal is the answer. After all ecstasy, heroin and cocaine were all made illegal many many years ago and nobody has taken any of those drugs ever since have they?

I Was Completely In The Daaaaark.......

(title sung in Bob Mortimer voice a la 'Man With The Stick')

So they installed a smart new 'bathroom' at work. No bath, obviously, just toilets. I used the gents and all seems fine and dandy and rather pristine. As you walk in there is total darkness due to the energy saving automatic light sensors. The fluorescent bulb flickers into life a split second after you enter and one can then empty the bladder illuminated in the bright white glow.

However, I used one of the stalls for the first time today. It soon became apparent that the sensors for the lights

(a) switch the lights off after approximately 3 minutes if no movement is detected; and
(b) they are located near the urinals but there are none with any detection range over the stalls

Trust me - I moved as much as I could in the circumstances. I was flapping my arms and waving a loo roll streamer in the air, all to no avail.

Without wishing to be graphic, I couldn't feasibly emerge from the stall at that point, but couldn't really proceed with the task in hand in pitch darkness either.

Solution: after a little pondering I rolled up a ball of loo roll and tossed it over the door towards the wall.

Fail

I thought maybe it was too small or light so chucked my wallet over instead (pondered chucking my phone as was running out of ideas - wallet seemed less likely to damage on impact).

Success.

Later contacted the contractors who confirmed the sensor cannot be set to cover the stalls, but the timer can be changed to shut off after 3, 5, 7 or 11 minutes. So perhaps need to do a straw poll amongst male colleagues tomorrow. I will suggest 7 mins should be fine.

I mean - who needs any longer than that to have a wank anyway?

More Nonsense

In 2009 I posted less shite but was still yelling my strange notions into the cavernous void that is the worldwide web - here be some of it...

More Bloggage

So - the posts below were the mindshite I thinked up in the year of last year (2008). I shall cut and paste the 2009 stuff onto this here bit of the internet soon.

Your Dog Doesn't Know It's Christmas

Greetings Card companies are always looking for smart new ways to get more money out of us by inventing new reasons to send cards. After all - the greetings card was designed in days gone by when you wouldn't see so many people at Christmas or on their birthday or wedding anniversary and so you would send your greetings in a card, via the miracle of the fledging Royal Mail.

Nowadays with the wonders of cars, trains, planes, bikes and rollerblades we see each other more frequently and more easily and have text messages, email, phone calls, facebook, twitter and Jesus H Gates knows what else.

So why do we still send cards? More perversely - I have found myself handing greetings cards to people. "Happy Christmas! :-) Here's your card" ......which says "Happy Christmas" in it and then, ludicrously, is signed to demonstrate that it is indeed me that is wishing you that.

Valentines cards were always there to send an anonymous message of love or admiration to the one you longed for - secretly and subtly. Now we are supposed to send them to our partners, spouses and girlfriends. "Be My Valentine?" - "Erm, well, I already agreed to be your wife - do you remember - that day in 1999 when you said "I Do" in the church and then got horribly drunk and danced like a giddy toddler to A-ha in the hotel bar - so I think I have already 'agreed' to something a little more binding so perhaps the idea of being your valentine is a little redundant?".

Oh, you're so unromantic, folk will say.

Bollocks I say. My other half gets flowers, gifts, surprises and affection - but do you know what - it happens spontaneously and more than once a year and not just because Clintons remind me it's February 14th so I'd better buy her some chocs and a vile glittery card to tell her I love her in the most insincere way possible (ie with someone else's words in a twee verse inside the card rather than my own words, spoken to her directly).

Well, they have successfully turned that into a money spinner and now they have Fathers' Day. Never used to exist. Mothering Sunday did (never involved cards either) and they turned that into a money spinner too. Well done Hallmark, Andrew Brownsword et al.

Nothing wrong with these particular days being celebrated (I think Hallmark have invented Grandparents Day too) but can't you just get these people a nice gift and tell them you love them and how much they mean to you face to face or over the phone - from the heart.

Well......with all these avenues successfully explored how else do the card companies increase their market? Well....it seems the solution is to increase the pool of people to whom you send cards. And by people I mean pets.

Yes, you can now get Christmas Cards that say "To The Dog" or "To The Cat" on the front. They have them in WH Smiths and Clintons (other card shops are available), but why would you?!?

