Rdd, why are you so desperate (other than attention seeking) to argue Greenwood is innocent?

Never get the attention seeking shouts, this is a debate forum. The idea is too discuss. If their debate is on going I don't see how that constitutes attention seeking. Ridiculous.

comment by Ole dirty Baztard - penited and penandes (U19119)
posted 13 minutes ago
Rdd, why are you so desperate (other than attention seeking) to argue Greenwood is innocent?
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Id be happy to talk with you, if you hadnt been such a nob towards me recently. Bye.

comment by Don (U22703)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by Ole dirty Baztard - penited and penandes (U19119)
posted 13 minutes ago
Rdd, why are you so desperate (other than attention seeking) to argue Greenwood is innocent?
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Id be happy to talk with you, if you hadnt been such a nob towards me recently. Bye.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Right. So you don’t like your other accounts being mentioned. Got it.

comment by Ole dirty Baztard - penited and penandes (U19119)
posted 11 minutes ago
comment by Don (U22703)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by Ole dirty Baztard - penited and penandes (U19119)
posted 13 minutes ago
Rdd, why are you so desperate (other than attention seeking) to argue Greenwood is innocent?
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Id be happy to talk with you, if you hadnt been such a nob towards me recently. Bye.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Right. So you don’t like your other accounts being mentioned. Got it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Yeah. Yeah thats it.

You do know that there are only 4 of us on here really?

comment by Don (U22703)
posted 33 minutes ago
comment by Elvis: King of Cult (U7425)
posted 11 minutes ago
comment by Don (U22703)
posted 11 minutes ago
You dont think an offence was committed, so what are you suggesting all of this contact amounts to?


----------------------------------------------------------------------

I didn't say I didn't think that an offence was committed. Stop putting words in my mouth. I said from the off that the remainder of the audio will be very important in determining whether an offence has been committed. Hopefully the police have access to the full recording so that they are able to ensure justice is done either way.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

So, based on what we heard, what offence do you think the contact constitues?
----------------------------------------------------------------------

You still there Elvis?

Elvis is trying to work out an answer 😆

comment by Don (U22703)
posted 1 hour, 22 minutes ago
comment by Elvis: King of Cult (U7425)
posted 11 minutes ago
comment by Don (U22703)
posted 11 minutes ago
You dont think an offence was committed, so what are you suggesting all of this contact amounts to?


----------------------------------------------------------------------

I didn't say I didn't think that an offence was committed. Stop putting words in my mouth. I said from the off that the remainder of the audio will be very important in determining whether an offence has been committed. Hopefully the police have access to the full recording so that they are able to ensure justice is done either way.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

So, based on what we heard, what offence do you think the contact constitues?
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Probably sexual assault. Which would likely require Harriet's supporting statement to get a conviction. Maybe rape, depending on what the rest of the audio is.

comment by Don (U22703)
posted 39 minutes ago
Elvis is trying to work out an answer 😆
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Been doing some work then out for lunch old boy. The answer to your question didn't take any working out once I had seen it.

comment by Elvis: King of Cult (U7425)
posted 26 minutes ago
comment by Don (U22703)
posted 1 hour, 22 minutes ago
comment by Elvis: King of Cult (U7425)
posted 11 minutes ago
comment by Don (U22703)
posted 11 minutes ago
You dont think an offence was committed, so what are you suggesting all of this contact amounts to?


----------------------------------------------------------------------

I didn't say I didn't think that an offence was committed. Stop putting words in my mouth. I said from the off that the remainder of the audio will be very important in determining whether an offence has been committed. Hopefully the police have access to the full recording so that they are able to ensure justice is done either way.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

So, based on what we heard, what offence do you think the contact constitues?
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Probably sexual assault. Which would likely require Harriet's supporting statement to get a conviction. Maybe rape, depending on what the rest of the audio is.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

So earlier, when asked what offence the audio constitued, you said 'I haven't said that an offence was committed' now its sexual assault.

