UPDATE: Reviews section refreshed, redesigned, searchable: Go take a look
Did you bother reading the article?
He “regretted” accepting a caution… why did he accept it?
Maybe he wanted to go home.
Did you bother reading the article?
Yes.
So you are happy to say that he punched his girlfriend when she denies that he did and there is no evidence that he did.
So you are happy to say that he punched his girlfriend when she denies that he did and there is no evidence that he did.
Him assaulting a pregnant woman doesn't make me happy.
So you are happy to say that he punched his girlfriend when she denies that he did and there is no evidence that he did.
We've all had rows with our partners I'm sure. Not many of us have had their partner ring 999 claiming that you were assaulting them during that argument I hope. That that partner made a decision not to assure the father of her future child (and source of income) had a criminal record is a sadly common occurrence in domestic abuse households.
Liddle and Clarkson, when they over stepped the mark it was just a joke or deliberate wind up or parody or... . Or was it that the booze had scraped off the veneer and the inner hate/lust/prejudice/contempt/anger was seepng out ?
Loveable rogues? Well definitely rogues, that get given too much space to spread their bile and paid too much for the privilege.
He didn't have his partner ring 999 and claim she was being assaulted. The simple fact is he accepted a slap on the wrist for a marital row , which we have no knowledge of other than what is reported.
Liddle was 66. In the years up to his death he looked like a like an absolute wreck and became an increasingly angry, grumpy man howling at the moon. Regardless of anything else, the state of him in both body and mind should be a salutatory lesson to middle aged men the world over to sort our shit out. Be less Liddle.
The simple fact is he accepted a slap on the wrist for a marital row ,
The only fact is he had a police caution for assaulting his pregnant girlfriend.
Precisely which is not what you originally said.
Precisely which is not what you originally said.
A police caution, which he accepted, is all the evidence I need to say that he assaulted his pregnant girlfriend. It's pretty distasteful that you continue to defend his appalling behaviour, but not entirely surprising, given his and your political views.
He received and accepted a police caution for assaulting his pregnant girlfriend.
That is not exactly how it goes. Plod may offer a caution if guilt has been admitted. Naughty person must agree (informed consent) to be cautioned. Then the caution is actually recorded. The pressure to agree comes of course from the fact that no criminal charges will follow (plod should not offer a caution unless the requirements for charging are met).
He “regretted” accepting a caution… why did he accept it?
See above. Of course in retrospect the idea of defending a criminal charge probably looks less daunting. He may not have fully appreciated the consequences of acquiring a criminal record, though he should have been advised of this.
That is not exactly how it goes. Plod may offer a caution if guilt has been admitted. Naughty person must agree (informed consent) to be cautioned
That's what I said. He accepted a caution.
I am just sharing the facts to the extent known which don't extend to him punching his girlfriend which you alleged. My views are quite different from his.
I am just sharing the facts to the extent known which don't extend to him punching his girlfriend which you alleged. My views are quite different from his.
He admitted that he assaulted his pregnant girlfriend, for which he received a caution. Carry on spinning all you like, but your "facts" are nothing of the sort. It's ok if you enjoyed his lazy, cliched writing, but you don't need to keep defending his behaviour.
Making snide comments about me doesn't change the fact that you can't stand up your initial claim.
Making snide comments about me doesn't change the fact that you can't stand up your initial claim.
Your dissembling doesn't change the fact that he admitted assaulting his pregnant girlfriend.
Lots of conjecture, the only relevant facts are that he was offered and accepted a caution for assault. I have no idea why, doesn't seem to me to be the actions of a man who is convinced of his innocence, neither does the comment after in the Independent article that "they couldn't have charged me" - lack of evidence? a witness who was too intimidated to back up the complaint?
I don’t know who this guy was or what he did or didn’t do but from his description of the cyclists who drew his ire he must have frequented STW
“All in Lycra, all with their energy drinks and fatuous expressions on their faces, expressions of self-righteousness and irreproachable virtue.”
I am not disassembling just pointing out your inaccuracy which rather pathetically you can't admit to, It is not hard,for instance:
"I can't categorically say that he punched her but I have my suspicions and they are backed up by Liddle receiving a caution for assault."
Now that is spinning.
I thoight his death had done that rare thing of uniting STW into s single voice of agreement. Alas, no such luck.
He was a disgusting money grabbing person with zero morals, quick to understand that his easymeans of income was being controversial. I don't know if he believed in what he wrote, but he was prepared to publish it anyway to earn ££ rather than finding another job. He didn't care who he upset on the way. In that respect, he's no different to Lawrence Fox or Katie Hopkins. Disgusting.
I really hope that mefty is on a wind up and you've taken the bait. Otherwise.......
Wow.
I thoight his death had done that rare thing of uniting STW into s single voice of agreement. Alas, no such luck.
This made me smirk.
But hey we all have different experiences !
Even without all the trouble he seems to been involved in - he's hardly a likeable person - or interesting.
He actually reminds me of Clarkson quite a bit, without the 'i'm from Yorkshire' edge. Which is a bit of a stretch as Sprotborough might be technically South Yorkshire but really ...
(Don't forget - Clarkson punched someone! )
Clarkson punched two people, Piers Morgan and his producer. The producer case would have been his downfall in a civilised world, alcohol fueled and racism motivated calling his victim a 'lazy Irish ****'.
