Man given five-year jail term for seven-minute attack on someone who urinated in his garden

Tony Cocks, jailed for beating up a man who urinated in his garden

Tony Cocks, jailed for beating up a man who urinated in his garden

First published in News
Last updated

A man who beat up someone for urinating in his garden, leaving them with a brain bleed, has been jailed.

Tony Cocks, 35, an engineer, of Windward Close, Littlehampton caught the man in the act on April 4 shortly before midnight when he came out of his home.

He chased him down the road and into Armada Way, where he viciously punched and kicked the victim for about seven minutes, according to police.

He then left the scene, leaving the man covered in blood.

Mr Cocks beat the man, now 55, so badly he was taken to Hurstwood Park with a bleed on his brain.

Mr Cocks appeared at Chichester Crown Court yesterday after pleading guilty to GBH.

He was sentenced to five years and four months for the attack.

The victim was in hospital for three weeks after the attack and had an operation.

He has now made a full recovery.

Detective Constable Jamie Carruthers said: "Cocks found the victim urinating in his garden, however this does not excuse the actions which he took.

"Cocks pleaded guilty to the offence at the earliest opportunity but has been sentenced to five years and four months in prison for this attack."

Comments (69)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

2:26pm Wed 13 Aug 14

Zamora251 says...

**** by name, **** by nature, what a scumbag, this man could have died!!
**** by name, **** by nature, what a scumbag, this man could have died!! Zamora251
  • Score: 16

2:49pm Wed 13 Aug 14

Youlikemyjugs says...

Urine is not a pleasant liquid to have sprayed over your lobelias.
Urine is not a pleasant liquid to have sprayed over your lobelias. Youlikemyjugs
  • Score: -6

3:01pm Wed 13 Aug 14

stevo!! says...

Zamora251 wrote:
**** by name, **** by nature, what a scumbag, this man could have died!!
The man pi55ed on someone's property. Why wasn't he charged with that?
[quote][p][bold]Zamora251[/bold] wrote: **** by name, **** by nature, what a scumbag, this man could have died!![/p][/quote]The man pi55ed on someone's property. Why wasn't he charged with that? stevo!!
  • Score: -5

3:03pm Wed 13 Aug 14

stevo!! says...

" where he viciously punched and kicked the victim for about seven minutes, according to police. "

So the police were standing there timing it?

No, Argus......the seven minutes was according to the victim.

I suspect it was a much shorter beating than that, but anything to paint C0cks in a bad light.

I have no sympathy whatsoever for the victim, and I trust this will stop him being a pr*ck in future.
" where he viciously punched and kicked the victim for about seven minutes, according to police. " So the police were standing there timing it? No, Argus......the seven minutes was according to the victim. I suspect it was a much shorter beating than that, but anything to paint C0cks in a bad light. I have no sympathy whatsoever for the victim, and I trust this will stop him being a pr*ck in future. stevo!!
  • Score: -16

3:03pm Wed 13 Aug 14

ThinkBrighton says...

Zamora251 wrote:
**** by name, **** by nature, what a scumbag, this man could have died!!
So it's quite OK to pee in somebodys garden and not expect any reaction
from the owner, I admit it was excessive, but to quote Albert Einstein (nearly) "For every negative reaction , there is always a positive reaction"
[quote][p][bold]Zamora251[/bold] wrote: **** by name, **** by nature, what a scumbag, this man could have died!![/p][/quote]So it's quite OK to pee in somebodys garden and not expect any reaction from the owner, I admit it was excessive, but to quote Albert Einstein (nearly) "For every negative reaction , there is always a positive reaction" ThinkBrighton
  • Score: 1

3:18pm Wed 13 Aug 14

Stoves says...

FREE TONY C0CKS
FREE TONY C0CKS Stoves
  • Score: -19

3:20pm Wed 13 Aug 14

PracticeNotTheories says...

I don't think that anyone is saying the victim (in the instance of the beating) was not in the wrong for needing to answer nature's call, however, the punishment meted out is far in excess of what was fair. If anything he could have been restrained and police called, or just reported.

While peeing in the garden is not pleasant, it's not as if it's going to end up killing off the begonias is it?

What's next, hanging for stealing a kitkat?
I don't think that anyone is saying the victim (in the instance of the beating) was not in the wrong for needing to answer nature's call, however, the punishment meted out is far in excess of what was fair. If anything he could have been restrained and police called, or just reported. While peeing in the garden is not pleasant, it's not as if it's going to end up killing off the begonias is it? What's next, hanging for stealing a kitkat? PracticeNotTheories
  • Score: 22

3:20pm Wed 13 Aug 14

PracticeNotTheories says...

I don't think that anyone is saying the victim (in the instance of the beating) was not in the wrong for needing to answer nature's call, however, the punishment meted out is far in excess of what was fair. If anything he could have been restrained and police called, or just reported.

While peeing in the garden is not pleasant, it's not as if it's going to end up killing off the begonias is it?

What's next, hanging for stealing a kitkat?
I don't think that anyone is saying the victim (in the instance of the beating) was not in the wrong for needing to answer nature's call, however, the punishment meted out is far in excess of what was fair. If anything he could have been restrained and police called, or just reported. While peeing in the garden is not pleasant, it's not as if it's going to end up killing off the begonias is it? What's next, hanging for stealing a kitkat? PracticeNotTheories
  • Score: 17

3:22pm Wed 13 Aug 14

Nikski says...

Stoves wrote:
FREE TONY C0CKS
With every packet of cornflakes! **** is a thug end of, and he'll be getting plenty of c*cks for the next few years...
[quote][p][bold]Stoves[/bold] wrote: FREE TONY C0CKS[/p][/quote]With every packet of cornflakes! **** is a thug end of, and he'll be getting plenty of c*cks for the next few years... Nikski
  • Score: 23

3:23pm Wed 13 Aug 14

Nikski says...

Youlikemyjugs wrote:
Urine is not a pleasant liquid to have sprayed over your lobelias.
Some people enjoy it apparently
[quote][p][bold]Youlikemyjugs[/bold] wrote: Urine is not a pleasant liquid to have sprayed over your lobelias.[/p][/quote]Some people enjoy it apparently Nikski
  • Score: 7

3:26pm Wed 13 Aug 14

stevo!! says...

PracticeNotTheories wrote:
I don't think that anyone is saying the victim (in the instance of the beating) was not in the wrong for needing to answer nature's call, however, the punishment meted out is far in excess of what was fair. If anything he could have been restrained and police called, or just reported.

While peeing in the garden is not pleasant, it's not as if it's going to end up killing off the begonias is it?

What's next, hanging for stealing a kitkat?
"While peeing in the garden is not pleasant, it's not as if it's going to end up killing off the begonias is it?"

It's an offence.

Peeing on the tarmac of a road won't kill off anything, but it's an offence.

The guy also trespassed and committed criminal damage by spreading urine in a garden.

"he could have been restrained"

But he chose to run. We have no idea if he taunted C0cks as he did, but it was plain that reporting to the police was the last thing on C0cks's mind as he ran after him.

He received a deserved beating, especially in view of the fact that it was the only punishment he received.
[quote][p][bold]PracticeNotTheories[/bold] wrote: I don't think that anyone is saying the victim (in the instance of the beating) was not in the wrong for needing to answer nature's call, however, the punishment meted out is far in excess of what was fair. If anything he could have been restrained and police called, or just reported. While peeing in the garden is not pleasant, it's not as if it's going to end up killing off the begonias is it? What's next, hanging for stealing a kitkat?[/p][/quote]"While peeing in the garden is not pleasant, it's not as if it's going to end up killing off the begonias is it?" It's an offence. Peeing on the tarmac of a road won't kill off anything, but it's an offence. The guy also trespassed and committed criminal damage by spreading urine in a garden. "he could have been restrained" But he chose to run. We have no idea if he taunted C0cks as he did, but it was plain that reporting to the police was the last thing on C0cks's mind as he ran after him. He received a deserved beating, especially in view of the fact that it was the only punishment he received. stevo!!
  • Score: -5

3:28pm Wed 13 Aug 14

HumanHater says...

the scumbag will think twice before he **** in someone's garden.the filthy swine.
the scumbag will think twice before he **** in someone's garden.the filthy swine. HumanHater
  • Score: -2

3:44pm Wed 13 Aug 14

maxiboy_ says...

Perhaps the beating was over the top but a **** for **** I say.
Perhaps the beating was over the top but a **** for **** I say. maxiboy_
  • Score: -1

4:26pm Wed 13 Aug 14

Ouseler says...

" What's next, hanging for stealing a kitkat? "

Hanging!! Indeed no..steal the KitKat I'm thinking of and no doubt messages of grateful thanks would be showered on you..:-) :-)
" What's next, hanging for stealing a kitkat? " Hanging!! Indeed no..steal the KitKat I'm thinking of and no doubt messages of grateful thanks would be showered on you..:-) :-) Ouseler
  • Score: 12

4:31pm Wed 13 Aug 14

Roundbill says...

ThinkBrighton wrote:
Zamora251 wrote:
**** by name, **** by nature, what a scumbag, this man could have died!!
So it's quite OK to pee in somebodys garden and not expect any reaction
from the owner, I admit it was excessive, but to quote Albert Einstein (nearly) "For every negative reaction , there is always a positive reaction"
Newton.
[quote][p][bold]ThinkBrighton[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Zamora251[/bold] wrote: **** by name, **** by nature, what a scumbag, this man could have died!![/p][/quote]So it's quite OK to pee in somebodys garden and not expect any reaction from the owner, I admit it was excessive, but to quote Albert Einstein (nearly) "For every negative reaction , there is always a positive reaction"[/p][/quote]Newton. Roundbill
  • Score: 38

4:45pm Wed 13 Aug 14

PracticeNotTheories says...

