Hundreds of dead babies found on Catholic property.

[Anchorman]

Nah, that well known fantasy writer Shakespeare, had so little knowledge of the real history of Scotlandd (or was such a political toady - you decide) that he invented the story.
The real lady was Grouch - and she was such a capable, trusted person that she governed her husband's kingdom while he went on pilgrimage to Rome. The only early medieval king of Alba/Scotland who felt secure enough on the throne to do so.
Far from being a nice old man, Duncan was probably younger than Macbeth when he died, not by a dagger, but in battle, Macbeth granting him a burial in Iona.
When Macbeth was killed in battle near Lumphinan (not 'Birnam wood') he was succeeeded, not by Malcolm, but by Grouoch's son, Lulach.
And there was hno Banquo or Fleance, and the witches were a sop to please James VI and I - whom Shakespeare wanted to toadt up to
All in all, total rubbish worthy of David Eddings.

[Nearly Sane]

I'm sorry, but language and it's use is extremely important. In this context latest and currently do not imply the same thing, the former being a reference to the news, the latter to the investigation. Also Anchorman's statement very clearly detached latest from the allegations, while the article included currently directly in relation to the investigation.

So try it this way

Titanic hits iceberg.

Latest: Titanic has not sunk

Is clearly different in inference to;

Titanic hits iceberg.

Titanic currently has not sunk

The former implies a final outcome, the latter merely a snapshot on an ongoing situation, clearly subject to change.

So the 'latest' score in a football match implies the final outcome? Maybe you didn't really think that out there.

[Nearly Sane]

I think you are completely confusing presumption of innocent when an individual has been charged with a criminal offence and investigating whether a crime has, or has not been committed.

In the latter case the investigation is unbiased, there is no presumption that a crime has, or has not been committed. The purpose of the investigation is to gather evidence to allow a judgement as to whether a crime has been committed. If the Police (or other investigating bodies) presumed that a crime hadn't been committed no investigation would even proceed. The presumption of innocence only refers to an individual being charged with an offence and we aren't at that stage yet.

Also remember this is Scotland which has a slightly more complex legal option in which there isn't only 'guilty' and 'not guilty' (consistent with innocent until proven guilty), but 'not proven' as well, which weakens the innocent until proven guilty as 'not proven' isn't a statement of innocence.

What does the existence of the Not Proven verdict, a post case finding, have to do with whether anchorman, not an investigator in the case, should work to the presumption of innocence in the absence of evidence?

[Nearly Sane]

In what way does it show I am lying.

Read my post - I said:

"the Lady Macbeth's here seem to always be sliding toward 'nothing to see here - move along please'."

I never said you, or AM for that matter, actually used those exact words - merely that the tenor of your posts (as indicated in the direct quotes I actually gave) are heading in that direction.

And who said you stated those were the exact words? More straw, vicar?

Neither Anchorman nor I have said anything with a tenor, a bass, or a mezzo soprano saying this should be ignored, swept under a Persian, or may not be something where after proper investigation there is a serious case to answer. Indeed we have said the opposite, but you seem to feel the need to misrepresent that.

[ProfessorDavey]

What does the existence of the Not Proven verdict, a post case finding, have to do with whether anchorman, not an investigator in the case, should work to the presumption of innocence in the absence of evidence?

The notion of innocent until proven guilty (i.e. presumption of innocence) is only really clear cut when there are only 2 verdicts, guilty or not guilty. The 3rd not proven means that you may not be found guilty but not presumed to be innocent (if not proven is the verdict).

As interesting as this is, it has no relevance with an investigation as to whether a crime has, or has not been committed - which is never conducted on the basis of an assumption or presumption that a crime has not been committed.

Presumption of innocence only applies to individuals charged with an offence.

[ProfessorDavey]

And who said you stated those were the exact words? More straw, vicar?

Fine - and in which case, therefore, you should probably retract your accusation that I was lying which is only sustainable if you believed I was quoting you directly.

[ProfessorDavey]

So the 'latest' score in a football match implies the final outcome? Maybe you didn't really think that out there.

Latest News: Arsenal win 2-0

Arsenal currently winning 2-0

I think we all understand the implied difference between those two statements.

The point is that the 'latest' in the former applies to the news, not the score - while the currently in the latter applies to the score. When you detach 'latest' from 'score', as AM did when he detached 'latest' from 'crimes being committed', is changes the clarity of the meaning. I'm happy to accept that AM didn't mean it that way (if he says so who am I to argue) but I do wonder why he didn't use the actual quote, which was very clear that all we have at the moment is a snapshot in an ongoing investigation:

'The Crown Office ... said there was currently no evidence of criminal activity.'

[Nearly Sane]

Fine - and in which case, therefore, you should probably retract your accusation that I was lying which is only sustainable if you believed I was quoting you directly.

No, for the reasons made made clear in the bit of the post that you removed in quotemining. Creating a straw man and then saying you will retract it if someone removes a justifiable comment would be underhand if it wasn't so obvious.

