Bollywood News, Bollywood Movies, Bollywood Chat

India-Forums

   
Bollywood News, Bollywood Movies, Bollywood Chat
Bollywood News, Bollywood Movies, Bollywood Chat

Shame on you Salman Khan, says author Sreemoyee Piu Kundu in her open (Page 35)

atominis IF-Sizzlerz
atominis
atominis

Joined: 24 June 2011
Posts: 18736

Posted: 13 May 2015 at 9:00am | IP Logged
Originally posted by hiddenstar

Originally posted by atominis

Hahaha!

What a joke!

I am a part of all sections. Not just Bolly one.

And I am discussing a case here. As well as manipulations by the influential.

You might not have heard about the writer because you do not follow all news I reckon.

This lady writes for many leading publications such as India Today. I have followed her columns on various issues hence I know about her. I don't just follow celeb gossip you see.

Salman and his friends are a prime example of how the system is manipulated by ones with influence.

<font size="4">And the contention that Salman is "targetted" just because he is a celeb is a JOKE.</font>

But then what else to expect from fanatics?

Billa ji, you can't tell me where to discuss and where not to. You don't own this forum.

Obviously those who disregard facts will call others' words as mere lectures.

This person did not even know about prisoners rotting in jail without even a trial and has the gall to mock me!

Free advice - try to focus on other sections of newspapers too beyond just the entertainment section. It will raise awareness level. And you will have better argument to offer than lame mocking.

I have no need to be frustrated if someone is rich. What a lame argument! And what is there to look as a human? We are discussing a case and a criminal offense here. Human human dialoguebaazi can be limited to films.

I have problem with manipulation of the system by such people.

Only some fan who refuses to look beyond idol worship can come up with a lame argument that others are jealous or frustrated with the wealth of their fav star! Silly
@bold its not a joke ..its the truth .. do u think a case would hav been dragged for 13 yrs and then a verdict wud hav been given where it still hasnt been proved that he the one driving?LOLthe influential as u say had the money to back them up whereas the poor might not .. is it their fault? wouldnt they save their ass if they got the bucks? what do u expect?ConfusedSalman is out on bail for God's sake ... isnt bail a part of the law or what?? how is he abusing law here pray tell? he dint buy the judge or had the verdict in favour of him then what influential manipulation are u talking about ?? yes i dont follow the indian news and that still dint change what i said .. i guess u dint read what i wrote or maybe u dont understandLOLthats not sth i will expect from a established writerLOLGood that u follow all the news and so aware, but mere paas itna time hai nahi to waste it writing essays here to take out my <font size="4">frustration... </font><font size="2">keep ur advice to urself ...if no one owns the forum , no one asked for ur 2 cent worth advice either ...lecture dena ata hai toh lecture sunna bhi seekho .. kisi ka baap ka raj hai nahi yahaLOLin all ur post, the only thing u are continously screaming about is how the rich got away .. what else does it show than ur frustration at the fact that the rich had the wealth to pull it off...LOL</font>


The language! Clap

You think stuff like laws and judiciary are faltu or waste of time?

Fine.

Don't even argue then if you don't know or did not bother to know.

I see what you called as "waste of time".

So many things are clear now, on celebrity culture and the kind of followers certain celebs attract.

It's corruption my dear.

But then if people are proud of it and wear it on their sleeves then what to say?

A big LOL at being frustrated with so called wealth! ROFL

The following 2 member(s) liked the above post:

AnnaElsapallavi25

blue-ice. IF-Addictz
blue-ice.
blue-ice.

Joined: 04 March 2009
Posts: 54326

Posted: 13 May 2015 at 9:11am | IP Logged
Originally posted by pallavi25


Here are the FACTS for people in Denial:
What nailed Salman Khan ...

http://www.ndtv.com/india-news/what-nailed-salman-khan-heres-what-the-judge-observed-761460


Salman could have provided medical help

The accused had knowledge, being a resident of the same locality, that poor labourers used to sleep in front of the bakery. It was also brought on record that the accused is a regular visitor to the Rain Bar. Khan was also having knowledge that one should not drive a vehicle after consuming alcohol.

The accused was also having knowledge that one should not drive a vehicle without licence. Khan, after the accident, did not wait at the spot, and instead of going to the police station for lodging information, he went to his house. Till 10:30 am, the accused did not make himself available at the police station or go to see the injured in the hospital.

The accused is a well-known artiste, it was possible for him to provide medical help to the poor people, but he didn't. For not visiting the police station, (the reason) is that the accused was under the influence of alcohol.

Valet parking attendant saw Salman in the driver's seat

The valet parking man at JW Marriott, Kalpesh, had given the possession of the car to Khan. There is direct evidence of the same witness who saw Salman sitting at the driver's seat and the accused had given a tip of Rs. 500 to him.

