web analytics

Barrister Rebecca Butler cross examines David Vance in the wake of the Twitter furore over his Marcus Rashford tweets.

By Patrick Van Roy On September 9th, 2020

16 Responses to “Barrister Rebecca Butler cross examines David Vance in the wake of the Twitter furore over his Marcus Rashford tweets.”

  1. David has now hidden his tweets from the public unless you are an “approved follower”

    https://twitter.com/DVATW
    These Tweets are protected
    Only approved followers can see @DVATW’s Tweets. To request access, click Follow

  2. I saw thw Tweet. David answered Rashford by stating something along the lines of,

    ‘Black men have a history of leaving their pregnent partners, never to be seen again. In order to understand your comment can you confirm If you’ve ever met your father?’

    Pretty disgusting, IMO.

  3. I am part way through listening to this video so haven’t got to the but where the tweets were discussed, so can’t see what prompted David to make that remark. If it was based on a similar personal insult made towards him it might mitigate the comment, otherwise I agree it seems quite indefensible. I will reserve my judgement until I have completed listening to ‘the trial of David Vance’

  4. I don’t know what the context of the comment was as I only saw a screenshot of the comment itself.

  5. The tweet was in response to an emotional statement Rashford made about his experience as a child watching his mother struggling to pay to feed her family. He didn’t mention his father hence David’s tweet. David could have and should have posed his question more diplomatically and without mentioning race. A simple “ were you brought up in a single parent household ?” Would have sufficed.

  6. The Tweet appears to be racist, and the fact that a report from 2007 was cited, with a vague assurance that more up to date evidence existed (but wasn’t produced), didn’t really help.

  7. A cursory Google search states that Rashford’s father acts as his agent. On the face of it the tweet above seems to be a bit of a trope.

  8. Twitter has suspended David’s account.

  9. So we will have to head over to Parler or Gab to see what gems of wisdom David is bestowing upon the masses.

  10. Beware Parler.

    They have an exceptionally strange and user-unfriendly feature.

    If they ( not you ) are sued because of something that you write on parler, you must reimburse them for their legal costs and / or for their liability. facebook and twitter don’t have that requirement.

    You’re a fool to engage in robust comment on a platform like that.

  11. “If they ( not you ) are sued because of something that you write on parler, you must reimburse them for their legal costs and / or for their liability. facebook and twitter don’t have that requirement.”

    Wait, are you saying that I should have actually read their terms and conditions before signing up for them?

  12. You may find this to be of interest.

    14. You agree to defend and indemnify Parler, as well as any of its officers, directors, employees, and agents, from and against any and all claims, actions, damages, obligations, losses, liabilities, costs or debt, and expenses (including but not limited to all attorneys fees) arising from or relating to your access to and use of the Services. Parler will have the right to conduct its own defense, at your expense, in any action or proceeding covered by this indemnity.

    Few people read those long legal agreements, but someone did.

  13. Is that clause legally sound ?

  14. It probably is, as companies enter into such ” hold harmless ” agreements among each other all the time.

    But they’d be sophisticated companies all with lawyers who knew what the deals are.

    Perhaps this one-sided contract can be challenged on the grounds that a corporation is exploiting members of the general public who clearly would have no idea what they were agreeing to.

  15. This provision is so nutty I almost posted on it a few weeks ago.

    They’ve been pumping this site on Fox News a bit, but they never mention that clause.

    Alright, who here is on parler?

    https://thedonald.win/p/FzYgtBq8/whoaparler-has-basically-a-rever/

  16. I’m on twitter that’s it and all I use it for really is a temperature gauge more than anything other than pumping out our own stuff and a selection of about 6-10 articles that I’ve read with coffee.

    I follow key players and publications on both sides of the spectrum here and the major world feeds. If you sit back and watch the feeds and the chatter you can easily see the patterns unfold throughout the day. It’s a pulse check nothing more whatever the position, issue, comment, etc that is each days bit of minutia being picked over you can get a feel for each side of the script.

    I never engage with anyone on a one to one on any side, too many kooks of every faction.