Urinating in public is an offence in violation of a byelaw, and is normally subject to an £80 fixed penalty fine.
Due to this not being a public place (private garden), and no indication of it being an enclosed area, trespass may be noted, which also has a fixed penalty fine.
Assaulting someone for contravening a byelaw is just that - Assault.
You can't go around taking the law into your own hands because you're upset about something. There are courts for this purpose. If his Prize Tulips were damaged, he could always go to small claims court.
As pertains the time referred to - if you happen to have a quick look, there are a number of CCTV camera's in a number of properties along Armada Way. I'm sure any detective looking into this with any kind of scrutiny would have arranged access and got plenty of detail from them.
Mr Stev0 - you do seem to be a rather irritating troll, with never a good opinion. I assume you're an incredibly law-abiding member of society never been known to over-indulge or misbehave in any way. Hopefully you never run into any **** if you ever find yourself in a tight spot.
Urinating in public is an offence in violation of a byelaw, and is normally subject to an £80 fixed penalty fine. Due to this not being a public place (private garden), and no indication of it being an enclosed area, trespass may be noted, which also has a fixed penalty fine. Assaulting someone for contravening a byelaw is just that - Assault. You can't go around taking the law into your own hands because you're upset about something. There are courts for this purpose. If his Prize Tulips were damaged, he could always go to small claims court. As pertains the time referred to - if you happen to have a quick look, there are a number of CCTV camera's in a number of properties along Armada Way. I'm sure any detective looking into this with any kind of scrutiny would have arranged access and got plenty of detail from them. Mr Stev0 - you do seem to be a rather irritating troll, with never a good opinion. I assume you're an incredibly law-abiding member of society never been known to over-indulge or misbehave in any way. Hopefully you never run into any **** if you ever find yourself in a tight spot. PracticeNotTheories
  • Score: 21

4:47pm Wed 13 Aug 14

Staver says...

Firstly who said he was urinating? The 'victim'? Why is that not surprising! Is there proof to show that is what he was actually doing?
Tony had come home, at night, to find some random bloke in his back garden? And That's ok? Surely if he had to answer to Mother Nature that badly you certainly would not find a house, work out which way to get into there back garden and then go?! Was tony meant to have known exactly what this bloke was doing when he got home? No.
So why does it seem so unacceptable what he did? Yes it was a beating and a half I'm not denying that at all. But this 'victim' could have actually been waiting to do a lot worse, what if he was actually waiting to break in? Steal? Or worse? he possibly just caught before it happened!

5 years is a disgusting amount of time to serve just for protecting your house and family in it!!!
Firstly who said he was urinating? The 'victim'? Why is that not surprising! Is there proof to show that is what he was actually doing? Tony had come home, at night, to find some random bloke in his back garden? And That's ok? Surely if he had to answer to Mother Nature that badly you certainly would not find a house, work out which way to get into there back garden and then go?! Was tony meant to have known exactly what this bloke was doing when he got home? No. So why does it seem so unacceptable what he did? Yes it was a beating and a half I'm not denying that at all. But this 'victim' could have actually been waiting to do a lot worse, what if he was actually waiting to break in? Steal? Or worse? he possibly just caught before it happened! 5 years is a disgusting amount of time to serve just for protecting your house and family in it!!! Staver
  • Score: -9

4:59pm Wed 13 Aug 14

stevo!! says...

PracticeNotTheories wrote:
Urinating in public is an offence in violation of a byelaw, and is normally subject to an £80 fixed penalty fine.
Due to this not being a public place (private garden), and no indication of it being an enclosed area, trespass may be noted, which also has a fixed penalty fine.
Assaulting someone for contravening a byelaw is just that - Assault.
You can't go around taking the law into your own hands because you're upset about something. There are courts for this purpose. If his Prize Tulips were damaged, he could always go to small claims court.
As pertains the time referred to - if you happen to have a quick look, there are a number of CCTV camera's in a number of properties along Armada Way. I'm sure any detective looking into this with any kind of scrutiny would have arranged access and got plenty of detail from them.
Mr Stev0 - you do seem to be a rather irritating troll, with never a good opinion. I assume you're an incredibly law-abiding member of society never been known to over-indulge or misbehave in any way. Hopefully you never run into any **** if you ever find yourself in a tight spot.
"Mr Stev0 - you do seem to be a rather irritating troll, with never a good opinion."

Thank you for admitting that I'm too clever for you.

I stick to facts, which is why so few people are able to discuss my posts and have to resort to discussing me.

" I assume you're an incredibly law-abiding member of society never been known to over-indulge or misbehave in any way. "

See what I mean? They try to imagine what my life is like, and in doing so, show what stupid people they are.

"Hopefully you never run into any **** if you ever find yourself in a tight spot."

To date, I've never failed to get out of a tight spot unscathed, but your concern is most touching.
[quote][p][bold]PracticeNotTheories[/bold] wrote: Urinating in public is an offence in violation of a byelaw, and is normally subject to an £80 fixed penalty fine. Due to this not being a public place (private garden), and no indication of it being an enclosed area, trespass may be noted, which also has a fixed penalty fine. Assaulting someone for contravening a byelaw is just that - Assault. You can't go around taking the law into your own hands because you're upset about something. There are courts for this purpose. If his Prize Tulips were damaged, he could always go to small claims court. As pertains the time referred to - if you happen to have a quick look, there are a number of CCTV camera's in a number of properties along Armada Way. I'm sure any detective looking into this with any kind of scrutiny would have arranged access and got plenty of detail from them. Mr Stev0 - you do seem to be a rather irritating troll, with never a good opinion. I assume you're an incredibly law-abiding member of society never been known to over-indulge or misbehave in any way. Hopefully you never run into any **** if you ever find yourself in a tight spot.[/p][/quote]"Mr Stev0 - you do seem to be a rather irritating troll, with never a good opinion." Thank you for admitting that I'm too clever for you. I stick to facts, which is why so few people are able to discuss my posts and have to resort to discussing me. " I assume you're an incredibly law-abiding member of society never been known to over-indulge or misbehave in any way. " See what I mean? They try to imagine what my life is like, and in doing so, show what stupid people they are. "Hopefully you never run into any **** if you ever find yourself in a tight spot." To date, I've never failed to get out of a tight spot unscathed, but your concern is most touching. stevo!!
  • Score: -13

5:31pm Wed 13 Aug 14

west hove says...

You stick to the facts, Stevo? You're blatatantly talking out of your a**e. Your posts here are full of supposition as to what happened. eg. "Firstly who said he was urinating? The 'victim'? Why is that not surprising! " Where does the article say that? It says **** 'caught the man urinating in his garden'. Doesn't say where that information came from. It could have come from a statement given by **** himself (thats supposition by the way).

Seeing as the victim was sent to an intensive care unit **** got what he deserved.
You stick to the facts, Stevo? You're blatatantly talking out of your a**e. Your posts here are full of supposition as to what happened. eg. "Firstly who said he was urinating? The 'victim'? Why is that not surprising! " Where does the article say that? It says **** 'caught the man urinating in his garden'. Doesn't say where that information came from. It could have come from a statement given by **** himself (thats supposition by the way). Seeing as the victim was sent to an intensive care unit **** got what he deserved. west hove
  • Score: 19

5:43pm Wed 13 Aug 14

stevo!! says...

west hove wrote:
You stick to the facts, Stevo? You're blatatantly talking out of your a**e. Your posts here are full of supposition as to what happened. eg. "Firstly who said he was urinating? The 'victim'? Why is that not surprising! " Where does the article say that? It says **** 'caught the man urinating in his garden'. Doesn't say where that information came from. It could have come from a statement given by **** himself (thats supposition by the way).

Seeing as the victim was sent to an intensive care unit **** got what he deserved.
Er.......you've quoted Staver, not stevo!!

And yes, I do stick to facts......I have no idea what Staver does.
[quote][p][bold]west hove[/bold] wrote: You stick to the facts, Stevo? You're blatatantly talking out of your a**e. Your posts here are full of supposition as to what happened. eg. "Firstly who said he was urinating? The 'victim'? Why is that not surprising! " Where does the article say that? It says **** 'caught the man urinating in his garden'. Doesn't say where that information came from. It could have come from a statement given by **** himself (thats supposition by the way). Seeing as the victim was sent to an intensive care unit **** got what he deserved.[/p][/quote]Er.......you've quoted Staver, not stevo!! And yes, I do stick to facts......I have no idea what Staver does. stevo!!
  • Score: 1

6:07pm Wed 13 Aug 14

nissancars says...

this guy may have children who play in the garden.after about 40 people peeing in my alley way after pride the other week i can understand how angry mr **** got. i am a placid person but last week i was losing the plot with these disgusting people. yeah he went to far but we dont know the nitty gritty of this case
this guy may have children who play in the garden.after about 40 people peeing in my alley way after pride the other week i can understand how angry mr **** got. i am a placid person but last week i was losing the plot with these disgusting people. yeah he went to far but we dont know the nitty gritty of this case nissancars
  • Score: 6

6:27pm Wed 13 Aug 14

maxiboy_ says...