[Nearly Sane]

Latest News: Arsenal win 2-0

Arsenal currently winning 2-0

I think we all understand the implied difference between those two statements.

The point is that the 'latest' in the former applies to the news, not the score - while the currently in the latter applies to the score. When you detach 'latest' from 'score', as AM did when he detached 'latest' from 'crimes being committed', is changes the clarity of the meaning. I'm happy to accept that AM didn't mean it that way (if he says so who am I to argue) but I do wonder why he didn't use the actual quote, which was very clear that all we have at the moment is a snapshot in an ongoing investigation:

'The Crown Office ... said there was currently no evidence of criminal activity.'

Except Anchorman's post doesn't make the difference between win and winning as you just,dishonestly, represented it as doing

[ProfessorDavey]

Except Anchorman's post doesn't make the difference between win and winning as you just,dishonestly, represented it as doing

But clearly detaches latest from criminal activity, so completely different from your 'latest score' analogy. Surely, even you can see the difference between:

'there is no evidence of criminal activity'

and

'there is currently no evidence of criminal activity'

The latter is what the Crown Service actually said, the former is what AM implied they said (to be perfectly accurate he implied that the Crown Service said that 'there is no evidence of any crime having been committed'), but that makes no difference to the point.

[Nearly Sane]

The notion of innocent until proven guilty (i.e. presumption of innocence) is only really clear cut when there are only 2 verdicts, guilty or not guilty. The 3rd not proven means that you may not be found guilty but not presumed to be innocent (if not proven is the verdict).

As interesting as this is, it has no relevance with an investigation as to whether a crime has, or has not been committed - which is never conducted on the basis of an assumption or presumption that a crime has not been committed.

Presumption of innocence only applies to individuals charged with an offence.

I note that you entirely ignored the point about Anchorman's position here ut given your dishonesty in misrepresenting him, your use of strawmen, and quote mining on this thread, surprise is absent.

That the not proven verdict exists in Scotland does not affect the assumption of innocence at the start of any case.

[Nearly Sane]

But clearly detaches latest from criminal activity, so completely different from your 'latest score' analogy. Surely, even you can see the difference between:

'there is no evidence of criminal activity'

and

'there is currently no evidence of criminal activity'

The latter is what the Crown Service actually said, the former is what AM implied they said (to be perfectly accurate he implied that the Crown Service said that 'there is no evidence of any crime having been committed'), but that makes no difference to the point.

And here you dishonestly remove the impact of 'latest', lying once again about what Anchorman said.

[ippy]

I haven't read all the way through this thread but the thought of this, another one of those catholic unplesant mysteries has been uncovered I wonder how many there are, it'd be good if this was one of the last, but I've got a feeling.

ippy

[ProfessorDavey]

And here you dishonestly remove the impact of 'latest', lying once again about what Anchorman said.

There is no dishonesty going on whatsoever - specifically because the impact of 'latest' is non-existent. So let's put 'latest' back in shall we.

'The latest, from the Court Service'

is not

'that there is no evidence of criminal activity'

it is

'that there is currently no evidence of criminal activity'

So let's put it all together - 2 statements for you to peruse

'The latest, from the Court Service, is that there is no evidence of criminal activity'

and

'The latest, from the Court Service, is that there is currently no evidence of criminal activity'

While the difference might appear subtle, language is important and the difference has a big effect on implied meaning. Surely even you can see that the implied meaning is different with the two statements - and, of course, only the latter is correct reporting of the latest statement from the Court Service on the matter. Now unlike you I don't throw around accusations of lying and dishonesty, so I am fully willing to accept that AM never intended to misrepresent what the Court Service had said in the statement reported in the article - but that is what he did.

[Nearly Sane]

The is no dishonesty going on whatsoever - specifically because the impact of 'latest' is non-existent. So let's put 'latest' back in shall we.

'The latest, from the Court Service'

is not

'that there is no evidence of criminal activity'

it is

'that there is currently no evidence of criminal activity'

So let's put it all together - 2 statements for you to peruse

'The latest, from the Court Service, is that there is no evidence of criminal activity'

and

'The latest, from the Court Service, is that there is currently no evidence of criminal activity'

While the difference might appear subtle, language is important and the difference has a big effect on implied meaning. Surely even you can see that the implied meaning is different with the two statements - and, of course, only the latter is correct reporting of the latest statement from the Court Service on the matter.

No, the difference is you lying that language is this simply black and white. When Anchorman said the latest was that there was no evidence of wring doing, he was correct and you are lying about it.

Latest and currently in your second example would be redundant.

[ProfessorDavey]

No, the difference is you lying that language is this simply black and white. When Anchorman said the latest was that there was no evidence of wring doing, he was correct and you are lying about it.

Latest and currently in your second example would be redundant.

Oh get over yourself - the two statements do not have the same implied meaning - there is no redundancy.