According to Special Public Prosecutor (Pradeep) Gharat, a tip is to be given when one leaves from a place. In such a situation, not producing the parking tagand not examining the main person at the valet parking will not be fatal to the case of prosecution.

Tyre didn't burst; accident was caused by rash and negligent driving

The defence put forth by the accused about bursting of the tyre is also ruled out. The accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving while turning the vehicle without taking proper care and attention, having knowledge that the people were sleeping in front of the laundry.

Defence argued that for a distance of 7-8 km, at a speed of 90-100 km/h, very little time would be required (to reach the spot from J W Marriott), but according to the defence, 30 minutes' time was required to reach the spot of the incident.

So, according to defence, the vehicle was not speeding. If really the vehicle was not in speed, bursting of the tyre would not arise, and vehicle could have been stopped on the spot by applying the brakes as the car was having ABS (anti-lock braking system).
It means that the vehicle was in speed and while taking right turn on Hill Road from St Andrews Road, the accused lost control and went straight over the people sleeping in front of the laundry; this amounts to rash and negligent driving.

Khan was not even in a position to think, in order to apply the brakes, and the vehicle climbed the stairs after crushing Nurullah and injuring four persons.

Salman must have been a little tipsy

So it goes to establish that the accused must have been a little tipsy because of the drinks he had consumed some time back. It is indeed extremely difficult to assess or judge when liquor would show its effect or would be at its peak.

The prosecution, saying that Khan was under the influence of alcohol, examined the bar waiter and manager (of Rain Bar) who were giving drinks and snacks at the table (where Salman was seated).

Also, the examination of the chemical analyst said his blood contained 0.62 mg of alcohol. While the defence said that he just had water there. One cannot go to a bar just to drink water.

The actor was driving, not driver Ashok Singh

While concluding, I find that it is established beyond reasonable doubt by the prosecution that the accused was driving the vehicle at the time of the accident.

Therefore, defence of the accused that Ashok Singh was driving is discarded from consideration. Singh is a got-up witness who has come to help the accused on the instruction of Salim Khan, father of Salman Khan.


I think this point is just common sense...why would Salman's Bodyguard...his friend Kamal Khan...not say that the driver was driving...why would they say that Salman was driving...I mean why...why would an employee of Salman lie to save the driver...why would Salman's friend lie to save the driver...Does this thing not boggle anyone...Does common sense not dictate that if it was the driver driving...it would have been an open and shut case?? Why didn't the driver come out at that time and say...I was driving...he comes and gives these statements after 13 years saying that he didn't know that a case was against Salman for 13 years...Do these questions not bother anyone??Confused...

The following 8 member(s) liked the above post:

--Pro.vo.King--AnnaElsaHarveySpecteriSakeenaektarfapyaranitaraniatominispallavi25

slumgod.. IF-Rockerz
slumgod..
slumgod..

Joined: 17 July 2013
Posts: 9715

Posted: 13 May 2015 at 9:16am | IP Logged
Originally posted by blue-ice

Originally posted by pallavi25


Here are the FACTS for people in Denial:
What nailed Salman Khan ...

http://www.ndtv.com/india-news/what-nailed-salman-khan-heres-what-the-judge-observed-761460


Salman could have provided medical help

The accused had knowledge, being a resident of the same locality, that poor labourers used to sleep in front of the bakery. It was also brought on record that the accused is a regular visitor to the Rain Bar. Khan was also having knowledge that one should not drive a vehicle after consuming alcohol.

The accused was also having knowledge that one should not drive a vehicle without licence. Khan, after the accident, did not wait at the spot, and instead of going to the police station for lodging information, he went to his house. Till 10:30 am, the accused did not make himself available at the police station or go to see the injured in the hospital.

The accused is a well-known artiste, it was possible for him to provide medical help to the poor people, but he didn't. For not visiting the police station, (the reason) is that the accused was under the influence of alcohol.

Valet parking attendant saw Salman in the driver's seat

The valet parking man at JW Marriott, Kalpesh, had given the possession of the car to Khan. There is direct evidence of the same witness who saw Salman sitting at the driver's seat and the accused had given a tip of Rs. 500 to him.

According to Special Public Prosecutor (Pradeep) Gharat, a tip is to be given when one leaves from a place. In such a situation, not producing the parking tagand not examining the main person at the valet parking will not be fatal to the case of prosecution.

Tyre didn't burst; accident was caused by rash and negligent driving

The defence put forth by the accused about bursting of the tyre is also ruled out. The accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving while turning the vehicle without taking proper care and attention, having knowledge that the people were sleeping in front of the laundry.

Defence argued that for a distance of 7-8 km, at a speed of 90-100 km/h, very little time would be required (to reach the spot from J W Marriott), but according to the defence, 30 minutes' time was required to reach the spot of the incident.