"You can't go around taking the law into your own hands"

In an ever growing lawless society that is now Britain 2014, I'm afraid that this is exactly what's going to happen in a country with a watered down Justice system that refuses to punish criminals severely and protect the law abiding public.
"You can't go around taking the law into your own hands" In an ever growing lawless society that is now Britain 2014, I'm afraid that this is exactly what's going to happen in a country with a watered down Justice system that refuses to punish criminals severely and protect the law abiding public. maxiboy_
  • Score: -4

6:33pm Wed 13 Aug 14

sussexram40 says...

stevo!! wrote:
Zamora251 wrote:
**** by name, **** by nature, what a scumbag, this man could have died!!
The man pi55ed on someone's property. Why wasn't he charged with that?
They don't. At Brighton Pride people were urinating all over the place and Police did nothing except wave their rainbow flags. It's called celebrating diversity I think.
[quote][p][bold]stevo!![/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Zamora251[/bold] wrote: **** by name, **** by nature, what a scumbag, this man could have died!![/p][/quote]The man pi55ed on someone's property. Why wasn't he charged with that?[/p][/quote]They don't. At Brighton Pride people were urinating all over the place and Police did nothing except wave their rainbow flags. It's called celebrating diversity I think. sussexram40
  • Score: 6

6:38pm Wed 13 Aug 14

stevo!! says...

sussexram40 wrote:
stevo!! wrote:
Zamora251 wrote:
**** by name, **** by nature, what a scumbag, this man could have died!!
The man pi55ed on someone's property. Why wasn't he charged with that?
They don't. At Brighton Pride people were urinating all over the place and Police did nothing except wave their rainbow flags. It's called celebrating diversity I think.
That clears that up....thanks.
[quote][p][bold]sussexram40[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]stevo!![/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Zamora251[/bold] wrote: **** by name, **** by nature, what a scumbag, this man could have died!![/p][/quote]The man pi55ed on someone's property. Why wasn't he charged with that?[/p][/quote]They don't. At Brighton Pride people were urinating all over the place and Police did nothing except wave their rainbow flags. It's called celebrating diversity I think.[/p][/quote]That clears that up....thanks. stevo!!
  • Score: -6

6:39pm Wed 13 Aug 14

stevo!! says...

Roundbill wrote:
ThinkBrighton wrote:
Zamora251 wrote:
**** by name, **** by nature, what a scumbag, this man could have died!!
So it's quite OK to pee in somebodys garden and not expect any reaction
from the owner, I admit it was excessive, but to quote Albert Einstein (nearly) "For every negative reaction , there is always a positive reaction"
Newton.
But his point was valid.
[quote][p][bold]Roundbill[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ThinkBrighton[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Zamora251[/bold] wrote: **** by name, **** by nature, what a scumbag, this man could have died!![/p][/quote]So it's quite OK to pee in somebodys garden and not expect any reaction from the owner, I admit it was excessive, but to quote Albert Einstein (nearly) "For every negative reaction , there is always a positive reaction"[/p][/quote]Newton.[/p][/quote]But his point was valid. stevo!!
  • Score: -12

6:51pm Wed 13 Aug 14

Juliusinnit says...

The man was urinating on someone else's property. He got what he deserved. I had someone urinating on the wall of my house last year and I didn't go quite as far as the homeowner did in this case, but I sure got my point across.
The man was urinating on someone else's property. He got what he deserved. I had someone urinating on the wall of my house last year and I didn't go quite as far as the homeowner did in this case, but I sure got my point across. Juliusinnit
  • Score: -7

6:54pm Wed 13 Aug 14

Frank14 says...

Reading some of your comments is absolutely disgusting yes this guy peed in **** garden but that doesn't excuse leaving him for dead!! The 6mins of kicking and punching came from CCTV as stated in another story so get your facts straight!! **** should have called the police straight away rather than chasing and repeatedly kicking the victim in the head then walking away!! WTF is wrong with people, kids pee against walls all the time get over it!!!
Reading some of your comments is absolutely disgusting yes this guy peed in **** garden but that doesn't excuse leaving him for dead!! The 6mins of kicking and punching came from CCTV as stated in another story so get your facts straight!! **** should have called the police straight away rather than chasing and repeatedly kicking the victim in the head then walking away!! WTF is wrong with people, kids pee against walls all the time get over it!!! Frank14
  • Score: 19

7:22pm Wed 13 Aug 14

stevo!! says...

Frank14 wrote:
Reading some of your comments is absolutely disgusting yes this guy peed in **** garden but that doesn't excuse leaving him for dead!! The 6mins of kicking and punching came from CCTV as stated in another story so get your facts straight!! **** should have called the police straight away rather than chasing and repeatedly kicking the victim in the head then walking away!! WTF is wrong with people, kids pee against walls all the time get over it!!!
"The 6mins of kicking and punching came from CCTV as stated in another story "

No-one claimed that it had, actually.

Another poster suggested that the area may have CCTV, which isn't the same thing.

The length of the beating is irrelevant, but a whole seven minutes of kicking and punching by an obviously angry man would have led to death. The victim has made a full recovery.

You have a flippant attitude towards public order offences.
[quote][p][bold]Frank14[/bold] wrote: Reading some of your comments is absolutely disgusting yes this guy peed in **** garden but that doesn't excuse leaving him for dead!! The 6mins of kicking and punching came from CCTV as stated in another story so get your facts straight!! **** should have called the police straight away rather than chasing and repeatedly kicking the victim in the head then walking away!! WTF is wrong with people, kids pee against walls all the time get over it!!![/p][/quote]"The 6mins of kicking and punching came from CCTV as stated in another story " No-one claimed that it had, actually. Another poster suggested that the area may have CCTV, which isn't the same thing. The length of the beating is irrelevant, but a whole seven minutes of kicking and punching by an obviously angry man would have led to death. The victim has made a full recovery. You have a flippant attitude towards public order offences. stevo!!
  • Score: -20

7:57pm Wed 13 Aug 14

Mayfield sweeper says...

If I caught someone peeing in my garden I'd make sure they got a beating and if I peed in someone's garden I'd expect the same. Time this country toughened up all round, the police are a weak feeble outfit as proved in all those riots 3 years ago so bypass them and sort it out yourself.
If I caught someone peeing in my garden I'd make sure they got a beating and if I peed in someone's garden I'd expect the same. Time this country toughened up all round, the police are a weak feeble outfit as proved in all those riots 3 years ago so bypass them and sort it out yourself. Mayfield sweeper
  • Score: -13

8:08pm Wed 13 Aug 14

The_hunter says...

@Stevo - Your insistence that Mr Tony Co#ks was justified to attack this man after chasing him from his property and putting him into hospital with awful injuries is justified I assume perhaps because you know of Mr Co#k, perhaps he might even be on your Facebook!
@Stevo - Your insistence that Mr Tony Co#ks was justified to attack this man after chasing him from his property and putting him into hospital with awful injuries is justified I assume perhaps because you know of Mr Co#k, perhaps he might even be on your Facebook! The_hunter
  • Score: 7

8:34pm Wed 13 Aug 14

stevo!! says...

The_hunter wrote:
@Stevo - Your insistence that Mr Tony Co#ks was justified to attack this man after chasing him from his property and putting him into hospital with awful injuries is justified I assume perhaps because you know of Mr Co#k, perhaps he might even be on your Facebook!
No, my comments were based on the fact that anyone who pees in someone's garden deserves any pounding they subsequently receive.

Try not to assume anything, because you'll only end up looking an ignorant tw@t.

HTH
[quote][p][bold]The_hunter[/bold] wrote: @Stevo - Your insistence that Mr Tony Co#ks was justified to attack this man after chasing him from his property and putting him into hospital with awful injuries is justified I assume perhaps because you know of Mr Co#k, perhaps he might even be on your Facebook![/p][/quote]No, my comments were based on the fact that anyone who pees in someone's garden deserves any pounding they subsequently receive. Try not to assume anything, because you'll only end up looking an ignorant tw@t. HTH stevo!!
  • Score: -14

8:41pm Wed 13 Aug 14

The_hunter says...

From all the comments you've made on here sadly only allows ones judgement to understand that clearly your the one that's the "ignorant tw@t"
Say hello to your mate for me
From all the comments you've made on here sadly only allows ones judgement to understand that clearly your the one that's the "ignorant tw@t" Say hello to your mate for me The_hunter
  • Score: 7

8:49pm Wed 13 Aug 14

Idontbelieveit1948 says...

Juliusinnit wrote:
The man was urinating on someone else's property. He got what he deserved. I had someone urinating on the wall of my house last year and I didn't go quite as far as the homeowner did in this case, but I sure got my point across.
I hope you told him to p!ss off ! Perhaps Mr **** will wish he had done this on reflection.
[quote][p][bold]Juliusinnit[/bold] wrote: The man was urinating on someone else's property. He got what he deserved. I had someone urinating on the wall of my house last year and I didn't go quite as far as the homeowner did in this case, but I sure got my point across.[/p][/quote]I hope you told him to p!ss off ! Perhaps Mr **** will wish he had done this on reflection. Idontbelieveit1948
  • Score: 0

8:49pm Wed 13 Aug 14

stevo!! says...

The_hunter wrote:
From all the comments you've made on here sadly only allows ones judgement to understand that clearly your the one that's the "ignorant tw@t"
Say hello to your mate for me
Feel free to point out any accuracies you've seen.

