Well done with Woody Allen & Roman Polanski. Now go burn your Michael Jackson albums

vienna · 03-10-20, 11:05 AM

Cool your jets, Skybird. As often happens with you, you are arguing against something that wasn't said, just what you want argue...

At no point in my post did I say wealth automatically makes one guilty, in a court of law, nor did I even infer such. In the US, a verdict of "not guilty' is not necessarily a finding of actual innocence, merely that the prosecution has not sufficiently presented its case so as to warrant a finding of "guilty". There are a lot of cases, many more than should probably be, where a defendant is blatantly guilty, but is found not guilty by a technicality of law, malfeasance of the court and/or court officers, or some other factor not related to the defendant's actual guilt...

The next time you want to argue your point(s) effectively, it is probably best to not try to do what you have, in the past, objected to so strenuously and accused others of doing to you: putting words in other people's mouths. My post stands as it was written and intended and your response has nothing to do with that content and intent; it appears you had no place to argue your point, so you made up 'fake content' as an excuse for your argument. Cowboy up and make your own arguments without the cheap crutch of trying to force perceptions of others' post that don't actually exist...

Ta...

<O>

03-10-20, 11:05 AM	#7
vienna Navy Seal Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: Anywhere but the here & now... Posts: 7,711 Downloads: 85 Uploads: 0	Cool your jets, Skybird. As often happens with you, you are arguing against something that wasn't said, just what you want argue... At no point in my post did I say wealth automatically makes one guilty, in a court of law, nor did I even infer such. In the US, a verdict of "not guilty' is not necessarily a finding of actual innocence, merely that the prosecution has not sufficiently presented its case so as to warrant a finding of "guilty". There are a lot of cases, many more than should probably be, where a defendant is blatantly guilty, but is found not guilty by a technicality of law, malfeasance of the court and/or court officers, or some other factor not related to the defendant's actual guilt... The next time you want to argue your point(s) effectively, it is probably best to not try to do what you have, in the past, objected to so strenuously and accused others of doing to you: putting words in other people's mouths. My post stands as it was written and intended and your response has nothing to do with that content and intent; it appears you had no place to argue your point, so you made up 'fake content' as an excuse for your argument. Cowboy up and make your own arguments without the cheap crutch of trying to force perceptions of others' post that don't actually exist... Ta... <O> __________________ __________________________________________________ __