So, according to defence, the vehicle was not speeding. If really the vehicle was not in speed, bursting of the tyre would not arise, and vehicle could have been stopped on the spot by applying the brakes as the car was having ABS (anti-lock braking system).
It means that the vehicle was in speed and while taking right turn on Hill Road from St Andrews Road, the accused lost control and went straight over the people sleeping in front of the laundry; this amounts to rash and negligent driving.

Khan was not even in a position to think, in order to apply the brakes, and the vehicle climbed the stairs after crushing Nurullah and injuring four persons.

Salman must have been a little tipsy

So it goes to establish that the accused must have been a little tipsy because of the drinks he had consumed some time back. It is indeed extremely difficult to assess or judge when liquor would show its effect or would be at its peak.

The prosecution, saying that Khan was under the influence of alcohol, examined the bar waiter and manager (of Rain Bar) who were giving drinks and snacks at the table (where Salman was seated).

Also, the examination of the chemical analyst said his blood contained 0.62 mg of alcohol. While the defence said that he just had water there. One cannot go to a bar just to drink water.

The actor was driving, not driver Ashok Singh

While concluding, I find that it is established beyond reasonable doubt by the prosecution that the accused was driving the vehicle at the time of the accident.

Therefore, defence of the accused that Ashok Singh was driving is discarded from consideration. Singh is a got-up witness who has come to help the accused on the instruction of Salim Khan, father of Salman Khan.


I think this point is just common sense...why would Salman's Bodyguard...his friend Kamal Khan...not say that the driver was driving...why would they say that Salman was driving...I mean why...why would an employee of Salman lie to save the driver...why would Salman's friend lie to save the driver...Does this thing not boggle anyone...Does common sense not dictate that if it was the driver driving...it would have been an open and shut case?? Why didn't the driver come out at that time and say...I was driving...he comes and gives these statements after 13 years saying that he didn't know that a case was against Salman for 13 years...Do these questions not bother anyone??Confused...
No, it does not bother me as I m blinded by bhai's charity work and charisma.

The following 9 member(s) liked the above post:

--Pro.vo.King--AnnaElsaiSakeenaHarveySpecterektarfapyaranitaraniatominispallavi25blue-ice.

ARK_ Goldie

Joined: 15 April 2015
Posts: 1078

Posted: 13 May 2015 at 9:26am | IP Logged
THE ACCOUNT OF THE MEMBER WHO POSTED THIS MESSAGE HAS BEEN TEMPORARILY BANNED.

If you think this is an error please Contact us.

The following 4 member(s) liked the above post:

--Pro.vo.King--AnnaElsaatominispallavi25

MainePyaarKiya IF-Stunnerz

Joined: 23 December 2011
Posts: 37768

Posted: 13 May 2015 at 9:27am | IP Logged
THE ACCOUNT OF THE MEMBER WHO POSTED THIS MESSAGE HAS BEEN TEMPORARILY BANNED.

If you think this is an error please Contact us.

The following 1 member(s) liked the above post:

Beautyful_Mess

briahna IF-Sizzlerz
briahna
briahna

Joined: 05 August 2012
Posts: 14048

Posted: 13 May 2015 at 9:38am | IP Logged
LOL
i don't know why that Arnab on times now ,didn't  grill bhai's bechaare friends with..
was it charity work or image clean up for your bhai?

The following 4 member(s) liked the above post:

AnnaElsaatominispallavi25blue-ice.

blue-ice. IF-Addictz
blue-ice.
blue-ice.

Joined: 04 March 2009
Posts: 54326

Posted: 13 May 2015 at 9:46am | IP Logged
Originally posted by briahna

LOL
i don't know why that Arnab on times now ,didn't  grill bhai's bechaare friends with..
was it charity work or image clean up for your bhai?

lol Bri...which bechare friends did he call on the show?LOLLOL
hiddenstar IF-Sizzlerz
hiddenstar
hiddenstar

Joined: 28 November 2012
Posts: 21225

Posted: 13 May 2015 at 12:24pm | IP Logged
Originally posted by atominis

Originally posted by hiddenstar

Originally posted by atominis

Hahaha!

What a joke!

I am a part of all sections. Not just Bolly one.

And I am discussing a case here. As well as manipulations by the influential.

You might not have heard about the writer because you do not follow all news I reckon.

This lady writes for many leading publications such as India Today. I have followed her columns on various issues hence I know about her. I don't just follow celeb gossip you see.

Salman and his friends are a prime example of how the system is manipulated by ones with influence.

<font size="4">And the contention that Salman is "targetted" just because he is a celeb is a JOKE.</font>

But then what else to expect from fanatics?

