Cities Drop Most Charges Against BLM Protesters as Cops Fail to Provide Evidence

[Czar]

I have no idea who this even is. But he appears to be released early on probation by the Manitoba Parole Board and apparently you are offended by this.

So what's your argument?....

1. That no one should be released on probation?.... All jurisdictions release prisoners on probation. Do you want that banned?... Do you want him to serve the remaining 2 years of his sentence in jail?.... Okay, go to Winnipeg and wear a sandwich board and stand outside the offices of the Manitoba Parole Board and yell at them until the cops come and collect you.

2. That the Parole Board made a mistake?.... They obviously don't think that they did and they know more about the case than you.

Again, you troll but you really have no solutions. If you read right wing tabloids and police press releases, you're going to find an endless supply of "outrages" to post on the board. You're also going to find that the tabloids and the police press releases suppress a lot of the facts. But who gives a shit?!... They deal in outrage from people like you.
[/QUOTE]

Are you completely stupid. People like you with your ideas are dangerous to society.

Let me quote what was the media says...." Winston George Thomas, 45 is considered a high risk to reoffend in a sexually violent manner against women and girls".

So YES Mandrill, I want this person and people like him to be kept in jail for as long as need be and never released if they are considered to be high risk to re-offend in a sexually violent manner.

It is obvious that I have been right all along. You are perfectly willing to release people that have been determined to be high risk to offend in a sexually violent manner on society(along with a lot of other types of criminals, no doubt).

Folks, this IS the mindset of the left. They will release criminals that are known to be high risk to offend again, even if it is sexual violence.

Think about that when you vote.

Czar....apparently a troll for wanting to keep sex predators locked up.

 

[mandrill]

Remember that ladies. When a long time law professor says that she thinks extreme drunkeness should not be a defense for the guy that raped(Man Drilled) you, our fraud will call her an extremist. Something to think about while it is happening.
And guess what, the world of feminist law professors is to be ignored but what is assumed to be feminist judges is to be accepted.
And there is something about boob grabbing in the above reply for you to think about as well.
Talk about a fraud.
Override the judges and their criminal rights agenda.

So this is why many people on the board dislike you. Again you have basically been trapped. You cannot respond to my post quoting the Supreme Court decision and you know that if you go down that road, you will not be able to make any of your arguments work.

So you will go back to a previous post you really like - the post quoting the feminist law professor who essentially lied about the case to boost her own political views - and you will continue to emphasize that post and insult me until you can duck out of the thread.

You've done this a couple of times already in this thread. You sneak back in a couple of days later and start arguing and trolling and insulting people again.

So just admit it. You've lost the argument and bow out gracefully. Be a stand-up guy, instead of a troll for once.

 

[mandrill]

Are you completely stupid. People like you with your ideas are dangerous to society.

Let me quote what was the media says...." Winston George Thomas, 45 is considered a high risk to reoffend in a sexually violent manner against women and girls".

So YES Mandrill, I want this person and people like him to be kept in jail for as long as need be and never released if they are considered to be high risk to re-offend in a sexually violent manner.

It is obvious that I have been right all along. You are perfectly willing to release people that have been determined to be high risk to offend in a sexually violent manner on society(along with a lot of other types of criminals, no doubt).

Folks, this IS the mindset of the left. They will release criminals that are known to be high risk to offend again, even if it is sexual violence.

Think about that when you vote.

Czar....apparently a troll for wanting to keep sex predators locked up.

I didn't release him and I know nothing about him. The Parole Board released him. I am going to assume that they're doing their job properly unless and until he re offends. And if he does, the Parole Board made a mistake. 100's of prisoners get parole every week. Most of the time, the Parole Board gets it right.

I don't spend hours a day reading police bulletins like - apparently - you do. I have a job.

So again, if you feel strongly about this case, go to Winnipeg, put on a sandwich board and stand outside the Parole Board office and scream at them when they go in and out. Eventually you will be arrested and then the Parole Board will be nice to you and give you early release - because they're all apparently woke liberals. So you have nothing to worry about.

