TheLodger in the Northern Echo

Corcaigh_the_Cat said:
That's because you're not employing someone to trawl through a football message board to dig dirt on a bloke who has just beaten the 'yes man' in a local election.

I didn't see any of Dave Smith's obnoxious posts brought up when the child molester was elected. I wonder why that was?
Click to expand...
You should have because the gazette wrote an article about it, it's what lead to his initial disgrace, prior to everything else coming out of the woodwork
 
The_Lizards_Jumpers said:
I think we did from memory, but I also recall people saying they'd report it to the papers too.

Perhaps they did, perhaps they didn't but it did come out eventually.
Click to expand...
Didn’t realise that. Thought it all came out after. Surprised an active councillor could come out with the stuff he did and it be known who he was without being reported. The lad wasn’t right.
 
Corcaigh_the_Cat said:
Which people and which person?

Both councillors posted the articles being referred to before they were elected. Only one of them has had his posts used as a gossip item by a local rag. Stirring up trouble for one, not for the other. Why?
Click to expand...
The Tory lad. I thought it only came to light he posted on here when the case went to court so that might have been why it hadn’t been reported before he went to trial?

I think his posts were reported whilst on trial.

If the situation is similar I’m not sure why one was reported and the other wasn’t.

Do you know why?
 
Last edited:
GazC_MFC said:
Ultimately your past is your past and no matter how it comes to surface or what you’ve said, you have to own it
Click to expand...

I agree. I'm not defending the comment itself, it was a stupid thing for Ian to say... but that's all it was, a nothing comment on a football board that nobody will even remember he said.

The article is just another Mike Hind marketing ploy like all the others that have came before it.
 
Linny said:
The Tory lad. I thought it only came to light he posted on here when the case went to court so that might have been why it hadn’t been reported before he went to trial?

I think his posts were reported whilst on trial.

If the situation is similar I’m not sure why one was reported and the other wasn’t.

Do you know why?
Click to expand...
The party they represent perhaps?
 
Waiting for Priti Patel and Michael Gove to do a Gazette face while holding a large printed copy of my post...
 
Mike is targetted by plenty, the latest being Atlas Gym. He’s having to post about his finances and Dibsys finances to prove allegations are wrong.

He’s getting publicity from doing good things. If it were bad stuff I’d understand the outrage.
 
Linny said:
Maybe. But I thought the Gazette was owned by The Mirror group who are pro labour so it would seem odd.
Click to expand...
It's owned by Reach which does own the Daily Mirror along with many other @rse wipe suppliers such as the Daily Star and Daily Express, hardly left wing, including The Mirror.
 
Linny said:
The Tory lad. I thought it only came to light he posted on here when the case went to court so that might have been why it hadn’t been reported before he went to trial?

I think his posts were reported whilst on trial.

If the situation is similar I’m not sure why one was reported and the other wasn’t.

Do you know why?
Click to expand...
The David smith one got reported because I got sick of seeing his smug face in the gazette when I knew all the stuff he had said on here so I sent links to his posts to the gazette.

I assume this one has happened because it's a PR opportunity
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top