Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
It's incredible the justifications spewing out. It's one thing to say you think the women aren't credible. It's quite another to say that if it did happen, it isn't a big deal because:
Pick Your Repugnant Rationale
She was old enough
She lured him on
She liked the attention
That age difference is common in Alabama
Jesus and Mary were the same ages
She didn't go to the cops, so she liked it.
The Moore allegations are disturbing enough, the defense, however, is vomitous.
Are you another person who believes in punishment without any evidence?
But he did also serve alcohol to an underage woman in one of the other cases. That too, is breaking the law.
No he didn't. They were in a 'dry' county. Do you know what that means? The WashingPoo didn't. That's what happens when they fire older, experienced reporters and hire cheaper young, new grads.
Besides, all of this is way beyond the statute of limitations so a rather pointless exercise. Typical Dem politics of personal destruction that they are famous for. (yawn)
I was speaking in generalities. As I have already said multiple times, due to the statute of limitations expiring, it is now impossible to put Moore in jail. Needless to say, just because the statute of limitations has expired doesn't somehow make him innocent. It's just that he can no longer be served charges and tried.
Your belief that we should imprison people without evidence is good enough.
According to your beliefs, a murderer cannot be sent to prison if they don't happen to find a body.
So, now you're just going to make things up?
Ok. Make up as much as you'd like, but since it comes from a person who would sent people to prison with no evidence, it won't carry weight with any sensible person.
It was a QUESTION to see if you shared the same beliefs as James Bond 007.
Easy Francis.
To even have a conversation about a criminal trial is an exercise in futility. The statue of limitations has long passed.
Now if this was a recent allegation, say two years ago and the alleged victim is now 16, it would be incumbent upon the detectives to gather evidence and the prosecutor to present that evidence in a compelling manner to a jury, even if that evidence only consists of the alleged victims testimony. The truth usually comes out one way or another when there is a threat of a perjury indictment. And if I were prosecuting such a case I would put the defendant on the stand and grill him like Tom Cruise.
But to be very clear, if this happened to any of my children, and the sicko got off, he'd never walk again. And I'd happily do the time.
Ok. Make up as much as you'd like, but since it comes from a person who would sent people to prison with no evidence, it won't carry weight with any sensible person.
No, I'm not making things up. That's the logical conclusion of your reasoning. No evidence = no conviction. And the lack of a body in a murder would be a lack of evidence. So all murderers who happen to do a really good job of disposing of a body must be set free.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