 

[Czar]

I didn't release him and I know nothing about him. The Parole Board released him. I am going to assume that they're doing their job properly unless and until he re offends. And if he does, the Parole Board made a mistake. 100's of prisoners get parole every week. Most of the time, the Parole Board gets it right.

I don't spend hours a day reading police bulletins like - apparently - you do. I have a job.

So again, if you feel strongly about this case, go to Winnipeg, put on a sandwich board and stand outside the Parole Board office and scream at them when they go in and out. Eventually you will be arrested and then the Parole Board will be nice to you and give you early release - because they're all apparently woke liberals. So you have nothing to worry about.

Hey folks, there is a good fraudulent argument made in Mandrill's two replies to the subject.

He doesn't know anything about him.

As a matter of fact, you know everything you need to know about him. Because the justice system has told you. Winston George Thomas, 45 is considered a high risk to reoffend in a sexually violent manner against women and girls

Oh and guess what? Mandrill has a job, as if we care.

And guess what, Mandrill appears as interested in my arrest than this violent sexual predator.

How sick the left are.

 

[Valcazar]

I have no idea who this even is. But he appears to be released early on probation by the Manitoba Parole Board and apparently you are offended by this.

So what's your argument?....

I think his argument might be that since this guy did a crime with a Mandatory Minimum Sentence but is now being released that Mandatory Minimums don't work.

 

[Czar]

I think his argument might be that since this guy did a crime with a Mandatory Minimum Sentence but is now being released that Mandatory Minimums don't work.

See how the frauds work folks. We have an extremely dangerous individual being released and the frauds think it is a subject appropriate to make what they think are their humorous statements.

I don't know what his previous crimes are but obviously, the justice system knows this man is very dangerous. How about a law(backed up with notwithstanding clause to bypass the activist judges) not allowing people to be released when it has been determined that they are likely to violently re-offend.

Czar: Total logic.

 

[Valcazar]

See how the frauds work folks. We have an extremely dangerous individual being released and the frauds think it is a subject appropriate to make what they think are their humorous statements.

I don't know what his previous crimes are but obviously, the justice system knows this man is very dangerous. How about a law(backed up with notwithstanding clause to bypass the activist judges) not allowing people to be released when it has been determined that they are likely to violently re-offend.

Czar: Total logic.

So you want some sort of law or section of the criminal code that would allow the government to determines someone was a dangerous offender (or whatever) and have the right to keep them in jail for an indeterminate length, regardless of the sentencing guidelines of the original crime?

Something like that?

"We have found you are too dangerous to let out into society, so we are keeping you here still?"

 

[mandrill]

See how the frauds work folks. We have an extremely dangerous individual being released and the frauds think it is a subject appropriate to make what they think are their humorous statements.
I don't know what his previous crimes are but obviously, the justice system knows this man is very dangerous. How about a law(backed up with notwithstanding clause to bypass the activist judges) not allowing people to be released when it has been determined that they are likely to violently re-offend.
Czar: Total logic.

But your problem is that the Manitoba Parole Board held a hearing and let him out. So the evidence was assessed and he was found release-able. You don't know what that evidence is and neither do I. You have no idea if that was a good decision of a shitty one. You didn't read his parole board file and you don't know what the evidence was.

Again, you've found a little outrage riff that you can play on and you're going to post the same information 6 or 7 times in this thread while people get sick of you. Because this is what you do.

 

[mandrill]

So you want some sort of law or section of the criminal code that would allow the government to determines someone was a dangerous offender (or whatever) and have the right to keep them in jail for an indeterminate length, regardless of the sentencing guidelines of the original crime?
Something like that?
"We have found you are too dangerous to let out into society, so we are keeping you here still?"

Which Canada actually has.

And Czar has no idea why there was no dangerous offender application made here because he has no idea what the evidence was.