Merely claiming that someone is a tw@t isn't sufficient and suggests that you don't have the required intelligence.
[quote][p][bold]The_hunter[/bold] wrote: From all the comments you've made on here sadly only allows ones judgement to understand that clearly your the one that's the "ignorant tw@t" Say hello to your mate for me[/p][/quote]Feel free to point out any accuracies you've seen. Merely claiming that someone is a tw@t isn't sufficient and suggests that you don't have the required intelligence. stevo!!
  • Score: -8

8:49pm Wed 13 Aug 14

hubby says...

Five years is ridiculous.
Opens the doors for all the dirty pigs to pee,poop and puke in anyones garden.
Five years is ridiculous. Opens the doors for all the dirty pigs to pee,poop and puke in anyones garden. hubby
  • Score: -7

9:25pm Wed 13 Aug 14

NickBrt says...

Good for him. Teach the little urinator a lesson. Shame he was sentenced though.
Good for him. Teach the little urinator a lesson. Shame he was sentenced though. NickBrt
  • Score: -12

9:25pm Wed 13 Aug 14

Levent says...

He should move to Whitehawk, as pi55ing in the garden is the last thing he'll be concerned with, more like sh1tting and leaving their drugs!
He should move to Whitehawk, as pi55ing in the garden is the last thing he'll be concerned with, more like sh1tting and leaving their drugs! Levent
  • Score: 0

9:40pm Wed 13 Aug 14

topcableguy says...

stevo!! wrote:
Zamora251 wrote:
**** by name, **** by nature, what a scumbag, this man could have died!!
The man pi55ed on someone's property. Why wasn't he charged with that?
Doesnt mention that the victim had to break into the garden to urinate does it !!!!! was he really ****
[quote][p][bold]stevo!![/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Zamora251[/bold] wrote: **** by name, **** by nature, what a scumbag, this man could have died!![/p][/quote]The man pi55ed on someone's property. Why wasn't he charged with that?[/p][/quote]Doesnt mention that the victim had to break into the garden to urinate does it !!!!! was he really **** topcableguy
  • Score: 0

9:49pm Wed 13 Aug 14

NathanAdler says...

When he first saw the man he shouted "Urine the wrong place"
When he first saw the man he shouted "Urine the wrong place" NathanAdler
  • Score: 6

9:51pm Wed 13 Aug 14

stevo!! says...

topcableguy wrote:
stevo!! wrote:
Zamora251 wrote:
**** by name, **** by nature, what a scumbag, this man could have died!!
The man pi55ed on someone's property. Why wasn't he charged with that?
Doesnt mention that the victim had to break into the garden to urinate does it !!!!! was he really ****
He was trespassing...how he achieved that is irrelevant.
[quote][p][bold]topcableguy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]stevo!![/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Zamora251[/bold] wrote: **** by name, **** by nature, what a scumbag, this man could have died!![/p][/quote]The man pi55ed on someone's property. Why wasn't he charged with that?[/p][/quote]Doesnt mention that the victim had to break into the garden to urinate does it !!!!! was he really ****[/p][/quote]He was trespassing...how he achieved that is irrelevant. stevo!!
  • Score: -1

9:57pm Wed 13 Aug 14

Quiterie says...

stevo!! wrote:
topcableguy wrote:
stevo!! wrote:
Zamora251 wrote:
**** by name, **** by nature, what a scumbag, this man could have died!!
The man pi55ed on someone's property. Why wasn't he charged with that?
Doesnt mention that the victim had to break into the garden to urinate does it !!!!! was he really ****
He was trespassing...how he achieved that is irrelevant.
Have you ever urinated in public stevo?
[quote][p][bold]stevo!![/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]topcableguy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]stevo!![/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Zamora251[/bold] wrote: **** by name, **** by nature, what a scumbag, this man could have died!![/p][/quote]The man pi55ed on someone's property. Why wasn't he charged with that?[/p][/quote]Doesnt mention that the victim had to break into the garden to urinate does it !!!!! was he really ****[/p][/quote]He was trespassing...how he achieved that is irrelevant.[/p][/quote]Have you ever urinated in public stevo? Quiterie
  • Score: 0

10:03pm Wed 13 Aug 14

brighton bluenose says...

stevo!! wrote:
The_hunter wrote:
@Stevo - Your insistence that Mr Tony Co#ks was justified to attack this man after chasing him from his property and putting him into hospital with awful injuries is justified I assume perhaps because you know of Mr Co#k, perhaps he might even be on your Facebook!
No, my comments were based on the fact that anyone who pees in someone's garden deserves any pounding they subsequently receive.

Try not to assume anything, because you'll only end up looking an ignorant tw@t.

HTH
Let's not forget that Thicko!! thought the guy who had his neck slashed in Brighton at the weekend and was fighting for his life in hospital probably 'deserved' it because he could have been 'acting like a dick'!! Yet in an earlier post on this subject Thicko!! says he sticks to 'facts' LOL - he is a total cretin and troll!!
[quote][p][bold]stevo!![/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]The_hunter[/bold] wrote: @Stevo - Your insistence that Mr Tony Co#ks was justified to attack this man after chasing him from his property and putting him into hospital with awful injuries is justified I assume perhaps because you know of Mr Co#k, perhaps he might even be on your Facebook![/p][/quote]No, my comments were based on the fact that anyone who pees in someone's garden deserves any pounding they subsequently receive. Try not to assume anything, because you'll only end up looking an ignorant tw@t. HTH[/p][/quote]Let's not forget that Thicko!! thought the guy who had his neck slashed in Brighton at the weekend and was fighting for his life in hospital probably 'deserved' it because he could have been 'acting like a dick'!! Yet in an earlier post on this subject Thicko!! says he sticks to 'facts' LOL - he is a total cretin and troll!! brighton bluenose
  • Score: 8

10:07pm Wed 13 Aug 14

stevo!! says...

brighton bluenose wrote:
stevo!! wrote:
The_hunter wrote:
@Stevo - Your insistence that Mr Tony Co#ks was justified to attack this man after chasing him from his property and putting him into hospital with awful injuries is justified I assume perhaps because you know of Mr Co#k, perhaps he might even be on your Facebook!
No, my comments were based on the fact that anyone who pees in someone's garden deserves any pounding they subsequently receive.

Try not to assume anything, because you'll only end up looking an ignorant tw@t.

HTH
Let's not forget that Thicko!! thought the guy who had his neck slashed in Brighton at the weekend and was fighting for his life in hospital probably 'deserved' it because he could have been 'acting like a dick'!! Yet in an earlier post on this subject Thicko!! says he sticks to 'facts' LOL - he is a total cretin and troll!!
Oh dear...are 'possibly' and probably' the same word in your world?

Well, when you finally reach big school in a couple of years, you might learn that they aren't.
[quote][p][bold]brighton bluenose[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]stevo!![/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]The_hunter[/bold] wrote: @Stevo - Your insistence that Mr Tony Co#ks was justified to attack this man after chasing him from his property and putting him into hospital with awful injuries is justified I assume perhaps because you know of Mr Co#k, perhaps he might even be on your Facebook![/p][/quote]No, my comments were based on the fact that anyone who pees in someone's garden deserves any pounding they subsequently receive. Try not to assume anything, because you'll only end up looking an ignorant tw@t. HTH[/p][/quote]Let's not forget that Thicko!! thought the guy who had his neck slashed in Brighton at the weekend and was fighting for his life in hospital probably 'deserved' it because he could have been 'acting like a dick'!! Yet in an earlier post on this subject Thicko!! says he sticks to 'facts' LOL - he is a total cretin and troll!![/p][/quote]Oh dear...are 'possibly' and probably' the same word in your world? Well, when you finally reach big school in a couple of years, you might learn that they aren't. stevo!!
  • Score: -13

10:10pm Wed 13 Aug 14

stevo!! says...

Quiterie wrote:
stevo!! wrote:
topcableguy wrote:
stevo!! wrote:
Zamora251 wrote:
**** by name, **** by nature, what a scumbag, this man could have died!!
The man pi55ed on someone's property. Why wasn't he charged with that?
Doesnt mention that the victim had to break into the garden to urinate does it !!!!! was he really ****
He was trespassing...how he achieved that is irrelevant.
Have you ever urinated in public stevo?
What a stupid question.

Public lavatories are built for that purpose.
[quote][p][bold]Quiterie[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]stevo!![/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]topcableguy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]stevo!![/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Zamora251[/bold] wrote: **** by name, **** by nature, what a scumbag, this man could have died!![/p][/quote]The man pi55ed on someone's property. Why wasn't he charged with that?[/p][/quote]Doesnt mention that the victim had to break into the garden to urinate does it !!!!! was he really ****[/p][/quote]He was trespassing...how he achieved that is irrelevant.[/p][/quote]Have you ever urinated in public stevo?[/p][/quote]What a stupid question. Public lavatories are built for that purpose. stevo!!
  • Score: -8

10:20pm Wed 13 Aug 14

Staver says...