With all the other nonsense I have listed above we are wasting several million trees each year - but now they urge you to 'send' or 'give' a card to your dog!?! You may as well show him the local delivery pizza menu that dropped through your letterbox whilst patting him on the head and giving him a bit of turkey for all the difference it will make to his understanding that you are wishing him a Merry Christmas.

Finally, I must add that, not content with this travesty, Smiths also have "Merry Christmas From The Dog". Yes, you read that correctly.

A card for you to buy your insipid spouse or stupid children and sign it, no doubt, with a crudely drawn felt-tip doggy paw-print as a signature and the whole family can pretend that Bullseye sent a card to wish you all Seasons Greetings.

If you are in that last category may I strongly recommend you re-assess your life choices.

Merry Christmas.

DANCEOPHILIA 2008

Yeah....it's the event of the year - back to the heady days of the 90's crazy dancefests. This is DANCEOPHILIA 2008:

Hosted by
DJ REPREHENSIBLE
MC ARTHUR BAVINGTON

FEATURING:

RIGHTEOUS W
THE BRIGHT BROWN COLLECTIVE
MISSY MISANTHROPE
DOCTOR NO-I-DON’T-THINK-SO-REALLY
LUNAR NEATNESS
HOLLYOAKS FIST FANTASY
UTTERLY SLABBS
DEGREES OF ORANGEING
HEY BOLLOCK FURTIVE
….AND MANY OTHER TOP TRUMPERS THAT’LL BOFF YOUR CHEESEBOX

The State Of Our Press

The Headlines following Max Mosley proving in court that yet another newspaper story is based on lies and bullshit and they just hope he's too embarrassed to challenge it in court:

Daily Mail: What Price Morality?

The Sun: Freedom Gets A Spanking!

Daily Telegraph: Mosley Ruling Means Adultery Can Be Kept Secret

Perfect. They couldn't be more predictable. The Mail pretends it's about sexual morals, The Sun pretends it's about freedom (erm, yeah - after all the headlines about supporting 42 day detention without trial you're clearly very pro-freedom) and The Torygraph goes for the poor wife angle.

The lowlifes that fill our daily rags with sensationalist nonsense and non-stories about non-celebs are smarting from the kicking and just can't have the good grace to admit they went too far and try to pull back a little with their invasion of people's privacy.

The judge said "Anyone indulging in sexual activity is entitled to a degree of privacy - especially if it is on private property between consenting adults". Isn't it sad that a judge actually has to spell that out and it's not already a basically understood principle by all.

If I want to indulge in some cakefarting in the privacy of my own shed, that's no-ones business but mine.

Rant over.

Are Women Too Sensitive

For reasons I won't bore you with three of us at work move between offices so a temporary profile had to be set up for us on the computers in our city office so we'd need a different logon and password to the ones we use on our other computers. The new logon was set by the IT guy who has to put the new password in - we don't get to choose. He is a nice bloke and has a decent sense of humour.

So - the other two staff are female and he decided to pick something random but cute and drew inspiration from a nearby wildlife calendar. He chose "penguin" and "panda".

He spoke to me today and told me that the girl who he picked 'penguin' for immediately got offended and asked if it was a dig about the size of her nose? He was bemused and apologised and said it was nothing like that and she hasn't even got a big nose - it was just a random word.

The girl who he picked 'panda' for also got offended as soon as she found out and asked if he was saying she wore too much eye make up (I'm not kidding). Again he was baffled as to why she would take offence and explained the thought hadn't occurred to him and indeed she didn't wear much make-up at all.

Having unwittingly offended these two women he then told me my password.

He then pointed out that he was amused by the contrast that when I was told my password, which he'd set up for a laugh, I just went "Fair enough. Cheers!" and made no complaint at all.

My password was "c-nt".

Shed Boat Shed

Well, I clearly missed out on this one didn't I?!

Not that I normally make a point at looking out for which heap of tosh has won the Turner art prize, but I have recently seen Simon Starling on TV and became aware of his "work".

Shed boat shed. I can barely begin to describe it, I'm that angry. It makes my urine boil.

He got a shed, turned it upside down and rowed it down a river and then put it in a gallery as a shed again.

And that's art! What a cock.

Well, for my next piece (and I hope to win the £25,000 prize) I intend to present Turd Breakfast Turd. You see, first I get a turd and put it on a plate, then.......