Richard Dunn

[Cressy Snr]

[Cressy Snr]

[Cressy Snr]

[I love prog]

[Cressy Snr]

such fun, but ultimately it is pointless.
I've better things to do than trade tumbleweeds with you clowns.
That's the last from me on this thread

[I love prog]

Well you fukin started it cock breath.

[Cressy Snr]

Bye bye Rudi/Jammy.
What a fukin pair of tossers you really are

Steeeeeeerike one!

Another two and I can ban myself

[I love prog]

As Dunnie says this ain't HFS (yet).

Fekin Eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeediot.

Gosh that's a lot of e's.

[Nick]

Gone

[Dr Bunsen Honeydew]

[Dr Bunsen Honeydew]

They are now doing the same thing at HFS. But we have ways of seeing who they are on joining so two removed already.

[Vlad_Dracul]

Well Mr Dunn, since you do not have the backbone to address the points made by the previous respondant , Whome I presume is now banned I thought that I would take you back to a late evening , whilst I was still a member of your forum, when you entirely lost your grip on reality, having in YOUR mind finally found the silver bullet to slay your arch enemy Marco.

I attempted , in vain, to politely explain why you were incorrect whilst also attempting to prevent you making a complete Arse of yourself and of wasting valuable Police time on your Psychosis induced report of a Non existent Crime.

My thanks for this being subject to your ravings and convoluted ad hominem crap merely to shut me up as I was spoiling your moment of self deluded triumph.
And NO, before you or one of your imported familiars goes squealing to Nick I am not a member of AOS or S Oil Audio, as one of your own forum members rightly comments.



‪Re: Richard Dunn - what a nice handsome young man‬
* Quote

Unread post
by ‪antonio66‬ » Thu Aug 17, 2017 12:01 pm
What's this then, an arse licking thread?

if only his persona on the internet portrayed his true personality he would certainly not have had the shit thrown at him as has been the case. On more than a couple of occasions, in my opinion, he has unnecessarily jumped in with both guns blazing. The reason could have been a misunderstanding of the post replied to, but it would have been a good idea to count to 10 before posting. I would like to thank him for making great hifi and for enabling me to see some of the bullshit that goes on in the industry and forums







Entirely the opposite as I seem to have a sounder grasp of Uk law than yourself Doc.

Yes it is illegal to threaten under several pieces of legislation depending upon the severity and circumstance.

Unfortunately in this particular circumstance we are presented with two immutable facts that would negate any investigation by the Police.

1. In order to satisfy the very basic tenant of Uk legislation WE HAVE TO HAVE A VICTIM , thus far has not made any direct or even thinly disguised threats against any person recognisable as such by name or inference. we do not have a victim.


2. In order to satisfy the second main tenant
1. Entirely the opposite as I seem to have a sounder grasp of Uk law than yourself Doc.

Yes it is illegal to threaten under several pieces of legislation depending upon the severity and circumstance.

Unfortunately in this particular circumstance we are presented with two immutable facts that would negate any investigation by the Police.

A. In order to satisfy the very basic tenant of Uk legislation WE HAVE TO HAVE A VICTIM , thus far has not made any direct or even thinly disguised threats against any person recognisable as such by name or inference. we do not have a victim.

B. In order to satisfy the second main tenant
1. The victim has to genuinely believes and is in fear that such a threat of violence will be carried out, and
2. That the suspect is in fact capable of physically carrying out the action within that threat.

In this case 2 is negated by the fact we do not have 1.

Even were 1 to exist and he were in possession of an IP address for that person, it would require either a Court Order, or a request arising from an official Police investigation in order to acquire an actual address from The relevant internet provider which he DOES NOT HAVE ergo without the means to locate that person we have 2 part 2.

3. Unlike his previous unequivocal threats he can contextualised what he states he would do in terms of the story of the boxer who turned up at some guys door, didn't say anything , no threats were made he merely stood in the doorway.
Of course this can be construed as an act of menace however this is such a gray line that were the police to be called that would undoubtedly conclude that no actionable offence had taken place take his detail tell the boxer to piss off and log it as merely a disturbance. MarcO is claiming that Is exactly what he would do.

He claims that he has access to firearms as outlined by a previous respondant. We all know he is more than likely trying to sound like Jason Bourne and is bullshit, even if true and he does know someone in possession of firearms if they are legal and used within the terms of the firearms cert most likely at an authorised range then Pieraccini does not need his own license to use those weapons under supervision, Unfortunatly he did not intimate anything criminal in what he wrote.

How do you know they are illegally held ? the access he refers to was not placed within my specific context or use other than the reference made by Haslegh1 and that pile of shite comment was made as one of self defence within his own home were presumably he has a n authorised firearm locker and certificate.

Doc, I think you need to chill and read up a little on this before advising me to "pack it in,"
i would love to see Pieraccini finally cross the line enough to recieve his comeuppance, unfortunately In this instance all we have IMHO is a Fantasist attempting a pathetic strategy to shut someone up and playing to his adoring crowd.

If I am wrong and your reporting him does have legs and bare fruit I should be more than happy to fly into London and buy you a very fine meal.The victim has to genuinely believes and is in fear that such a threat of violence will be carried out, and
2. That the suspect is in fact capable of physically carrying out the action within that threat.

In this case 2 is negated by the fact we do not have 1.

Even were 1 to exist and Marco. was in possession of an IP address for that person, it would require either a Court Order, or a request arising from an official Police investigation in order to acquire an actual address from The relevant internet provider which he DOES NOT HAVE ergo without the means to locate that person we have 2 part 2.

3. Unlike his previous unequivocal threats he can contextualised what he states he would do in terms of the story of the boxer who turned up at some guys door, didn't say anything , no threats were made he merely stood in the doorway.
Of course this can be construed as an act of menace however as there is no legislation in place to cover such a gray area were the police to be called they would undoubtedly conclude that no actionable offence had taken place, take relevant details and tell the boxer to piss off , logging it as merely a disturbance. MarcO is claiming that Is exactly what he would do.

2. He claims that he has access to firearms as outlined by a previous respondant. We all know he is more than likely trying to sound like Jason Bourne and is bullshit, even if true and he does know someone in possession of firearms if they are legal and used within the terms of the firearms cert most likely at an authorised range then Pieraccini does not need his own license to use those weapons under supervision, Unfortunatly he did not intimate anything criminal in what he wrote.

1. How do you know they are illegally held ?

2. the access he refers to was not placed within my specific context or use other than the reference made by Haslegh1, and even that pile of shite bullshit comment was made as one of self defence within his own home were presumably he has an authorised firearm locker and certificate.

Doc, I think you need to chill and read up a little on this before advising me to "pack it in,"

I am aware that you would love to see Pieraccini finally cross the line enough to recieve his comeuppance, unfortunately In this instance all we have IMHO is a Fantasist attempting a pathetic strategy to shut someone up and playing to his adoring crowd.

If I am wrong and your reporting him does have legs and bare fruit I should be more than happy to fly into London and buy you a very fine meal.



ADMIN EDIT - you had ad hominem removed which gave you a strike. By editing and removing that admin edit, you now have 2nd and 3rd strike so are now on the naughty step. Normally interfering with admin posts means removal from the forum,

[shane]

the previous respondant , Whome I presume is now banned

It would appear the your grasp of the English language is almost as tenuous as your grasp of reality. Perhaps you view them committing of grammatical errors as an art form. To get so many into single simple phrase is a significant achievement.

[pre65]

I lost the will to live before I'd got a quarter way through Vlad's post.

[Nick]

This is fun, like Whac-A-Mole except these moles have less intelligence than the normal plastic puppets.