I think it's ridiculous that people on here think it's ok for someone to trespass into someone's back garden...not front garden in this case either! I know the area and there are cameras on the street from what I'm aware but not any that show peoples back gardens...so who said he was urinating? Again he could have been there for many other reasons except he got caught. The justice system is ridiculous! 5 years because he beat up someone who was trespassing on HIS property?! I am certain there are PLENTY of other people that would have done the same and no, that doesn't mean there scum, they would just be protecting there property and family inside the house! If he had just called the police, can you honestly say something would have been done? Would they check the CCTV and find the man and fine him? No and that would be because he got caught and ran before doing anything bad enough. Police would see it as unnessicary paperwork.
I think it's ridiculous that people on here think it's ok for someone to trespass into someone's back garden...not front garden in this case either! I know the area and there are cameras on the street from what I'm aware but not any that show peoples back gardens...so who said he was urinating? Again he could have been there for many other reasons except he got caught. The justice system is ridiculous! 5 years because he beat up someone who was trespassing on HIS property?! I am certain there are PLENTY of other people that would have done the same and no, that doesn't mean there scum, they would just be protecting there property and family inside the house! If he had just called the police, can you honestly say something would have been done? Would they check the CCTV and find the man and fine him? No and that would be because he got caught and ran before doing anything bad enough. Police would see it as unnessicary paperwork. Staver
  • Score: -4

10:22pm Wed 13 Aug 14

Quiterie says...

stevo!! wrote:
Quiterie wrote:
stevo!! wrote:
topcableguy wrote:
stevo!! wrote:
Zamora251 wrote:
**** by name, **** by nature, what a scumbag, this man could have died!!
The man pi55ed on someone's property. Why wasn't he charged with that?
Doesnt mention that the victim had to break into the garden to urinate does it !!!!! was he really ****
He was trespassing...how he achieved that is irrelevant.
Have you ever urinated in public stevo?
What a stupid question.

Public lavatories are built for that purpose.
Fascinating. Thanks for that public service announcement.

Anyway, back to my question. Have you ever urinated in public?
[quote][p][bold]stevo!![/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Quiterie[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]stevo!![/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]topcableguy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]stevo!![/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Zamora251[/bold] wrote: **** by name, **** by nature, what a scumbag, this man could have died!![/p][/quote]The man pi55ed on someone's property. Why wasn't he charged with that?[/p][/quote]Doesnt mention that the victim had to break into the garden to urinate does it !!!!! was he really ****[/p][/quote]He was trespassing...how he achieved that is irrelevant.[/p][/quote]Have you ever urinated in public stevo?[/p][/quote]What a stupid question. Public lavatories are built for that purpose.[/p][/quote]Fascinating. Thanks for that public service announcement. Anyway, back to my question. Have you ever urinated in public? Quiterie
  • Score: 0

10:44pm Wed 13 Aug 14

Frank14 says...

stevo!! wrote:
Frank14 wrote:
Reading some of your comments is absolutely disgusting yes this guy peed in **** garden but that doesn't excuse leaving him for dead!! The 6mins of kicking and punching came from CCTV as stated in another story so get your facts straight!! **** should have called the police straight away rather than chasing and repeatedly kicking the victim in the head then walking away!! WTF is wrong with people, kids pee against walls all the time get over it!!!
"The 6mins of kicking and punching came from CCTV as stated in another story "

No-one claimed that it had, actually.

Another poster suggested that the area may have CCTV, which isn't the same thing.

The length of the beating is irrelevant, but a whole seven minutes of kicking and punching by an obviously angry man would have led to death. The victim has made a full recovery.

You have a flippant attitude towards public order offences.
You seem to have a lot to say seeing as you probably don't know the full story!! I think you'll find that CCTV was found and Mr **** himself watched it and it was clearly stated ap
[quote][p][bold]stevo!![/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Frank14[/bold] wrote: Reading some of your comments is absolutely disgusting yes this guy peed in **** garden but that doesn't excuse leaving him for dead!! The 6mins of kicking and punching came from CCTV as stated in another story so get your facts straight!! **** should have called the police straight away rather than chasing and repeatedly kicking the victim in the head then walking away!! WTF is wrong with people, kids pee against walls all the time get over it!!![/p][/quote]"The 6mins of kicking and punching came from CCTV as stated in another story " No-one claimed that it had, actually. Another poster suggested that the area may have CCTV, which isn't the same thing. The length of the beating is irrelevant, but a whole seven minutes of kicking and punching by an obviously angry man would have led to death. The victim has made a full recovery. You have a flippant attitude towards public order offences.[/p][/quote]You seem to have a lot to say seeing as you probably don't know the full story!! I think you'll find that CCTV was found and Mr **** himself watched it and it was clearly stated ap Frank14
  • Score: 0

10:51pm Wed 13 Aug 14

Frank14 says...

Frank14 wrote:
stevo!! wrote:
Frank14 wrote:
Reading some of your comments is absolutely disgusting yes this guy peed in **** garden but that doesn't excuse leaving him for dead!! The 6mins of kicking and punching came from CCTV as stated in another story so get your facts straight!! **** should have called the police straight away rather than chasing and repeatedly kicking the victim in the head then walking away!! WTF is wrong with people, kids pee against walls all the time get over it!!!
"The 6mins of kicking and punching came from CCTV as stated in another story "

No-one claimed that it had, actually.

Another poster suggested that the area may have CCTV, which isn't the same thing.

The length of the beating is irrelevant, but a whole seven minutes of kicking and punching by an obviously angry man would have led to death. The victim has made a full recovery.

You have a flippant attitude towards public order offences.
You seem to have a lot to say seeing as you probably don't know the full story!! I think you'll find that CCTV was found and Mr **** himself watched it and it was clearly stated ap
Approx 6mins!
Too quote someone else, Mr **** hadn't just got home he had been in the garden when he heard a noise which led to him chasing the victim! Wish people would get their facts straight rather than just assume!
[quote][p][bold]Frank14[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]stevo!![/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Frank14[/bold] wrote: Reading some of your comments is absolutely disgusting yes this guy peed in **** garden but that doesn't excuse leaving him for dead!! The 6mins of kicking and punching came from CCTV as stated in another story so get your facts straight!! **** should have called the police straight away rather than chasing and repeatedly kicking the victim in the head then walking away!! WTF is wrong with people, kids pee against walls all the time get over it!!![/p][/quote]"The 6mins of kicking and punching came from CCTV as stated in another story " No-one claimed that it had, actually. Another poster suggested that the area may have CCTV, which isn't the same thing. The length of the beating is irrelevant, but a whole seven minutes of kicking and punching by an obviously angry man would have led to death. The victim has made a full recovery. You have a flippant attitude towards public order offences.[/p][/quote]You seem to have a lot to say seeing as you probably don't know the full story!! I think you'll find that CCTV was found and Mr **** himself watched it and it was clearly stated ap[/p][/quote]Approx 6mins! Too quote someone else, Mr **** hadn't just got home he had been in the garden when he heard a noise which led to him chasing the victim! Wish people would get their facts straight rather than just assume! Frank14
  • Score: 0

10:51pm Wed 13 Aug 14

stevo!! says...

Quiterie wrote:
stevo!! wrote:
Quiterie wrote:
stevo!! wrote:
topcableguy wrote:
stevo!! wrote:
Zamora251 wrote:
**** by name, **** by nature, what a scumbag, this man could have died!!
The man pi55ed on someone's property. Why wasn't he charged with that?
Doesnt mention that the victim had to break into the garden to urinate does it !!!!! was he really ****
He was trespassing...how he achieved that is irrelevant.
Have you ever urinated in public stevo?
What a stupid question.

Public lavatories are built for that purpose.
Fascinating. Thanks for that public service announcement.

Anyway, back to my question. Have you ever urinated in public?
Already answered......you even quoted my answer.
[quote][p][bold]Quiterie[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]stevo!![/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Quiterie[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]stevo!![/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]topcableguy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]stevo!![/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Zamora251[/bold] wrote: **** by name, **** by nature, what a scumbag, this man could have died!![/p][/quote]The man pi55ed on someone's property. Why wasn't he charged with that?[/p][/quote]Doesnt mention that the victim had to break into the garden to urinate does it !!!!! was he really ****[/p][/quote]He was trespassing...how he achieved that is irrelevant.[/p][/quote]Have you ever urinated in public stevo?[/p][/quote]What a stupid question. Public lavatories are built for that purpose.[/p][/quote]Fascinating. Thanks for that public service announcement. Anyway, back to my question. Have you ever urinated in public?[/p][/quote]Already answered......you even quoted my answer. stevo!!
  • Score: -7

10:52pm Wed 13 Aug 14

Quiterie says...

Staver wrote:
I think it's ridiculous that people on here think it's ok for someone to trespass into someone's back garden...not front garden in this case either! I know the area and there are cameras on the street from what I'm aware but not any that show peoples back gardens...so who said he was urinating? Again he could have been there for many other reasons except he got caught. The justice system is ridiculous! 5 years because he beat up someone who was trespassing on HIS property?! I am certain there are PLENTY of other people that would have done the same and no, that doesn't mean there scum, they would just be protecting there property and family inside the house! If he had just called the police, can you honestly say something would have been done? Would they check the CCTV and find the man and fine him? No and that would be because he got caught and ran before doing anything bad enough. Police would see it as unnessicary paperwork.
Why do you keep saying it was the back garden? There is no mention of the back garden in the article at all.
[quote][p][bold]Staver[/bold] wrote: I think it's ridiculous that people on here think it's ok for someone to trespass into someone's back garden...not front garden in this case either! I know the area and there are cameras on the street from what I'm aware but not any that show peoples back gardens...so who said he was urinating? Again he could have been there for many other reasons except he got caught. The justice system is ridiculous! 5 years because he beat up someone who was trespassing on HIS property?! I am certain there are PLENTY of other people that would have done the same and no, that doesn't mean there scum, they would just be protecting there property and family inside the house! If he had just called the police, can you honestly say something would have been done? Would they check the CCTV and find the man and fine him? No and that would be because he got caught and ran before doing anything bad enough. Police would see it as unnessicary paperwork.[/p][/quote]Why do you keep saying it was the back garden? There is no mention of the back garden in the article at all. Quiterie
  • Score: 0

10:53pm Wed 13 Aug 14

stevo!! says...