 

[mandrill]

Hey folks, there is a good fraudulent argument made in Mandrill's two replies to the subject.
He doesn't know anything about him.
As a matter of fact, you know everything you need to know about him. Because the justice system has told you. Winston George Thomas, 45 is considered a high risk to reoffend in a sexually violent manner against women and girls
Oh and guess what? Mandrill has a job, as if we care.
And guess what, Mandrill appears as interested in my arrest than this violent sexual predator.
How sick the left are.

That's what the cops think. The Parole Board thinks different. It's the Parole Board's call, not the cops. For all I know, the cops' take might be unreasonable. You don't know anything about the actual case either.

So move on. Go find another "outrage" to whine about and time waste.

 

[Czar]

So you want some sort of law or section of the criminal code that would allow the government to determines someone was a dangerous offender (or whatever) and have the right to keep them in jail for an indeterminate length, regardless of the sentencing guidelines of the original crime?

Something like that?

"We have found you are too dangerous to let out into society, so we are keeping you here still?"

It appears the government(whichever department it was in this case) already can make the dangerous offender determination.

And of course I want them to be able to keep them locked up.

Please tell us why you would think that someone who the government has determined is " considered a high risk to reoffend in a sexually violent manner against women and girls " should be let out of jail.

And please be specific in your answer to this particular case.

 

[Valcazar]

You're adorable.
I know nothing about the details in this case.
Neither do you.
I have a dinner date to get to and am not going to go look up his entire criminal record.

But, since it is important to you I assume you already have.
Publish the pdfs here and I will peruse them after you make your case.
Everyone here knows I am perfectly happy to read primary sources.

 

[Czar]

But your problem is that the Manitoba Parole Board held a hearing and let him out. So the evidence was assessed and he was found release-able. You don't know what that evidence is and neither do I. You have no idea if that was a good decision of a shitty one. You didn't read his parole board file and you don't know what the evidence was.

Again, you've found a little outrage riff that you can play on and you're going to post the same information 6 or 7 times in this thread while people get sick of you. Because this is what you do.

Hey ladies. the manitoba government has determined that an individual who considered a high risk to reoffend in a sexually violent manner against women and girls will be let out(or the law has forced them to release this person. Apparently, I have no idea if it was a good decision to let a person who is considered a high risk to reoffend in a sexually violent manner against women and girls .

It appears that the frauds like mandrill are much more upset at me and likely consider me to be a threat than this individual. If only I had read his parole board file, it would somehow make a difference in the likelihood that he would re-offend. If only I saw the evidence, somehow it would make a difference. Exactly what difference would it make. Obviously, the people that you have previously called the experts have made their determination(and you basically said earlier that I am not an expert).

Why do we need to look at parole board files when we have already been told that he is violently dangerous.

So remember that ladies who vote liberal and NDP. The lefties consider conservatives complaining about this situation(which is no doubt the only one as I have heard of this before) to be 'whining' and that it is an 'outrage riff'.

You just might want to think about that the next time you vote.

 

[Czar]

You're adorable.
I know nothing about the details in this case.
Neither do you.
I have a dinner date to get to and am not going to go look up his entire criminal record.

Hey, I have a great idea. Tell your dinner date that you have been debating some guy on an escort review forum about the prison release of a person considered a high risk to reoffend in a sexually violent manner against women and girls . This person you are debating thinks he should be kept in jail but you don't agree.

I really would like to know what she says.

A good example of how the ladies should really try to get to know a bit more detail about their dinner dates. They might not like the opinions they post publicly elsewhere.

And don't forget to show her this picture you posted as well during your heavy discussion....

https://terb.cc/xenforo/threads/hot-chix-in-long-socks.739585/page-50#post-7534522

 

[mandrill]

Hey ladies. the manitoba government has determined that an individual who considered a high risk to reoffend in a sexually violent manner against women and girls will be let out(or the law has forced them to release this person. Apparently, I have no idea if it was a good decision to let a person who is considered a high risk to reoffend in a sexually violent manner against women and girls .
It appears that the frauds like mandrill are much more upset at me and likely consider me to be a threat than this individual. If only I had read his parole board file, it would somehow make a difference in the likelihood that he would re-offend. If only I saw the evidence, somehow it would make a difference. Exactly what difference would it make. Obviously, the people that you have previously called the experts have made their determination(and you basically said earlier that I am not an expert).
Why do we need to look at parole board files when we have already been told that he is violently dangerous.
So remember that ladies who vote liberal and NDP. The lefties consider conservatives complaining about this situation(which is no doubt the only one as I have heard of this before) to be 'whining' and that it is an 'outrage riff'.
You just might want to think about that the next time you vote.