Make your mind up mate. All over the place.

comment by Don (U22703)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Elvis: King of Cult (U7425)
posted 26 minutes ago
comment by Don (U22703)
posted 1 hour, 22 minutes ago
comment by Elvis: King of Cult (U7425)
posted 11 minutes ago
comment by Don (U22703)
posted 11 minutes ago
You dont think an offence was committed, so what are you suggesting all of this contact amounts to?


----------------------------------------------------------------------

I didn't say I didn't think that an offence was committed. Stop putting words in my mouth. I said from the off that the remainder of the audio will be very important in determining whether an offence has been committed. Hopefully the police have access to the full recording so that they are able to ensure justice is done either way.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

So, based on what we heard, what offence do you think the contact constitues?
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Probably sexual assault. Which would likely require Harriet's supporting statement to get a conviction. Maybe rape, depending on what the rest of the audio is.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

So earlier, when asked what offence the audio constitued, you said 'I haven't said that an offence was committed' now its sexual assault.

Make your mind up mate. All over the place.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

I hadn't said that it constituted an offence had I?

Since then you've asked me a question and I've answered it.

Just how mental are you?

comment by Elvis: King of Cult (U7425)
posted 2 hours, 35 minutes ago
comment by Don (U22703)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Elvis: King of Cult (U7425)
posted 26 minutes ago
comment by Don (U22703)
posted 1 hour, 22 minutes ago
comment by Elvis: King of Cult (U7425)
posted 11 minutes ago
comment by Don (U22703)
posted 11 minutes ago
You dont think an offence was committed, so what are you suggesting all of this contact amounts to?


----------------------------------------------------------------------

I didn't say I didn't think that an offence was committed. Stop putting words in my mouth. I said from the off that the remainder of the audio will be very important in determining whether an offence has been committed. Hopefully the police have access to the full recording so that they are able to ensure justice is done either way.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

So, based on what we heard, what offence do you think the contact constitues?
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Probably sexual assault. Which would likely require Harriet's supporting statement to get a conviction. Maybe rape, depending on what the rest of the audio is.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

So earlier, when asked what offence the audio constitued, you said 'I haven't said that an offence was committed' now its sexual assault.

Make your mind up mate. All over the place.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

I hadn't said that it constituted an offence had I?

Since then you've asked me a question and I've answered it.

Just how mental are you?


----------------------------------------------------------------------

So you initially didnt think it constituted an offence hut now do. What changed?

comment by Don (U22703)
posted 1 hour, 38 minutes ago
comment by Elvis: King of Cult (U7425)
posted 2 hours, 35 minutes ago
comment by Don (U22703)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Elvis: King of Cult (U7425)
posted 26 minutes ago
comment by Don (U22703)
posted 1 hour, 22 minutes ago
comment by Elvis: King of Cult (U7425)
posted 11 minutes ago
comment by Don (U22703)
posted 11 minutes ago
You dont think an offence was committed, so what are you suggesting all of this contact amounts to?


----------------------------------------------------------------------

I didn't say I didn't think that an offence was committed. Stop putting words in my mouth. I said from the off that the remainder of the audio will be very important in determining whether an offence has been committed. Hopefully the police have access to the full recording so that they are able to ensure justice is done either way.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

So, based on what we heard, what offence do you think the contact constitues?
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Probably sexual assault. Which would likely require Harriet's supporting statement to get a conviction. Maybe rape, depending on what the rest of the audio is.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

So earlier, when asked what offence the audio constitued, you said 'I haven't said that an offence was committed' now its sexual assault.

Make your mind up mate. All over the place.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

I hadn't said that it constituted an offence had I?

Since then you've asked me a question and I've answered it.

Just how mental are you?


----------------------------------------------------------------------

So you initially didnt think it constituted an offence hut now do. What changed?
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Nope. I told you to stop putting words in my mouth.

