Report this comment to us

And why do you feel the need to tell us of our sins and make up illnesses for us?
I believe this urge you have to continue commenting on a gay news site and spout crap is an illness in itself
You're a disease pringle, you are cured by educating people!

Report this comment to us

Report this comment to us

Report this comment to us

Why don't you just live your life anf let other people live their lives?

And please don't answer with a shovel full of manure; use your B.S. to fertilize your own inner garden. Be human.

Report this comment to us

- It most certainly is what 14-stone Gavin Alker is alleged to have said. O'Connor joined in the frenzy if you look through the case carefully. Causer was half his size, asleep and dragged out of bed and kicked to death.

How do you know the mind of Gavin Alker and O'Connor, to say it was not homophobic murder, DavidSkinner / Pringle?

Report this comment to us

While you're thinking about that, maybe you could read this extract talking about the huge increase in HIV infections in STRAIGHT people:

"The number of heterosexually acquired HIV infections diagnosed in the UK has risen hugely over the last 15 years. In 1999, for the first time, the rate of heterosexually acquired HIV diagnoses overtook the rate of diagnoses in men who have sex with men. The peak was 4,889 in 2004, since when there has been a slight decline. A total of 44,617 cases had been reported by the end of 2008."

Report this comment to us

Report this comment to us

Report this comment to us

No you didn't. You outlines offensive and wild acquisitions without one shred of proof. Why on earth would gay people having medical conditions (which of course they don't) make you feel better? What a disturbing idea to have, all the more so because it a lie.

However, I have already outlined that you are more stupid than we are. I provided proof of this by scientific study and observation of your posts.

Report this comment to us

Lizabella

You again state:- The only logical motive WAS homophobia due to the ATTACKERS stating "He's a little queer he deserves it".

This is definitely not what O'Connor the killer is alleged to have uttered. You are again trying to apportion any mens rea to him because of what others have said. This is not good practice and is at odds with your earlier remark:-

"Legally it was not classed by the judge 'obiter', as being homophobic."

You do not impress in attempting to ascribe personality disorders to those who disagree with you. In fact, under the banner of freedom noted earlier in this thread I outlined several serious medical problams associated with homosexuality.

You really ought to look to your own!

Whatever legal training you have had it is sufficient for you to confirm the judgement of the court. It was NOT a homophobic murder.

Anyway, why aren't you at work?

.

Report this comment to us

This guy must be rattling out letters to all and sundry that irk his political views. Every MP in Westminster must be thinking "Oh fuck, another pink envelope. It's that Murphy twat again" *SHRED*

Report this comment to us

"If I'm ever in a vegetative state, please don't let me stay hooked to a machine, and dependent on fluids from a bottle."

He promptly got up, unplugged my computer, and dumped out the rest of my bottle of wine!

Report this comment to us

"If the assailant of Michael Causer had, through rational, cold -blooded deduction, without malice, carried out the killing simply because he believed homosexuals should die, would this have been a lesser or worse crime?"

So you're asking whether, if the assailant 'didn't know what he was doing was wrong' i.e it was just the assailants view of homosexuals.

This would then fall under the Mac' Naughten Rules (spelling is variable as it's so old) of 'insanity'. To put the rules very bluntly and simply, they can be used if an assailant either:

A) Didn't know what they were doing
B) Didn't know what they were doing was wrong.

This doesn't apply in the Causer case as the assailants did know what they were doing, they were not in psychosis or anything, and more importantly they knew it was wrong; hence they dragged Michael into the street and lied that other youths had beaten him to cover their tracks. To cover one's tracks and to lie is a clear indication you knew what you did was wrong.

The only logical motive WAS homophobia due to the attackers stating "He's a little queer he deserves it".

So your question is pointless as it simply doesn't apply here.

Are you trying to defend murderers here because you hate gays so much? Or are you trying to test me? Either way, on both counts you've failed.

I think you DO have a personality disorder, seriously.

You're obsessed with homosexuality aren't you? Do you think this, or trying to defend murderers of a gay man, is normal behaviour?

Report this comment to us

There's still time to save yourself some humiliation.

GO HOME!
GO HOME!
BOO! BOO!
WE DON'T WANT ANY!

Report this comment to us

BOO!
BOO!
BOO!
BOO!

Report this comment to us

Must be too much for you. Do we have to dumb them down for you, or is it each split personality doesn't think we're talking to him/it?

So many questions, so many you can't answer because of your mental condition.

Report this comment to us

And when will that be happening then?? When we recruit enough children, I suppose, in your strange mind.

If you're one of Pringles many alter egos, maybe you could answer the question – why do you think Michael Causer was killed?

Report this comment to us

I always thought that crimes of passion were put in the category of manslaughter and are therefore not so serious as pre- meditated murder. But it seems now that manslaughter motivated by phobia, passion, hatred, is a worse crime. Or does this only apply to crimes motivated by homophobia? If the assailant of Michael Causer had, through rational, cold -blooded deduction, without malice, carried out the killing simply because he believed homosexuals should die, would this have been a lesser or worse crime?

Here is another conundrum: if the assailant of Michael had been motivated by homophilia, irrational love, like Nadim Kurrimbukus who set fire to his lover, Charlie Davies, or Oral Seaton who butchered his former lover Winston Dow – Stephenson, would this be a lesser crime?

And what about crimes motivated by cyprinophobia, dysmorphophobia, photophobia, gerontophobia, heterophobia, gingerphobia hobophobia, Judeophobia, peladophobia. Why are not these minority groups given special protection?

In September 2008, Ian Mckellen said,

"I've been busy at quite a few schools recently. I went to a wonderful school in Harpenden.
"They invited me to come and give prizes to 13-year-olds in front of the parents and to talk, partly, about being gay. I said that we were all part of a minority group – be it for being short or tall or fat or thin, or having red hair or whatever. I said, 'Hands up who thinks they are part of a minority group,' and all the hands went up.

Why didn’t he tell them that some minorities, like homosexuals are more equal than others?

Finally Lezabella, what happens when homosexuals cease to be a tiny minority but grow to become 10, 20 50 or even 60% of the population. Will they loose their protected status?

So many questions.

Report this comment to us

Who cares? They're in the dark whether or not the bulb is changed.

Report this comment to us