Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Two arrested for murder after hunt supporter's death


At Birmingham Crown Court he pleaded not guilty to a new charge of manslaughter by gross negligence, in that he killed Mr Morse – to whom he had a duty of care – by driving towards him at speed a gyrocopter with an unguarded revolving rear propeller at a time when it was unsafe to do so.

Q. do you still have the same duty of care towards someone who is trying to do you harm?
 
The idea is to sabotage the hunt, not give near-sexual pleasure to receding-chinned cousin-fuckers.

I love the fact that Urban still like to believe that all hunt supporters are "toffs". Everyone I know who hunts is very much working class.
 
I don't like the hunt - they are a toffee-nosed pain in the arse.

I don't generally like sabs - they are almost as much of a pain as the hunt.

I dont like foxes - any I see get a face full of BBs.

But to run someone over with your helicopter? Jeesarse - its only a fox.

This.
 
If the guy in the gyrocopter had made it clear he was about to take off, and had the perfect right to do so, then it was up to the other bloke to get out of the way, surely?

I mean, if I was in my car, and for some reason, protest or otherwise, some idiot stands in front of my car and says "you're not going anywhere" I would probably tell him to move, then count to ten, and then drive off anyway, having redefined him as an object of less importance than my goal.

Putting yourself in the way of a combination person and machine that is more powerful than you, is asking for it. The other person's power and will outrank you.

Giles..
 
if I was in my car, and for some reason, protest or otherwise, some idiot stands in front of my car and says "you're not going anywhere" I would probably tell him to move, then count to ten, and then drive off anyway, having redefined him as an object of less importance than my goal.

You reckon if someone stands in front of your car, you've got the right to drive through him?

Strangely enough, the law doesn't agree with you on this one.
 
I don't care. My goal takes precedence, if the situation requires it.

I'd be pretty interested just what situation you think would require, or indeed what goal would justify, driving over someone.

Because that would help clarify whether you're just daft, or a prick.
 
You reckon if someone stands in front of your car, you've got the right to drive through him?

Strangely enough, the law doesn't agree with you on this one.

indeed, though i'd guess that a gyrocopter is very different machine. once the blades start moving you'd just get the fuck out of the way if you had half a brain.
 
indeed, though i'd guess that a gyrocopter is very different machine. once the blades start moving you'd just get the fuck out of the way if you had half a brain.

And if you didn't have half a brain when the props started, you soon would.
 
I don't like the hunt - they are a toffee-nosed pain in the arse.

I don't generally like sabs - they are almost as much of a pain as the hunt.

I dont like foxes - any I see get a face full of BBs.

But to run someone over with your helicopter? Jeesarse - its only a fox.

yeah, and it's one less wax jacket wearing, bloodsport loving gaurun -fucking-teed tory voting waste of skin.
 
I don't care. My goal takes precedence, if the situation requires it.

Giles..

I'd love to smash you repeatedly in the skull with a baseball bat. Strangely enough the law wouldn't agree with me on this. That said I don't care, my goal would take preference if the situation required it, and let's be honest it certainly does require it.
 
Erm, cry harder in your Dorset Cereal's Breakfast Granola Crunch, the favoured choice of Samantha and the Cameron clan?
 
I love the fact that Urban still like to believe that all hunt supporters are "toffs". Everyone I know who hunts is very much working class.

I made a comment about giving sexual pleasure to inbreds. You appear to have confused that with a comment about all hunters being toffs.
Have you not had your morning coffee and fully awoken yet, or are you this stupid 24 hours a day?
 
I'd be pretty interested just what situation you think would require, or indeed what goal would justify, driving over someone.

Because that would help clarify whether you're just daft, or a prick.

He believes that eugenics offer an appropriate solution to the problem of crime.

So, I'd go with "prick" if I were you. :)
 
I love the fact that Urban still like to believe that all hunt supporters are "toffs". Everyone I know who hunts is very much working class.
Then you obviously live in a working class area.

Everyone who *I* know who hunts is very thoroughly a toff. And I'm even willing to bet that I know and have come across a *lot* more hunters than you do.

In fact, there were a couple talking loudly in our local pub at the weekend, boasting about the foxes that they'd killed that day so that everybody could overhear. They were so fucking upper-class that they should have been in a Monty Python sketch. Never have I been so tempted to slash somebody's tyres, but which Land Rover would I have gone for?
 
there was plenty of bozon activity all round:facepalm:.
pretty sure the CAA should have had a word with the gyrocopter pilot before hand I can't see how its legal to do aerial survillence.
 
Some very clearly "working class" huntsmen having a pre-hunt tipple, yesterday

0873717.jpg



3163551.jpg
 
the man tried to stop a mini helicopter with his head.
give him a Darwin award and move on.
 
not true. murder requires intent to kill.

Kill or seriously injure.


indeed, though i'd guess that a gyrocopter is very different machine. once the blades start moving you'd just get the fuck out of the way if you had half a brain.

It sounds to me that he may have initially been standing in front of a stopped machine:

Artcle linked by elbows said:
In it [the video] Mr Morse approaches the gyrocopter and stands on its left side just a few feet away from the unguarded rear propellor blade.

The engine starts up and the blade’s speed appears to increase, before it lurches towards Mr Morse.

Mr Griffiths admitted that the manoeuvre that killed Mr Morse was dangerous.

Now either the engine was off and started whilst Morse was standing in front, or the engine was revved and the machine driven at him.

Either way it's definitely manslaughter and quite possibly murder. If Griffiths was in fear for his safety he should've got out of the machine and run away from the old man and lady that were confronting him, not driven a deadly machine at them.
 
Then you obviously live in a working class area.

Everyone who *I* know who hunts is very thoroughly a toff. And I'm even willing to bet that I know and have come across a *lot* more hunters than you do.

In fact, there were a couple talking loudly in our local pub at the weekend, boasting about the foxes that they'd killed that day so that everybody could overhear. They were so fucking upper-class that they should have been in a Monty Python sketch. Never have I been so tempted to slash somebody's tyres, but which Land Rover would I have gone for?

if 1927 had said hunt supporters, i think he might have had a bit more credibility.

the proles can follow in a car and open gates, but not get on a horse...
 
Back
Top Bottom