Elvis you could of been shouting at me today you know that right?

comment by Elvis: King of Cult (U7425)
posted 1 hour, 59 minutes ago
comment by Don (U22703)
posted 1 hour, 38 minutes ago
comment by Elvis: King of Cult (U7425)
posted 2 hours, 35 minutes ago
comment by Don (U22703)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Elvis: King of Cult (U7425)
posted 26 minutes ago
comment by Don (U22703)
posted 1 hour, 22 minutes ago
comment by Elvis: King of Cult (U7425)
posted 11 minutes ago
comment by Don (U22703)
posted 11 minutes ago
You dont think an offence was committed, so what are you suggesting all of this contact amounts to?


----------------------------------------------------------------------

I didn't say I didn't think that an offence was committed. Stop putting words in my mouth. I said from the off that the remainder of the audio will be very important in determining whether an offence has been committed. Hopefully the police have access to the full recording so that they are able to ensure justice is done either way.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

So, based on what we heard, what offence do you think the contact constitues?
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Probably sexual assault. Which would likely require Harriet's supporting statement to get a conviction. Maybe rape, depending on what the rest of the audio is.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

So earlier, when asked what offence the audio constitued, you said 'I haven't said that an offence was committed' now its sexual assault.

Make your mind up mate. All over the place.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

I hadn't said that it constituted an offence had I?

Since then you've asked me a question and I've answered it.

Just how mental are you?


----------------------------------------------------------------------

So you initially didnt think it constituted an offence hut now do. What changed?
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Nope. I told you to stop putting words in my mouth.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So it was always an offence on your opinion?

comment by Don (U22703)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by Elvis: King of Cult (U7425)
posted 1 hour, 59 minutes ago
comment by Don (U22703)
posted 1 hour, 38 minutes ago
comment by Elvis: King of Cult (U7425)
posted 2 hours, 35 minutes ago
comment by Don (U22703)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Elvis: King of Cult (U7425)
posted 26 minutes ago
comment by Don (U22703)
posted 1 hour, 22 minutes ago
comment by Elvis: King of Cult (U7425)
posted 11 minutes ago
comment by Don (U22703)
posted 11 minutes ago
You dont think an offence was committed, so what are you suggesting all of this contact amounts to?


----------------------------------------------------------------------

I didn't say I didn't think that an offence was committed. Stop putting words in my mouth. I said from the off that the remainder of the audio will be very important in determining whether an offence has been committed. Hopefully the police have access to the full recording so that they are able to ensure justice is done either way.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

So, based on what we heard, what offence do you think the contact constitues?
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Probably sexual assault. Which would likely require Harriet's supporting statement to get a conviction. Maybe rape, depending on what the rest of the audio is.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

So earlier, when asked what offence the audio constitued, you said 'I haven't said that an offence was committed' now its sexual assault.

Make your mind up mate. All over the place.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

I hadn't said that it constituted an offence had I?

Since then you've asked me a question and I've answered it.

Just how mental are you?


----------------------------------------------------------------------

So you initially didnt think it constituted an offence hut now do. What changed?
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Nope. I told you to stop putting words in my mouth.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So it was always an offence on your opinion?
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Assuming it wasn't a s3x game, I think that the audio amounts to sexual assault. But it will likely need a statement from Harriet to get a conviction.

comment by Rude Van Nist (U22799)
posted 32 minutes ago
Elvis you could of been shouting at me today you know that right?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
About what?

Biology and gender.

I'm good thanks.

comment by Elvis: King of Cult (U7425)
posted 23 minutes ago
I'm good thanks.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Thirty other people have it covered.

Oh OK step daddy

You're as weird as Luke

No I'm not, I'm insulting a cunnnt. Who's tried to insult me. Very standard. Mind you business it's nothing to do with you

comment by Rude Van Nist (U22799)
posted 38 minutes ago
No I'm not, I'm insulting a cunnnt. Who's tried to insult me. Very standard. Mind you business it's nothing to do with you
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I was minding my business until you tried to get my attention. Are you drunk?

wtf