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.
They would be enough if they were true, unfortunately for your argument they are not, unless you can present the cogent argument that up to this point you have been utterly incapable of expressing.
Here we go....
There is a reason she is being indicted. Whether by citizens grand jury or the state...if the system of checks and balances work as they should, then all is well right?
But you were the one who made a hammerfisted statement that she DID NOT withhold evidence...so then wouldn't the burden of proof be on you?
There is a reason she is being indicted. Whether by citizens grand jury or the state...if the system of checks and balances work as they should, then all is well right?
But you were the one who made a hammerfisted statement that she DID NOT withhold evidence...so then wouldn't the burden of proof be on you?
Do you think she withheld evidence? Just for the record, what evidence would that be which you think she withheld???
Actually, the burden of proof would be on the group who made the original charges.
Regardless of the trial verdict, don't her actions somewhat resemble those of disbarred and convicted ex-prosecutor Mike Nifong who rushed to charge those Duke lacrosse players to gain clout for re-election?
No. There was no rush in this case.
Quote:
Originally Posted by whogo
I doubt it is BS. It is just a few idiots calling themselves a grand jury and indicting someone ain't exactly gonna make the news.
Here's the Google search. YOU find a legit. news source in here. I don't even see FOX, The Guardian, or the Daily Mail in here. They all reference a "citizen's jury" as well.
There is a reason she is being indicted. Whether by citizens grand jury or the state...if the system of checks and balances work as they should, then all is well right?
That is so fundamentally stupid. An indictment is a charging bill based upon the presentation of evidence establishing probable cause to proceed to a trial. That is not a freaking "check and balance."
...another graduate of the Orly Taitz School of Internet Law.
That is so fundamentally stupid. An indictment is a charging bill based upon the presentation of evidence establishing probable cause to proceed to a trial. That is not a freaking "check and balance."
...another graduate of the Orly Taitz School of Internet Law.
Assistant State Attorney Bernie de la Rionda declared they turned over "everything we've got" to the defense...
They gave the "data source file" over to the defense but not the internal report. So they have to determine if the data was compromised. How do they do that without the original internal report being handed over at the same time? They have to reference.
So...to answer your question... they ABSOLUTELY have grounds to charge because this is fact. The reasoning for the judge deferring is subjective...and probably justified because maybe there is no fire. But there is definitely smoke.
This isn't just conjecture.
Now, do you want to present an argument that this is bogus? Do you want to present an argument that there is no plausibility in pointing out that there might very well be corruption here??
Or do you want to just continue being a hack?
Last edited by Hot_Handz; 07-04-2013 at 05:59 PM..
Very profound statement. If we didn't go back to the original founding documents I fear this country would break up into shattered fiefdoms ruled by warlords. Not something I wish upon my grandchildren. So I'm sticking with the founding documents.
I'm not of a closed mind sir. I would be most willing to hear your predictions and solutions.
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.