Billa ji, you can't tell me where to discuss and where not to. You don't own this forum.

Obviously those who disregard facts will call others' words as mere lectures.

This person did not even know about prisoners rotting in jail without even a trial and has the gall to mock me!

Free advice - try to focus on other sections of newspapers too beyond just the entertainment section. It will raise awareness level. And you will have better argument to offer than lame mocking.

I have no need to be frustrated if someone is rich. What a lame argument! And what is there to look as a human? We are discussing a case and a criminal offense here. Human human dialoguebaazi can be limited to films.

I have problem with manipulation of the system by such people.

Only some fan who refuses to look beyond idol worship can come up with a lame argument that others are jealous or frustrated with the wealth of their fav star! Silly
@bold its not a joke ..its the truth .. do u think a case would hav been dragged for 13 yrs and then a verdict wud hav been given where it still hasnt been proved that he the one driving?LOLthe influential as u say had the money to back them up whereas the poor might not .. is it their fault? wouldnt they save their ass if they got the bucks? what do u expect?ConfusedSalman is out on bail for God's sake ... isnt bail a part of the law or what?? how is he abusing law here pray tell? he dint buy the judge or had the verdict in favour of him then what influential manipulation are u talking about ?? yes i dont follow the indian news and that still dint change what i said .. i guess u dint read what i wrote or maybe u dont understandLOLthats not sth i will expect from a established writerLOLGood that u follow all the news and so aware, but mere paas itna time hai nahi to waste it writing essays here to take out my <font size="4">frustration... </font><font size="2">keep ur advice to urself ...if no one owns the forum , no one asked for ur 2 cent worth advice either ...lecture dena ata hai toh lecture sunna bhi seekho .. kisi ka baap ka raj hai nahi yahaLOLin all ur post, the only thing u are continously screaming about is how the rich got away .. what else does it show than ur frustration at the fact that the rich had the wealth to pull it off...LOL</font>


The language! Clap

You think stuff like laws and judiciary are faltu or waste of time?

Fine.

Don't even argue then if you don't know or did not bother to know.

I see what you called as "waste of time".

So many things are clear now, on celebrity culture and the kind of followers certain celebs attract.

It's corruption my dear.

But then if people are proud of it and wear it on their sleeves then what to say?

A big LOL at being frustrated with so called wealth! ROFL
jaisi ko taisi milti haiLOL ..someone supporting abuses is out crying over my language ! ROFL what an irony! u are the limit seriously ...oh sweetheart , i know enough for someone like u .. a wanna be socialist on a virtual forumLOL werent u the one asking Billaji not to tell u what to do or not ??LOL then who the hell are u to tell me whether i should argue or not?? amusing u are ! LOL yes its a waste of time for me to be indulging over here doing nothing in real for sth that i m so against forSilly celebrity status not only attract followers but vultures as well for ur kind infoLOL all over u are just busy dissing celebs and their followers and commenting on how we are this and that .. LOL @bold laughing still wont hide the truthROFL waise laughter is good for health :) u do need to lighten up a bit LOL

Go to top

Related Topics

  Topics Author Replies Views Last Post
Your dressing says a lot, says Alia Bhatt

Author: touch_of_pink   Replies: 2   Views: 710

touch_of_pink 2 710 17 April 2015 at 10:38am by SaMaiRa.
Salman Khan, Shah Rukh Khan, and Aamir Khan to share stage with Rajat

2 3

Author: nana5   Replies: 16   Views: 4340

nana5 16 4340 16 February 2015 at 11:22pm by swap22
Salman Khan is real No 1, Shahrukh Khan very charming: Aamir Khan

Author: Javed__   Replies: 9   Views: 5171

Javed__ 9 5171 14 December 2013 at 8:01am by atominis
The USP of Dabangg 2 is Salman, Salman, Salman

Author: Athene   Replies: 6   Views: 2556

Athene 6 2556 03 December 2012 at 12:19am by sweet_angel27
Khan v/s Khan v/s Khan this October

Author: sweet_angel27   Replies: 3   Views: 6311

sweet_angel27 3 6311 21 March 2008 at 8:29pm by BengaliChica92

Forum Quick Jump

Forum Category / Channels
Forums

Bollywood News, Bollywood Movies, Bollywood Chat Topic Index

Disclaimer: All Logos and Pictures of various Channels, Shows, Artistes, Media Houses, Companies, Brands etc. belong to their respective owners, and are used to merely visually identify the Channels, Shows, Companies, Brands, etc. to the viewer. Incase of any issue please contact the webmaster.

Popular Channels :
Star Plus | Zee TV | Sony TV | Colors TV | SAB TV | Life OK

Quick Links :
Top 100 TV Celebrities | Top 100 Bollywood Celebs | About Us | Contact Us | Advertise | Forum Index