'The latest, from the Court Service, is that there is no evidence of criminal activity'

is not the same in implied meaning as:

'The latest, from the Court Service, is that there is currently no evidence of criminal activity'

And there is no redundancy in that latter, as 'latest' and 'currently' apply to different things. I suspect you recognise that perfectly well, but aren't prepared to admit it.

[Nearly Sane]

Oh get over yourself - the two statements do not have the same implied meaning - there is no redundancy.

'The latest, from the Court Service, is that there is no evidence of criminal activity'

is not the same in implied meaning as:

'The latest, from the Court Service, is that there is currently no evidence of criminal activity'

And there is no redundancy in that latter, as 'latest' and 'currently' apply to different things. I suspect you recognise that perfectly well, but aren't prepared to admit it.

As already illustrated the latest score in a football match is the current score, so of course there is redundancy. Your own sentence examples illustrate that. Stop lying.

[ProfessorDavey]

No, the difference is you lying that language is this simply black and white. When Anchorman said the latest was that there was no evidence of wring doing, he was correct and you are lying about it.

I'm sorry you are simply wrong.

The latest from the Court Service is that there is currently no evidence of criminal activity. That is not what AM stated.

And at least get it right on accuracy - criminal activity and wrong doing aren't the same thing either, so it is perfectly possible for there to have been wrong doing but no criminal activity.

If you are going to be a pedant, at least try to be good at it.

[Nearly Sane]

I'm sorry you are simply wrong.

The latest from the Court Service is that there is currently no evidence of criminal activity. That is not what AM stated.

And at least get it right on accuracy - criminal activity and wrong doing are the same thing either, so it is perfectly possible for there to have been wrong doing but no criminal activity.

If you are going to be a pedant, at least try to be good at it.

As opposed to a very bad liar, like you?  What has my use of the phrase wrong doing by me have to do with your lying about Anchorman's statement being correct?  Whenever you calm down, and stiyo lying, I will expect your apology to Anchorman.

[ProfessorDavey]

As opposed to a very bad liar, like you?  What has my use of the phrase wrong doing by me have to do with your lying about Anchorman's statement being correct?  Whenever you calm down, and stiyo lying, I will expect your apology to Anchorman.

Why would I apologise to AM given that I have already accepted that his misrepresentation of report from the Court Service was not deliberate. But the fact remains that the correct reporting is:

'The latest, from the Court Service, is that there is currently no evidence of criminal activity'

And by the way I haven't lied regardless of the insults you may throw - I could demand an apology from you for claiming I have - but I won't waste my breath.

Anyhow I'm off out now as I have better things to do. But just to reiterate one more time:

'The latest, from the Court Service, is that there is currently no evidence of criminal activity'

[Nearly Sane]

Why would I apologise to AM given that I have already accepted that his misrepresentation of report from the Court Service was not deliberate. But the fact remains that the correct reporting is:

'The latest, from the Court Service, is that there is currently no evidence of criminal activity'

And by the way I haven't lied regardless of the insults you may throw - I could demand an apology from you for claiming I have - but I won't waste my breath.

Anyhow I'm off out now as I have better things to do. But just to reiterate one more time:

'The latest, from the Court Service, is that there is currently no evidence of criminal activity'

Because you have continued to talk about the tenor of posts to misrepresent his views, and as you have once again illustrated you don't understand the redundancy in the above. 

[ProfessorDavey]

.. once again illustrated you don't understand the redundancy in the above.

There is no redundancy.

'The latest, from the Court Service, is that there is no evidence of criminal activity'

is not the same in implied meaning as:

'The latest, from the Court Service, is that there is currently no evidence of criminal activity'

If 'currently' was redundant then it could be removed without changing the implied meaning of the statement - but it cannot.

[Nearly Sane]

For those interested in what happened at Smyllum.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/magazine-41229124/i-was-abused-by-nuns-for-a-decade

[Nearly Sane]

There is no redundancy.

'The latest, from the Court Service, is that there is no evidence of criminal activity'

is not the same in implied meaning as:

'The latest, from the Court Service, is that there is currently no evidence of criminal activity'

If 'currently' was redundant then it could be removed without changing the implied meaning of the statement - but it cannot.

Why the avoidance of your continued misrepresentation of Anchor man's position. The two sentences are equivalent here. It's only you making up stuff about Anchirman's motivation that leads to your issue.

The latest score is nil nil.
The latest score is currently nil nil

[ProfessorDavey]

Why the avoidance of your continued misrepresentation of Anchor man's position. The two sentences are equivalent here. It's only you making up stuff about Anchirman's motivation that leads to your issue.

The latest score is nil nil.
The latest score is currently nil nil

Why are you using a different example which isn't comparable (hint, think about what 'latest' and 'currently' are referring to in this example and in the real one).

So let's focus back on the actual example. Once again:

'The latest, from the Court Service, is that there is no evidence of criminal activity'

is not the same in implied meaning as:

'The latest, from the Court Service, is that there is currently no evidence of criminal activity'