Frank14 wrote:
stevo!! wrote:
Frank14 wrote:
Reading some of your comments is absolutely disgusting yes this guy peed in **** garden but that doesn't excuse leaving him for dead!! The 6mins of kicking and punching came from CCTV as stated in another story so get your facts straight!! **** should have called the police straight away rather than chasing and repeatedly kicking the victim in the head then walking away!! WTF is wrong with people, kids pee against walls all the time get over it!!!
"The 6mins of kicking and punching came from CCTV as stated in another story "

No-one claimed that it had, actually.

Another poster suggested that the area may have CCTV, which isn't the same thing.

The length of the beating is irrelevant, but a whole seven minutes of kicking and punching by an obviously angry man would have led to death. The victim has made a full recovery.

You have a flippant attitude towards public order offences.
You seem to have a lot to say seeing as you probably don't know the full story!! I think you'll find that CCTV was found and Mr **** himself watched it and it was clearly stated ap
I've commented on the report.

There is no evidence that there is CCTV footage of the assault or that C0cks has seen it.

You will doubtless now tell us what you know of the CCTV and explain how you know.
[quote][p][bold]Frank14[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]stevo!![/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Frank14[/bold] wrote: Reading some of your comments is absolutely disgusting yes this guy peed in **** garden but that doesn't excuse leaving him for dead!! The 6mins of kicking and punching came from CCTV as stated in another story so get your facts straight!! **** should have called the police straight away rather than chasing and repeatedly kicking the victim in the head then walking away!! WTF is wrong with people, kids pee against walls all the time get over it!!![/p][/quote]"The 6mins of kicking and punching came from CCTV as stated in another story " No-one claimed that it had, actually. Another poster suggested that the area may have CCTV, which isn't the same thing. The length of the beating is irrelevant, but a whole seven minutes of kicking and punching by an obviously angry man would have led to death. The victim has made a full recovery. You have a flippant attitude towards public order offences.[/p][/quote]You seem to have a lot to say seeing as you probably don't know the full story!! I think you'll find that CCTV was found and Mr **** himself watched it and it was clearly stated ap[/p][/quote]I've commented on the report. There is no evidence that there is CCTV footage of the assault or that C0cks has seen it. You will doubtless now tell us what you know of the CCTV and explain how you know. stevo!!
  • Score: 0

11:14pm Wed 13 Aug 14

stevo!! says...

Quiterie wrote:
Staver wrote:
I think it's ridiculous that people on here think it's ok for someone to trespass into someone's back garden...not front garden in this case either! I know the area and there are cameras on the street from what I'm aware but not any that show peoples back gardens...so who said he was urinating? Again he could have been there for many other reasons except he got caught. The justice system is ridiculous! 5 years because he beat up someone who was trespassing on HIS property?! I am certain there are PLENTY of other people that would have done the same and no, that doesn't mean there scum, they would just be protecting there property and family inside the house! If he had just called the police, can you honestly say something would have been done? Would they check the CCTV and find the man and fine him? No and that would be because he got caught and ran before doing anything bad enough. Police would see it as unnessicary paperwork.
Why do you keep saying it was the back garden? There is no mention of the back garden in the article at all.
Does it really matter?
[quote][p][bold]Quiterie[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Staver[/bold] wrote: I think it's ridiculous that people on here think it's ok for someone to trespass into someone's back garden...not front garden in this case either! I know the area and there are cameras on the street from what I'm aware but not any that show peoples back gardens...so who said he was urinating? Again he could have been there for many other reasons except he got caught. The justice system is ridiculous! 5 years because he beat up someone who was trespassing on HIS property?! I am certain there are PLENTY of other people that would have done the same and no, that doesn't mean there scum, they would just be protecting there property and family inside the house! If he had just called the police, can you honestly say something would have been done? Would they check the CCTV and find the man and fine him? No and that would be because he got caught and ran before doing anything bad enough. Police would see it as unnessicary paperwork.[/p][/quote]Why do you keep saying it was the back garden? There is no mention of the back garden in the article at all.[/p][/quote]Does it really matter? stevo!!
  • Score: -6

11:24pm Wed 13 Aug 14

Quiterie says...

stevo!! wrote:
Quiterie wrote:
stevo!! wrote:
Quiterie wrote:
stevo!! wrote:
topcableguy wrote:
stevo!! wrote:
Zamora251 wrote:
**** by name, **** by nature, what a scumbag, this man could have died!!
The man pi55ed on someone's property. Why wasn't he charged with that?
Doesnt mention that the victim had to break into the garden to urinate does it !!!!! was he really ****
He was trespassing...how he achieved that is irrelevant.
Have you ever urinated in public stevo?
What a stupid question.

Public lavatories are built for that purpose.
Fascinating. Thanks for that public service announcement.

Anyway, back to my question. Have you ever urinated in public?
Already answered......you even quoted my answer.
You see this is why people take a dislike to you. You ask ridiculous question after ridiculous question, but when someone asks you a simple question you refuse to answer it.

As I've said before having a discussion with you is like talking to a retarded hamster with Alzheimer's........
[quote][p][bold]stevo!![/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Quiterie[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]stevo!![/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Quiterie[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]stevo!![/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]topcableguy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]stevo!![/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Zamora251[/bold] wrote: **** by name, **** by nature, what a scumbag, this man could have died!![/p][/quote]The man pi55ed on someone's property. Why wasn't he charged with that?[/p][/quote]Doesnt mention that the victim had to break into the garden to urinate does it !!!!! was he really ****[/p][/quote]He was trespassing...how he achieved that is irrelevant.[/p][/quote]Have you ever urinated in public stevo?[/p][/quote]What a stupid question. Public lavatories are built for that purpose.[/p][/quote]Fascinating. Thanks for that public service announcement. Anyway, back to my question. Have you ever urinated in public?[/p][/quote]Already answered......you even quoted my answer.[/p][/quote]You see this is why people take a dislike to you. You ask ridiculous question after ridiculous question, but when someone asks you a simple question you refuse to answer it. As I've said before having a discussion with you is like talking to a retarded hamster with Alzheimer's........ Quiterie
  • Score: 12

12:39am Thu 14 Aug 14

stevo!! says...

Quiterie wrote:
stevo!! wrote:
Quiterie wrote:
stevo!! wrote:
Quiterie wrote:
stevo!! wrote:
topcableguy wrote:
stevo!! wrote:
Zamora251 wrote:
**** by name, **** by nature, what a scumbag, this man could have died!!
The man pi55ed on someone's property. Why wasn't he charged with that?
Doesnt mention that the victim had to break into the garden to urinate does it !!!!! was he really ****
He was trespassing...how he achieved that is irrelevant.
Have you ever urinated in public stevo?
What a stupid question.

Public lavatories are built for that purpose.
Fascinating. Thanks for that public service announcement.

Anyway, back to my question. Have you ever urinated in public?
Already answered......you even quoted my answer.
You see this is why people take a dislike to you. You ask ridiculous question after ridiculous question, but when someone asks you a simple question you refuse to answer it.

As I've said before having a discussion with you is like talking to a retarded hamster with Alzheimer's........
I answered your question.

You quoted it.

So don't lie by claiming that I hadn't, because adding 'liar' to 'stupid' alongside your CV doesn't impress anyone.
[quote][p][bold]Quiterie[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]stevo!![/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Quiterie[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]stevo!![/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Quiterie[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]stevo!![/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]topcableguy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]stevo!![/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Zamora251[/bold] wrote: **** by name, **** by nature, what a scumbag, this man could have died!![/p][/quote]The man pi55ed on someone's property. Why wasn't he charged with that?[/p][/quote]Doesnt mention that the victim had to break into the garden to urinate does it !!!!! was he really ****[/p][/quote]He was trespassing...how he achieved that is irrelevant.[/p][/quote]Have you ever urinated in public stevo?[/p][/quote]What a stupid question. Public lavatories are built for that purpose.[/p][/quote]Fascinating. Thanks for that public service announcement. Anyway, back to my question. Have you ever urinated in public?[/p][/quote]Already answered......you even quoted my answer.[/p][/quote]You see this is why people take a dislike to you. You ask ridiculous question after ridiculous question, but when someone asks you a simple question you refuse to answer it. As I've said before having a discussion with you is like talking to a retarded hamster with Alzheimer's........[/p][/quote]I answered your question. You quoted it. So don't lie by claiming that I hadn't, because adding 'liar' to 'stupid' alongside your CV doesn't impress anyone. stevo!!
  • Score: -17

6:56am Thu 14 Aug 14

John9000 says...

I've just finished reading Stephen Kings "Under the Dome." I see some of his characters of this forum. I find it truly scary that people are applauding the violence of this guy.
I've just finished reading Stephen Kings "Under the Dome." I see some of his characters of this forum. I find it truly scary that people are applauding the violence of this guy. John9000
  • Score: 0

7:41am Thu 14 Aug 14

hoveguyactually says...

He just picked the wrong garden to pee in. Next time he should be more selective.

The response was certainly violent, but what right had the "victim" to assume he could behave that way? Why should peeing in someone's garden, or anywhere in public, be considered the norm? Unfortunately this kind of behaviour has become so common nowadays, along with putting one's feet up on the seat in buses and trains, cycling on pavements. It is all about me, me, me and what I want, regardless of other people. It is no wonder that some people react in an aggressive way, and the sentence was far too great.