Clarkson punched two people, Piers Morgan and his producer. The producer case would have been his downfall in a civilised world, alcohol fueled and racism motivated calling his victim a 'lazy Irish ****'.
Is it wrong to think "Clarkson punched Piers Morgan? I'd pay good money to see that"?
No , quite normal, Morecashthandash, you can sleep easy concience clear.
Reading through the thread there's something of a theme in the names popping up - racist, misogynist, cyclist hating, pick at least two.
Witty, provocative writer who often made me laugh out loud. A thorn in the side of authority, who annoyed all the right people, and was always on the side of the common man.
But all too often his his humour crossed over into cruelty, and while both Liddle and Clarkson pose(d) as anti-establishment, their targets are too often vulnerable minorities, it's pretty lazy writing to punch down. They both remind me of the Boris Johnson quote about his reports from Brussels (mostly completely fabricated) "I was just chucking these rocks over the garden and I listened to this amazing crash from the greenhouse next door".
All of them immensely wealthy, highly educated, metropolitan elite middle aged white men posing as ordinary "bloke down the pub" all of them insisting that it's their voice that needs to be heard, despite obviously being the last group of people we need to hear more manufactured culture-war grievance from.
That's what I said. He accepted a caution
You get the order wrong, the admission of guilt and the agreement to be cautioned come before the formal caution. You don't receive a caution then accept it.
they couldn't have charged me" - lack of evidence? a witness who was too intimidated to back up the complaint?
See my earlier comment, if the requirements for charging were not met they should not have offered a caution.
TBH, when i saw some of the gushing epitaphs on Twitter, i thought there was another Rod Liddle who had died. 30 seconds of clicking and it's clear that most of these people are exactly the sort of people society functions better without...
I am not disassembling just pointing out your inaccuracy which rather pathetically you can't admit to, It is not hard,for instance:
I assume you meant "dissembling".
He admitted to it. It's a real pity that you continue to defend his behaviour.
He was a disgusting money grabbing person with zero morals, quick to understand that his easy means of income was being controversial.
And in doing so he (and others like him) "inspired" all manner of lower tier journos on local rags to behave the same way, to write similar opinion pieces, to view it all as "saying it like it is" while churning out cliche-ridden stereotypical nonsense.
Didn’t agree with much he wrote, occasionally made me laugh, approved of the Today updating that was needed. i wouldn’t wish “death by short illness” (usually liver or pancreas) on anyone. I imagine, like clarkson, he wasn't his public persona. RIP
I imagine, like clarkson, he wasn't his public persona.
Maybe. But the damage he caused was in the public space. How nice he might have been on the personal level doesn't undo any of that. And while the comparisons with Clarkson are understandable, his work in the media to normalise public hate against so many groups was on another level. His normalisation of harm done to, and wishing harm to be done to, children in particular, wasn't worth the occasional laugh he might have brought people.
Totally agree.
If you genuinely don't believe what you are writing, but still write it because it's good for views or clicks - that's one thing, I suppose. It makes a living, is it very different from the Pub Landlord whose act is a pastiche of that person?
But when the effect of your writing is to galvanise the reader into acts of hate and bigotry, that far outweighs the right to make a living. "I was only doing it for clicks" is no defence when a follower's setting fire to a refugee's house.
If someone tells you who they are, you'd be wise to listen.
There's a long history of unscrupulous people making money from pandering to, and reinforcing, the prejudices of the non-too-bright.
The problem is that the non-too-bright that are being pandered to can't see it, because they're non-too-bright...
We have bright posters here being positive about his work, and defending his private actions... so it's not quite that simple. You can be bright and still enjoy having your prejudices shared out in the open... or you can just enjoy having a laugh at people unlike you... or people who care about people and problems you don't care about... or just people you think take things far too seriously. Any of those can make you think more kindly towards those who shit stir for money and status, even if their work could incite people to harm children (whether that's defending the making/sharing/watching of child porn, or talking about taking them out with piano wire).
[ It's also true of course that someone's death can lead people to excuse their worse actions, and focus instead on their better points... a human trait we should welcome... I'll try better and drop out of this thread now. ]
There is a difference, I think, between having a media personality which is 'edgy' or 'controversial' and just being a ****. Even if the net result is the same.
Clarkson feels like he's playing a hyper-exaggerated version of himself. Whereas Liddle came across as a right nasty piece of work. Clarkson might run a piece going "car is king, bloody cyclists getting in the way hey?!" but I'd like to think he'd stop short of encouraging the laying of potentially fatal traps for middle-class families who have committed the heinous crime of "living on the same street."
Piers Morgan almost seems the opposite; he's a weapons-grade **** actually trying to downplay how much of a **** he really is.
I could be way off the mark with all of these, of course.
Clarkson feels like he's playing a hyper-exaggerated version of himself.
I'm not so sure.
His more serious comments do reflect his staged obnoxiousness - but he has a bit of humility every now and again which works very well.
Don't forget he punched someone too. You can't put that down to a silly character.
His recent comments about people on benefits - say it all. Not bad for someone that has had plenty of state support.
Can you get to a point where you hate Roman Polanski (those who know will know) - but think he's made some good films? Yes I can hold both thoughts.
Trouble is with Rod - is I didn't like him or his work.
