I've got Vlad to thank for this tip. We tend to pick on Di-ve very often for their atrocious failure to command the basics of the English lingo. This time the venerable Times of Malta has joined the fray of journalistic howlers and from no lesser source than the Editorial. Here is the text... (no formatting I am working in Safari!) before I rush out for some camping disasters somewhere in Contrexville (nord de la France)... see you all on Sunday night and avoid parricidal juries.
A good system of justice
In a disturbing example of patricide, a jury panel last week returned a 7-2 not guilty verdict and cleared the son of murdering his father. It does not say anything for the victim that his entire family greeted the verdict with relief and applause. Public opinion, shocked by the evidence given in court by the family, fully endorsed the jury's decision. Still, it needs to be remarked, in case anybody concludes that he can get away with murder, that it is intrinsically wrong to take life.
4 commentaires:
How funny... You commented on the one word and I think the whole first para is really obnoxious. If ever there was a deserved acquittal, it was this case. What would The Times leader writer know of the suffering of this family? S/he writes from on high without seemingly making the least bit effort to understand what drives human nature. Bloody hell, did they have to use THIS example to argue against the dangers of trying to justify homicide? How it made me swear this morning. I nearly choked on my orange juice.
I didn't manage to read the rest of the paper after that self-righteous diatribe. What about the fact one man was allowed to terrorize his family? The abuse was just left well enough alone and omerta' was present once again. IIRC the village priest told the abused woman to have kids... and that will change the man for the better. Uh huh huh. But that's all right I suppose... *bites tongue*
Sorry Vlad.
Had to remove your post. I have nothing against anyone expressing themselves however they like (or quoting insult sites) BUT
1) You do not log onto Blogger and therefore you operate behind a nick and are uncontactable and therefore unable to carry legal responsibility for your entries,
2) I did not particularly like the extended swearword that you quoted and since it has absolutely nothing to do with the current blog...
I chose to remove it.
QUOD PRINCIPI PLACQUIT LEGEM HABET RIGOREM..-
Enregistrer un commentaire