Incidentally, I wonder what effect this had on the plants.
He just picked the wrong garden to pee in. Next time he should be more selective. The response was certainly violent, but what right had the "victim" to assume he could behave that way? Why should peeing in someone's garden, or anywhere in public, be considered the norm? Unfortunately this kind of behaviour has become so common nowadays, along with putting one's feet up on the seat in buses and trains, cycling on pavements. It is all about me, me, me and what I want, regardless of other people. It is no wonder that some people react in an aggressive way, and the sentence was far too great. Incidentally, I wonder what effect this had on the plants. hoveguyactually
  • Score: -1

8:08am Thu 14 Aug 14

well i never says...

my front door is in a passage way about 10ft wide, for the 23 years i have lived here people have urinated very regualy in the passage way, some time 3 or 4 together, often on or by my front door, generally they are drunk . they cannot be bothered to walk further down and use the grass at the rear. I used to get livid about it, now adays its fun seeing them on cctv I get two choices, throw water over them from an upstairs window or better still go down and shout at them and get them to try and move off in full flow.
my front door is in a passage way about 10ft wide, for the 23 years i have lived here people have urinated very regualy in the passage way, some time 3 or 4 together, often on or by my front door, generally they are drunk . they cannot be bothered to walk further down and use the grass at the rear. I used to get livid about it, now adays its fun seeing them on cctv I get two choices, throw water over them from an upstairs window or better still go down and shout at them and get them to try and move off in full flow. well i never
  • Score: 1

8:27am Thu 14 Aug 14

Quiterie says...

stevo!! wrote:
Quiterie wrote:
Staver wrote:
I think it's ridiculous that people on here think it's ok for someone to trespass into someone's back garden...not front garden in this case either! I know the area and there are cameras on the street from what I'm aware but not any that show peoples back gardens...so who said he was urinating? Again he could have been there for many other reasons except he got caught. The justice system is ridiculous! 5 years because he beat up someone who was trespassing on HIS property?! I am certain there are PLENTY of other people that would have done the same and no, that doesn't mean there scum, they would just be protecting there property and family inside the house! If he had just called the police, can you honestly say something would have been done? Would they check the CCTV and find the man and fine him? No and that would be because he got caught and ran before doing anything bad enough. Police would see it as unnessicary paperwork.
Why do you keep saying it was the back garden? There is no mention of the back garden in the article at all.
Does it really matter?
Despite your refusal to answer my simple question, I am of course always happy to answer any put my way.

It seems to matter to Staver because he keeps mentioning it, so you might want to ask him rather than me.

But, in my opinion, yes it does matter, because going into someone's back garden (which is normally harder to gain access to), could be construed as having a more ulterior motive than simply urinating. This is indeed what Staver is suggesting. There's no mention of the back garden in the article at all.
[quote][p][bold]stevo!![/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Quiterie[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Staver[/bold] wrote: I think it's ridiculous that people on here think it's ok for someone to trespass into someone's back garden...not front garden in this case either! I know the area and there are cameras on the street from what I'm aware but not any that show peoples back gardens...so who said he was urinating? Again he could have been there for many other reasons except he got caught. The justice system is ridiculous! 5 years because he beat up someone who was trespassing on HIS property?! I am certain there are PLENTY of other people that would have done the same and no, that doesn't mean there scum, they would just be protecting there property and family inside the house! If he had just called the police, can you honestly say something would have been done? Would they check the CCTV and find the man and fine him? No and that would be because he got caught and ran before doing anything bad enough. Police would see it as unnessicary paperwork.[/p][/quote]Why do you keep saying it was the back garden? There is no mention of the back garden in the article at all.[/p][/quote]Does it really matter?[/p][/quote]Despite your refusal to answer my simple question, I am of course always happy to answer any put my way. It seems to matter to Staver because he keeps mentioning it, so you might want to ask him rather than me. But, in my opinion, yes it does matter, because going into someone's back garden (which is normally harder to gain access to), could be construed as having a more ulterior motive than simply urinating. This is indeed what Staver is suggesting. There's no mention of the back garden in the article at all. Quiterie
  • Score: 1

8:50am Thu 14 Aug 14

ThinkBrighton says...

Roundbill wrote:
ThinkBrighton wrote:
Zamora251 wrote:
**** by name, **** by nature, what a scumbag, this man could have died!!
So it's quite OK to pee in somebodys garden and not expect any reaction
from the owner, I admit it was excessive, but to quote Albert Einstein (nearly) "For every negative reaction , there is always a positive reaction"
Newton.
Thank you
[quote][p][bold]Roundbill[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ThinkBrighton[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Zamora251[/bold] wrote: **** by name, **** by nature, what a scumbag, this man could have died!![/p][/quote]So it's quite OK to pee in somebodys garden and not expect any reaction from the owner, I admit it was excessive, but to quote Albert Einstein (nearly) "For every negative reaction , there is always a positive reaction"[/p][/quote]Newton.[/p][/quote]Thank you ThinkBrighton
  • Score: 1

9:17am Thu 14 Aug 14

Watchdog50 says...

stevo!! wrote:
Zamora251 wrote:
**** by name, **** by nature, what a scumbag, this man could have died!!
The man pi55ed on someone's property. Why wasn't he charged with that?
Perhaps he was. I doubt it, but we can't assume.
[quote][p][bold]stevo!![/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Zamora251[/bold] wrote: **** by name, **** by nature, what a scumbag, this man could have died!![/p][/quote]The man pi55ed on someone's property. Why wasn't he charged with that?[/p][/quote]Perhaps he was. I doubt it, but we can't assume. Watchdog50
  • Score: 0

9:35am Thu 14 Aug 14

Pitviper says...

stevo!! wrote:
Zamora251 wrote:
**** by name, **** by nature, what a scumbag, this man could have died!!
The man pi55ed on someone's property. Why wasn't he charged with that?
Exactly, just because you're a victim because you committed an indecent act doesn't mean you can get away with it!
[quote][p][bold]stevo!![/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Zamora251[/bold] wrote: **** by name, **** by nature, what a scumbag, this man could have died!![/p][/quote]The man pi55ed on someone's property. Why wasn't he charged with that?[/p][/quote]Exactly, just because you're a victim because you committed an indecent act doesn't mean you can get away with it! Pitviper
  • Score: 0

9:59am Thu 14 Aug 14

PracticeNotTheories says...

Mr Stev0! - in response to your queries.

If you look at http://www.littleham
ptongazette.co.uk/ne
ws/local/littlehampt
on-stepfather-jailed
-for-gbh-with-intent
-1-6234583, you will see a more complete story (unusual for TheArgus to not be complete in their reporting).

As can be seen, CCTV was obtained, and followed up - as reported. It doesn't state any detail of whether the garden was secured or not, but I'm sure it was taken into account during the investigation.

A few people mention 'protection of property' - unfortunately, the property would have been 'secured' immediately that the victim had left the vicinity. The fact Mr C*cks then chased the victim and attacked him is the problem - once the threat has passed, you can no longer take significant action, past restraint for the police. To do so is Assault. The fact there was significant injury makes this GBH (as per Littlehampton Gazzette article)
As per the Oxford English Dictionary, the word 'Troll' is defined as: A person who makes a deliberately offensive or provocative online posting.
Due to most of your posts having no further use than disagreeing, it would appear this is most descriptive of yourself.
Mr Stev0! - in response to your queries. If you look at http://www.littleham ptongazette.co.uk/ne ws/local/littlehampt on-stepfather-jailed -for-gbh-with-intent -1-6234583, you will see a more complete story (unusual for TheArgus to not be complete in their reporting). As can be seen, CCTV was obtained, and followed up - as reported. It doesn't state any detail of whether the garden was secured or not, but I'm sure it was taken into account during the investigation. A few people mention 'protection of property' - unfortunately, the property would have been 'secured' immediately that the victim had left the vicinity. The fact Mr C*cks then chased the victim and attacked him is the problem - once the threat has passed, you can no longer take significant action, past restraint for the police. To do so is Assault. The fact there was significant injury makes this GBH (as per Littlehampton Gazzette article) As per the Oxford English Dictionary, the word 'Troll' is defined as: A person who makes a deliberately offensive or provocative online posting. Due to most of your posts having no further use than disagreeing, it would appear this is most descriptive of yourself. PracticeNotTheories
  • Score: 2

10:16am Thu 14 Aug 14

Mrbrightside1 says...

PracticeNotTheories wrote:
Mr Stev0! - in response to your queries.

If you look at http://www.littleham

ptongazette.co.uk/ne

ws/local/littlehampt

on-stepfather-jailed

-for-gbh-with-intent

-1-6234583, you will see a more complete story (unusual for TheArgus to not be complete in their reporting).

As can be seen, CCTV was obtained, and followed up - as reported. It doesn't state any detail of whether the garden was secured or not, but I'm sure it was taken into account during the investigation.

