Taxi Driver Online

You've changed your signature Jasbar. How apt. Your the scumbag pal.

I wonder if i'll be right? that youll be looking for a drive next week? I bet I'm right. Will you have the balls to tell us if I'm right? I don't think so cause that would blow you clean oot the water! You think your so clever Jasbar, your a moron. What have you fought for that you have actually won. You and your sidekick couldn't win a raffle with one ticket ya pair o turds.

I'm so disappointed that Skull hasn't been on to put me to sleep. Feck me I was laughing earlier recalling what Skull was saying about "pretendy" business men. I'm going to blow his argument to feck. In bold print, I may even use a " Stensil"

That would be a great idea Skull apart from the obvious. It would be very rude of me to meet you and fall asleep as you were trying to educate me, I remember how my teachers felt!

I think I could probably educate you Skull regarding business. Far from me to guess, an educated one at that, I would hate to hear of anybody investing their hard earned profit from the sale of their free plate in a business that was total crap. Now an intelligent business man wouldn't do such a thing! Do you know of anybody that may have fallen in to this category Skull?

C'mon Skull, answer the question? Any ideas of anyone that could fall in to this category? I hope I haven't hit a nerve? Surly not!

Why on Earth would I want to meet you for a coffee? I'd rather get my shoes on and walk to John "o" Groats right now.

So it's a pretendy business says the skull! The one who got a free plate and then sold it and obviously made a profit and then blew it. Then invested it in a quick profit business that had as much chance of making money as Fred West being knighted. As James Kaan would say I'm out.

So Skull before you cast your critical eye on anyone else, look in the mirror my man.

As the convicted man was a TAXI driver, found guilty of using his TAXI to murder a PH driver, I'd call it a TAXI issue.

The Philpotts caused the deaths of 6 of their children.

It was held that they didn't intend to kill them, although they were instrumental in the fire being started deliberately. So they were found guilty of manslaughter and not murder.

Yet Stevie Nolan was found guilty of murder and not manslaughter. He was followed to the park by a willing adversary, there is no tangible evidence that murder was his intent. Given that his adversary was so far from his vehicle, and he also had a history of previous rage, suggesting aggression, wasn't it almost a matter of chance that Nolan himself wasn't the victim?

I just don't get it.

Murder requires intent. If it was held that Nolan intended to take the life of Nekoo, or at least he should have understood that his actions could have led to the severe injury or death of Nekoo, and he committed murder, how are the Philpotts, who should also have been aware that their actions could cause serious harm or death, only guilty of manslaughter?

I already smell a miscarriage of Justice.

Mr Kaiser you have stirred the Skull in to action. He is intent on meeting you is he not. I should maybee arrange a meeting with him myself, only I might bite!

What has awoken you Mr Skull?