About me
Archive
About me

Man charged over Kilroy ‘attack’

close

Warning: This post was published more than 12 years ago.

I keep old posts on the site because sometimes it's interesting to read old content. Not everything that is old is bad. Also, I think people might be interested to track how my views have changed over time: for example, how my strident teenage views have mellowed and matured!

But given the age of this post, please bear in mind:

  • My views might have changed in the 12 years since I wrote this post.
  • This post might use language in ways which I would now consider inappropriate or offensive.
  • Factual information might be outdated.
  • Links might be broken; embedded material might not appear properly.

Many thanks for your understanding.

Man charged over Kilroy ‘attack’ (BBC News)

As much as I disagree with his methods – it’s not a terribly good idea to go pouring slurry over people – I do think that Kilroy has somewhat walked into this kind of abuse. If he will insult great swathes of the population, does he not expect that he might end up in some trouble because of it sometimes?

I also particularly like the way the Beeb has chosen to put ‘attack’ in inverted commas, and refer to it throughout the article simply as an ‘incident’. I’d just be interested now to find out exactly what David McGraths three counts of criminal damage were in relation to. Three different parts of Kilroy? His jacket, tie, and trousers? I don’t know the details of the incident, but three counts seems slightly excessive to me, especially when combined with a public order offence. Though, of course, I do think it’s right that he is punished.

This 273rd post was filed under: News and Comment, Politics.






More posts worth reading

What I’ve been reading this month (published 4th March 2017)

What I’ve been reading this month (published 6th February 2017)

What I’ve been reading this month (published 31st December 2016)

Diary for 17th March 2008 (published 17th March 2008)

Lies, Damn lies, and Newspaper sales (published 31st January 2005)

Subscribe by Email (published 15th May 2005)

Fuel duty increase postponed. Nobody surprised. (published 16th July 2008)


Comments and responses

No comments or responses to this article have been published yet.

Compose a new comment



Comment

You may use these tags: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong> .

If you would like to display a profile picture beside your comment, sign up for Gravatar, and enter your email address above.

By submitting your comment, you confirm that it conforms to the site's comment policy. Comments are subject to both automatic and human moderation, and may take some time to appear.



The content of this site is copyright protected by a Creative Commons License, with some rights reserved. All trademarks, images and logos remain the property of their respective owners. The accuracy of information on this site is in no way guaranteed. Opinions expressed are solely those of the author. No responsibility can be accepted for any loss or damage caused by reliance on the information provided by this site. This site uses cookies - click here for more information.