News24, very credible. 
As has been stated I don't care who or what he is. It's purely about the incident. Seems Spur can't get enough business from the black side so they're now turning back to their once loyal white side. Either way won't be supporting them any more.

But you are so caught up in your own issues you actually can't see that. It is clear you haven't worked through them yet. That may be valid but it's also not ok to behave the way you are towards others. Some people also just use what happened to them as a crutch to get away with how they really are.
Humans are also incredibly biased and capable of making incorrect conclusions. It's a well known scientific fact we act on emotions first and then look for evidence to support our conclusions. That is why we have a system of judges who look at facts first. They make incorrect decisions as well sometimes because they don't have all the relevant facts but the general public who don't even have access to those facts make incorrect decisions more often than not. I am so glad I am not living in your system of "justice."
And another thing, Jacob Zuma wasn't tried and found not guilty. He was tried indirectly once and found to have taken tax payer funds. That is corruption so get you facts right please.

As has been stated I don't care who or what he is. It's purely about the incident. Seems Spur can't get enough business from the black side so they're now turning back to their once loyal white side. Either way won't be supporting them any more.
Based purely on previous behavior?Not that I disagree with you, but we've seen many instances of people being deemed the guilty party in one instance because of previous behaviour.
Who showed remarkable self-restraint with someone egging him on.yes, let's do that, whilst considering that the guy has anger issues and is a women beater
End of the day both acted as idiots.Sticks and stones.. I wonder how many people calling for her banning are also the sort of people who complain about safe spaces and triggering.
And if you are going down that route he was also guilty of verbal abuse (as well as physical), end of the day what he did was a lot more worthy of a ban
Yes, we already know you can't be objective because of personal issues.everyone, you can now stop defending this twatnoodle.
he beat his wife, he deserves more than getting banned from spur, and he does not deserve your keyboard warrior aggression.
he is scum, and regardless if he was right or wrong if the ban was the right thing or not, he does not deserve any attention.
and just to make it clear, imho, if you defend him, you defend wife beating, an act of complete cowardase done only by spineless wurms who do not deserve being called human never mind being called a man. (I feel like this about any spousal abuse for the record)
Take you issues elsewhere, I don't care about them. It's people like you who make life difficult for others that are pretty good people and don't deserve it. It's why real victims don't get attention. And few people are defending him here but we are all saying the the same thing you are, that she should get banned as well.let me spell it out for you.
he beats his wife.
he is a POS.
he has anger issues.
because we know he has anger issues, we can safely say he did not handle the situation correctly. so there is no valid reason to defend him.
and I say again, you defend him, you are pro spousal abuse, you are then also a POS, and you are also too small minded to realise it.
I want to also state, that by no means was the women in spur in the right here, she also handled the entire thing incorrectly and she should at the very least ALSO be banned.
but there is no way you can defend this twatnoodle with a clear conscience.
But you are so caught up in your own issues you actually can't see that. It is clear you haven't worked through them yet. That may be valid but it's also not ok to behave the way you are towards others. Some people also just use what happened to them as a crutch to get away with how they really are.
So if I make 4 cases of rape against you and withdraw them am I also a victim or is this just valid against men you believe to be POSes? He may or may not be one, but the extremist reaction you are having here also makes you one.4 cases withdrawn by the victim, including the public assult charge.
he is not innocent, and it is clear as day. go watch the wife's reaction, she is a beaten women, and you can see it from a mile away.
We aren't the ones making up stuff. Woman ducking - not on the video. Man attacking a woman - not on the video. Man flipping over a table - not on the video. You are so caught up in your own "social justice" you can't see facts any more.Okay so I'm going to explain something to you, try and keep up okay.
You see us human beings, what we do is we are capable of taking numerous pieces of data or information, what we then do is we analyse this information, not in isolation but when there is certain evidence directly relating to an incident, we do not discount this. Four cases of assault? Four? So you reckon nothing to be made of that? Okay..
Next captured video evidence of him acting violently to a child, threatening a woman half his size (repeated threats) and then making kids at a table cry because he violently lifted their table.
Still nothing there? Okay, if you say so lol.
Another thing, Jacob Zuma.. not a single conviction for corruption. Not corrupt? By your logic, he's not corrupt at all. We all know better though right?
Humans are also incredibly biased and capable of making incorrect conclusions. It's a well known scientific fact we act on emotions first and then look for evidence to support our conclusions. That is why we have a system of judges who look at facts first. They make incorrect decisions as well sometimes because they don't have all the relevant facts but the general public who don't even have access to those facts make incorrect decisions more often than not. I am so glad I am not living in your system of "justice."
And another thing, Jacob Zuma wasn't tried and found not guilty. He was tried indirectly once and found to have taken tax payer funds. That is corruption so get you facts right please.
No you are trying to make 1+1=3. He was tried on 1 and found not guilty on 1. We don't know if he would have been found guilty of any of the other 4 if true. You're assuming yes while it could also be no. Thanks for showing us your extremism again.no, he was found not guilty on one charge, but all the others were withdrawn by the victim. this includes the case of beating her in public.
there is nothing here that fits my narrative, its just a simple 1+1 = 2 situation.
he beats his wife, so he has anger problems, so he made a bigger deal out of a situation than it needed to be, but due to the first thing, he should still be dragged into the streets and have his arms cut off, but that is my opinion.
It does matter. If they got it illegally there's no way to verify if it's correct or even true.Stop being an idiot. It's like you got diarthoea of the mouth. Librarian asked if news24 got that legally and I said it doesn't matter. It's fact as it will be on his criminal record showing that he has been arrested all those times.
No it's 136 with your post.The tread is only up to page 51...![]()