A few people mention 'protection of property' - unfortunately, the property would have been 'secured' immediately that the victim had left the vicinity. The fact Mr C*cks then chased the victim and attacked him is the problem - once the threat has passed, you can no longer take significant action, past restraint for the police. To do so is Assault. The fact there was significant injury makes this GBH (as per Littlehampton Gazzette article)
As per the Oxford English Dictionary, the word 'Troll' is defined as: A person who makes a deliberately offensive or provocative online posting.
Due to most of your posts having no further use than disagreeing, it would appear this is most descriptive of yourself.
Brilliant post
[quote][p][bold]PracticeNotTheories[/bold] wrote: Mr Stev0! - in response to your queries. If you look at http://www.littleham ptongazette.co.uk/ne ws/local/littlehampt on-stepfather-jailed -for-gbh-with-intent -1-6234583, you will see a more complete story (unusual for TheArgus to not be complete in their reporting). As can be seen, CCTV was obtained, and followed up - as reported. It doesn't state any detail of whether the garden was secured or not, but I'm sure it was taken into account during the investigation. A few people mention 'protection of property' - unfortunately, the property would have been 'secured' immediately that the victim had left the vicinity. The fact Mr C*cks then chased the victim and attacked him is the problem - once the threat has passed, you can no longer take significant action, past restraint for the police. To do so is Assault. The fact there was significant injury makes this GBH (as per Littlehampton Gazzette article) As per the Oxford English Dictionary, the word 'Troll' is defined as: A person who makes a deliberately offensive or provocative online posting. Due to most of your posts having no further use than disagreeing, it would appear this is most descriptive of yourself.[/p][/quote]Brilliant post Mrbrightside1
  • Score: 4

10:54am Thu 14 Aug 14

stevo!! says...

PracticeNotTheories wrote:
Mr Stev0! - in response to your queries.

If you look at http://www.littleham

ptongazette.co.uk/ne

ws/local/littlehampt

on-stepfather-jailed

-for-gbh-with-intent

-1-6234583, you will see a more complete story (unusual for TheArgus to not be complete in their reporting).

As can be seen, CCTV was obtained, and followed up - as reported. It doesn't state any detail of whether the garden was secured or not, but I'm sure it was taken into account during the investigation.

A few people mention 'protection of property' - unfortunately, the property would have been 'secured' immediately that the victim had left the vicinity. The fact Mr C*cks then chased the victim and attacked him is the problem - once the threat has passed, you can no longer take significant action, past restraint for the police. To do so is Assault. The fact there was significant injury makes this GBH (as per Littlehampton Gazzette article)
As per the Oxford English Dictionary, the word 'Troll' is defined as: A person who makes a deliberately offensive or provocative online posting.
Due to most of your posts having no further use than disagreeing, it would appear this is most descriptive of yourself.
Thanks.

I was going on The Argus report above.

Funny how people expected others to know of other reports, as if we're telepathic, or something.
[quote][p][bold]PracticeNotTheories[/bold] wrote: Mr Stev0! - in response to your queries. If you look at http://www.littleham ptongazette.co.uk/ne ws/local/littlehampt on-stepfather-jailed -for-gbh-with-intent -1-6234583, you will see a more complete story (unusual for TheArgus to not be complete in their reporting). As can be seen, CCTV was obtained, and followed up - as reported. It doesn't state any detail of whether the garden was secured or not, but I'm sure it was taken into account during the investigation. A few people mention 'protection of property' - unfortunately, the property would have been 'secured' immediately that the victim had left the vicinity. The fact Mr C*cks then chased the victim and attacked him is the problem - once the threat has passed, you can no longer take significant action, past restraint for the police. To do so is Assault. The fact there was significant injury makes this GBH (as per Littlehampton Gazzette article) As per the Oxford English Dictionary, the word 'Troll' is defined as: A person who makes a deliberately offensive or provocative online posting. Due to most of your posts having no further use than disagreeing, it would appear this is most descriptive of yourself.[/p][/quote]Thanks. I was going on The Argus report above. Funny how people expected others to know of other reports, as if we're telepathic, or something. stevo!!
  • Score: 3

10:56am Thu 14 Aug 14

stevo!! says...

"As per the Oxford English Dictionary, the word 'Troll' is defined as: A person who makes a deliberately offensive or provocative online posting.
Due to most of your posts having no further use than disagreeing, it would appear this is most descriptive of yourself."

You now have the difficult task of proving 'deliberation' on my part.

Until it is proven, the term cannot be used about me.

Cheers!
"As per the Oxford English Dictionary, the word 'Troll' is defined as: A person who makes a deliberately offensive or provocative online posting. Due to most of your posts having no further use than disagreeing, it would appear this is most descriptive of yourself." You now have the difficult task of proving 'deliberation' on my part. Until it is proven, the term cannot be used about me. Cheers! stevo!!
  • Score: -3

11:54am Thu 14 Aug 14

sussexram40 says...

Mayfield sweeper wrote:
If I caught someone peeing in my garden I'd make sure they got a beating and if I peed in someone's garden I'd expect the same. Time this country toughened up all round, the police are a weak feeble outfit as proved in all those riots 3 years ago so bypass them and sort it out yourself.
Exactly. I'm pretty sure if you rang the Police to report someone urinating on your property they wouldn't even send anyone out. They would say well there's nothing we can do etc etc

So you are left with no option but to deal with it yourself - unless you don't mind your garden being used a public toilet.

The man may have gone a bit far in his beating but the urinator deserved a beating.
[quote][p][bold]Mayfield sweeper[/bold] wrote: If I caught someone peeing in my garden I'd make sure they got a beating and if I peed in someone's garden I'd expect the same. Time this country toughened up all round, the police are a weak feeble outfit as proved in all those riots 3 years ago so bypass them and sort it out yourself.[/p][/quote]Exactly. I'm pretty sure if you rang the Police to report someone urinating on your property they wouldn't even send anyone out. They would say well there's nothing we can do etc etc So you are left with no option but to deal with it yourself - unless you don't mind your garden being used a public toilet. The man may have gone a bit far in his beating but the urinator deserved a beating. sussexram40
  • Score: 0

11:55am Thu 14 Aug 14

Mrbrightside1 says...

stevo!! wrote:
"As per the Oxford English Dictionary, the word 'Troll' is defined as: A person who makes a deliberately offensive or provocative online posting.
Due to most of your posts having no further use than disagreeing, it would appear this is most descriptive of yourself."

You now have the difficult task of proving 'deliberation' on my part.

Until it is proven, the term cannot be used about me.

Cheers!
Easily proved with this comment you TROLL:

http://www.theargus.
co.uk/news/11407716.
Flip_flops_for_foots
ore_clubbers/#commen
tsList

Sicko
[quote][p][bold]stevo!![/bold] wrote: "As per the Oxford English Dictionary, the word 'Troll' is defined as: A person who makes a deliberately offensive or provocative online posting. Due to most of your posts having no further use than disagreeing, it would appear this is most descriptive of yourself." You now have the difficult task of proving 'deliberation' on my part. Until it is proven, the term cannot be used about me. Cheers![/p][/quote]Easily proved with this comment you TROLL: http://www.theargus. co.uk/news/11407716. Flip_flops_for_foots ore_clubbers/#commen tsList Sicko Mrbrightside1
  • Score: 4

1:08pm Thu 14 Aug 14

scuba1 says...

stevo!! wrote:
"As per the Oxford English Dictionary, the word 'Troll' is defined as: A person who makes a deliberately offensive or provocative online posting.
Due to most of your posts having no further use than disagreeing, it would appear this is most descriptive of yourself."

You now have the difficult task of proving 'deliberation' on my part.

Until it is proven, the term cannot be used about me.

Cheers!
TROLL ... Like you we can say what we want ! Now sod off and stop boring everyone with your pointless posts .. Zzzzzzzz
[quote][p][bold]stevo!![/bold] wrote: "As per the Oxford English Dictionary, the word 'Troll' is defined as: A person who makes a deliberately offensive or provocative online posting. Due to most of your posts having no further use than disagreeing, it would appear this is most descriptive of yourself." You now have the difficult task of proving 'deliberation' on my part. Until it is proven, the term cannot be used about me. Cheers![/p][/quote]TROLL ... Like you we can say what we want ! Now sod off and stop boring everyone with your pointless posts .. Zzzzzzzz scuba1
  • Score: 4

1:25pm Thu 14 Aug 14

stevo!! says...

scuba1 wrote:
stevo!! wrote:
"As per the Oxford English Dictionary, the word 'Troll' is defined as: A person who makes a deliberately offensive or provocative online posting.
Due to most of your posts having no further use than disagreeing, it would appear this is most descriptive of yourself."

You now have the difficult task of proving 'deliberation' on my part.

Until it is proven, the term cannot be used about me.

Cheers!
TROLL ... Like you we can say what we want ! Now sod off and stop boring everyone with your pointless posts .. Zzzzzzzz
So you admit to making baseless accusations.

Good luck with that!

" stop boring everyone with your pointless posts .."

Who forces you to read them? No-one? So you see my name and can't help yourself......you're now my b*tch!
[quote][p][bold]scuba1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]stevo!![/bold] wrote: "As per the Oxford English Dictionary, the word 'Troll' is defined as: A person who makes a deliberately offensive or provocative online posting. Due to most of your posts having no further use than disagreeing, it would appear this is most descriptive of yourself." You now have the difficult task of proving 'deliberation' on my part. Until it is proven, the term cannot be used about me. Cheers![/p][/quote]TROLL ... Like you we can say what we want ! Now sod off and stop boring everyone with your pointless posts .. Zzzzzzzz[/p][/quote]So you admit to making baseless accusations. Good luck with that! " stop boring everyone with your pointless posts .." Who forces you to read them? No-one? So you see my name and can't help yourself......you're now my b*tch! stevo!!
  • Score: -2

Comments are closed on this article.

Send us your news, pictures and videos

Most read stories

Local Info

Enter your postcode, town or place name

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree