http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2210734/Megan-Stammers-Read-Jeremy-Forrests-fake-CV-French-bar-work-Bordeaux.html
The guy turned out to have a fake identity, poor guy really did blow his cover when applying for a job!
I did always wonder though how on earth did the girl just go along with it all, there must have been the idea of money or was it really straight up love?
Do I feel sympathy for the guy...erm no I don't. Sorry but what man thinks to fall in love with someone much younger, then run away together, only to get away from the entire country. Makes me laugh how short their trip was. His lawyer mentioned that Jack wanted to "lie low", yeah ofcourse he did! He's like twice her age and a frikin teacher!
I don't quiet understand why stating his GCSE results was so significant to include in an article, I mean are they trying to highlight his perfomance at her age? Seriously don't get the link at all, then to state which University he attended was a great shocker!
He did Journalism which makes me want to cry as it just doesn't seem right, to wish to do the same course as this crazy guy!
However, surely there was nothing he did that was wrong, no evidence that he slept with her, no evidence that he forced her into anything, no violence, yet then again he did hold his job at stake. Surely all he wanted was a relationship, is it so wrong that he fell in love with someone so young?
Attitudes towards relationships have changed though haven't they, with time it's almost become abnormal that you have to question the age of someone, ofcourse extreme differences are wrong, but I mean for my grand-parents there's like 10 years between them.
One detail i enjoyed reading was the idea that they planned to stay in France for another 6 months, so that when they came back to the UK Megan would be 16 making her legal. Still what's stopping people from frowning upon a relationship with a 16 and 31 year old? It's the same isn't it.
He has lost his profession and his trust, with his close friends, family and the rest of society.
She has lost taste, but on the whole she has gained more, she had the attention, the label of being vulnerable as a girl, attention amongst her family and friends.
I'm just angry that at the end of the day she'll be seen as the victim and him as the "perpetrator"
; in my opinion they were equally motivated.
Sunday, 30 September 2012
Thursday, 27 September 2012
Mark Duggan shooting
sorry I am just so frustrated over this article presented by The Guardian
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2012/sep/27/mark-duggan-shooting-taxi-driver-evidence
now I fully understand that with the poccession of any sort of fire-arms is bad in itself.
but think...Mark was only transporting a gun for someone else,
forget the idea that guns are illegal for a second, because in hindsight we don't have any evidence that he was going to use it,
surely you have to think contextually, why was he doing this, it sounds to me more like a deal than him actually using it,
to have it in a shoe box gives the impression that it was like a parcel, totally planned disguise!
It's so unfair, the police are authority here, they should have atleast used the gun to stop him running, not to stop his life. They should have the practice to understand the consequences of open fire, why on earth would you do such a thing, has running after the baddy become too old fashioned now? Police had so much choice, after reading the article too it seemed as though they were hunting him down, so was it planned?
Mistake or no mistake, the police are still in the wrong, i;m sure if the gun was to do any harm...HELLO it didn't, Mark was innocent, he was an innocent man transporting a weapon contained in a box.
Hmmm so interesting how there is no mention of the police officers name, the guy who actually shot him, also there is no mention of their apology or even a slight idea of a "mistake".
All about ruling class ideology isn't it, the working class is seen as the criminal in the media in contrast to the corporate criminal who was in fact the officer who shot the guy, making him responsible for the end of someones life.
I see no Justice here at all, Mark had a gun...and a life.
The Police wanted the gun so they took away his life.
How very sad.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2012/sep/27/mark-duggan-shooting-taxi-driver-evidence
now I fully understand that with the poccession of any sort of fire-arms is bad in itself.
but think...Mark was only transporting a gun for someone else,
forget the idea that guns are illegal for a second, because in hindsight we don't have any evidence that he was going to use it,
surely you have to think contextually, why was he doing this, it sounds to me more like a deal than him actually using it,
to have it in a shoe box gives the impression that it was like a parcel, totally planned disguise!
It's so unfair, the police are authority here, they should have atleast used the gun to stop him running, not to stop his life. They should have the practice to understand the consequences of open fire, why on earth would you do such a thing, has running after the baddy become too old fashioned now? Police had so much choice, after reading the article too it seemed as though they were hunting him down, so was it planned?
Mistake or no mistake, the police are still in the wrong, i;m sure if the gun was to do any harm...HELLO it didn't, Mark was innocent, he was an innocent man transporting a weapon contained in a box.
Hmmm so interesting how there is no mention of the police officers name, the guy who actually shot him, also there is no mention of their apology or even a slight idea of a "mistake".
All about ruling class ideology isn't it, the working class is seen as the criminal in the media in contrast to the corporate criminal who was in fact the officer who shot the guy, making him responsible for the end of someones life.
I see no Justice here at all, Mark had a gun...and a life.
The Police wanted the gun so they took away his life.
How very sad.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)