|
|
Post by sesley on Jun 23, 2012 18:57:02 GMT
 lovely aren't they  |
|
|
|
Post by housesparrow on Jun 23, 2012 19:33:53 GMT
Lock up your toilet rolls!
Are they guide dogs Sesley?
|
|
|
|
Post by sesley on Jun 24, 2012 13:02:43 GMT
no they are dogs for Heroes for soldiers returning with life changing injurys yes i suppose they will train them for the ones that have lost their sight.They have been fund raising with Help for Heroes for these dogs to help with day to living hence the title Dogs for Help for Heroes.
|
|
|
|
Post by housesparrow on Jun 24, 2012 15:32:37 GMT
Okay, I've found it: www.houndsforheroes.com/whatwedo/I hope the charity factors in continuing support, to ensure that things are going as they should; I know Guide Dogs for the Blind does. Jack has a blind acquaintance who has had several guide dogs in the past, but his newest is posing problems. It seems she is in the wrong job, but of course he can't part with her - they have bonded. |
|
|
|
Post by jean on Jul 8, 2012 8:18:31 GMT
I know a deaf man who has a hearing dog. I have only just heard this story, and I did find it funny. (It was my sister, who's had an eating disorder, who told me, so I judged that was OK to laugh.) |
|
|
|
Post by housesparrow on Jul 11, 2012 11:17:21 GMT
An eating dog for the overweight sounds somewhat more use.
Actually, I know of one who would be quite good at it; he will snatch at anything edible within reach.
|
|
|
|
Post by jean on Jul 11, 2012 13:14:27 GMT
But the idea is the the dog does what you can't do yourself.
Overweight people are only too good at eating
(I wonder if you've been following the case of Shafila Ahmed, housey? I know your interest in the Law.)
|
|
|
|
Post by housesparrow on Jul 11, 2012 19:14:04 GMT
Well, yes, I've been following the trial. But am not quit sure of the relevance here.
I'm just glad I'm not sitting on a jury. I'm inclined to believe the mother's new story - but would I be saying the same if she was an Anglo Saxon mum?
|
|
|
|
Post by bonbonlarue on Jul 11, 2012 19:31:57 GMT
This case is particularly worrying. Is it culture, religion or lack of education?
|
|
|
|
Post by housesparrow on Jul 11, 2012 19:58:46 GMT
A joke is never quite the same once you have to explain it. But it does open up all kinds of possibilities. I'm quite convinced that our dog chases a ball because we aren't fast enough to catch it; he is ever willing to please.
As for Shafila Ahmed: I'm not quite sure the strength of evidence against the parents, but haven't any idea how we as a country can change the mindset of people who think honour killing and forced marriages are acceptable in our country.
|
|
|
|
Post by bonbonlarue on Jul 12, 2012 19:52:12 GMT
Multi culturalism is fine and to be applauded but not when it defies morality. Murder is wrong in any country/religion.
|
|
|
|
Post by jean on Jul 13, 2012 17:24:26 GMT
Well, yes, I've been following the trial. But am not quit sure of the relevance here. No relevance at all - just that you were posting on this thread and I thought it would catch your eye. I've just spent the day in court listening to the father being cross-examined. The youngest daughter, who has refused to give evidence up to now, has decided now to support he mother - she possibly doesn't realise that supporting one parent will inevitably mean not supporting the other. |
|
|
|
Post by housesparrow on Jul 13, 2012 18:06:26 GMT
That must have been interesting, Jean.
How did the father come across?
In truth, I'm not quite sure what evidence there is to directly link the parents to the murder : are there any forensic clues?
|
|
|
|
Post by jean on Jul 13, 2012 18:12:50 GMT
He came across as arrogant and over-confident. He is obviously an intelligent and articulate man, and perhaps he should not be anxious to be seen in this way when he wants to claim that he signed the statements he made to police without actually reading them.
I don't think there is any forensic evidence. But the prosecution seem confident they've got him nailed anyway.
|
|
|
|
Post by housesparrow on Jul 13, 2012 19:17:54 GMT
I hope so for the wife and daughter's sake. What on earth will they do if he gets off?
The poor girl - faced with the prospect of seeing both her parents in jail, it is hardly suprising she broke her silence. Who wants to stand by a violent man whom you suspect of killing your sister?
|
|
|
|
Post by jean on Jul 13, 2012 20:22:56 GMT
She has, though, refused to say anything up to now.
The older sister was adamant that both her parents were involved in the killing. Who knows if the mother is now telling the truth?
|
|
|
|
Post by housesparrow on Jul 14, 2012 6:42:42 GMT
Now I'm confused. So did the sister make a statement implicting both parents, then refuse to speak but has now changed her story saying her mother had nothing to do with it, or what?
Are you following the whole trial or was it just for that day?
|
|
|
|
Post by jean on Jul 14, 2012 7:49:51 GMT
There are three sisters, apart from the one who was killed.
It was when the first sister told the police that she'd seen both her parents kill the eldest girl that the police investigation, stalled for lack of evidence since the discovery of the body, was reopened. This was after a robbery on the parents' house that the first sister was involved in.
Then when the trial was under way, a friend of the second sister gave the police letters that sister had written to her which described the killing. The sister insisted in court that they were 'free writing' and did not refer to an actual event. This isn't very convincing.
The third sister is the one who has so far refused to give evidence for either the prosecution or the defence, though she has been in the public gallery every day apparently. She has now agreed to testify on behalf of her mother, but this will mean that she has to testify against her father since her mother is now basing her defence on her husband's guilt.
There's also a brother who may be called, but as he is on record as having said 'she deserved it' I am not sure his evidence would help anyone much.
(I'm especially interested because OH's brother is prosecuting.)
|
|
|
|
Post by housesparrow on Jul 14, 2012 8:42:36 GMT
Ah - thank you - but what a fascinating tale. If letters came to light like that during a TV drama, you'd suspend belief. And what was the significance of the burglary?
I haven't followed the press reports TBH: perhaps they explain all this?
Anyway I'm glad your BiL isn't prosecuting a fraud trial. I gather most people lose the plot after a few days - including most of the jury.
|
|
|
|
Post by jean on Jul 14, 2012 11:33:27 GMT
And what was the significance of the burglary? You could read it in different ways. Perhaps she invented the story of the murder hoping to be treated more leniently for her part in the attempted burglary if she could tell the police something they'd be really pleased to hear. Or perhaps she got involved in the burglary because she was so utterly alienated from her parents on account of the murder. Don't they do them without juries sometimes now, because they're just too difficult? I must say that when I hear people rubbishing the jury system in general, I always think of the juries I've been on where everyone took their responsibilities very seriously indeed, even if (IMO) they sometimes got it wrong! |
|