You said this already a couple of times. Like I predicted, you're going to ignore most of the posts in this thread and just deal with a couple of your own posts, which have been debunked already. What a troll!

You're pretty transparent.

 

[mandrill]

It appears the government(whichever department it was in this case) already can make the dangerous offender determination.
And of course I want them to be able to keep them locked up.
Please tell us why you would think that someone who the government has determined is " considered a high risk to reoffend in a sexually violent manner against women and girls " should be let out of jail.
And please be specific in your answer to this particular case.

For a dude who appears to be obsessed with this stuff, don't you already know all the law and procedure around dangerous offender applications?

I'm surprised. I figured that you were a real expert in this stuff. I guess you're just a guy who goes look stuff up on Google and doesn't know how it all fits together.

You know who ARE real experts??..... The Parole Board.

 

[Czar]

For a dude who appears to be obsessed with this stuff, don't you already know all the law and procedure around dangerous offender applications?

I'm surprised. I figured that you were a real expert in this stuff. I guess you're just a guy who goes look stuff up on Google and doesn't know how it all fits together.

You know who ARE real experts??..... The Parole Board.

First of all, we don't know if he is out on parole. But you seem to assume so(or know so). Going on that basis(but not knowing if that is the actual reason here)......

Wow.......The parole board experts that are letting a violent offender out even though he is likely to re-offend. How much of an expert does one have to be to do that. Do they have a stupidity contest for an interview and choose the worst.

Remember that ladies when you vote. If the parole board actually do let a guy out on parole who is likely to re-offend in a violent sexual manner, the lefties will tell you that the experts knew what they were doing.

Think about that when you vote because this is a widespread belief among the lefties. And they just passed a law letting violent criminals using guns to get a lesser sentence in some cases with legislation made due to racism according to the government.

 

[basketcase]

Czar sure uses the term 'fraud' a lot. I wonder if he knows what it actually means.

 

[Frankfooter]

First of all, we don't know if he is out on parole.

You didn't check?

 

[mandrill]

First of all, we don't know if he is out on parole. But you seem to assume so(or know so). Going on that basis(but not knowing if that is the actual reason here)......

Wow.......The parole board experts that are letting a violent offender out even though he is likely to re-offend. How much of an expert does one have to be to do that. Do they have a stupidity contest for an interview and choose the worst.

Remember that ladies when you vote. If the parole board actually do let a guy out on parole who is likely to re-offend in a violent sexual manner, the lefties will tell you that the experts knew what they were doing.

Think about that when you vote because this is a widespread belief among the lefties. And they just passed a law letting violent criminals using guns to get a lesser sentence in some cases with legislation made due to racism according to the government.

Winston George Thomas, 45, is considered a high risk to reoffend in a sexually violent manner against women and girls, despite having participated in some treatment programming in the past, the Manitoba integrated high-risk sex offender unit said on Saturday.
Winston George Thomas, 45, was set to be released Saturday from the Brandon Correctional Centre, where he's been serving a sentence for assaulting a woman.

Police said while Thomas has taken some treatment programs in the past, they still consider him a high risk to reoffend in a sexual or sexually violent way.

Officers noted Thomas has a lengthy criminal history of violence and breaching court orders. As part of his most recent 18-month sentence he will serve two years of probation following his jail time.

In addition to a nightly curfew and an order to stay sober, Thomas's probation conditions bar him from attending the building housing the Legal Aid Manitoba offices on Broadway in Winnipeg, police said.

It's in your own article, genius!