07-07-2009, 09:32 AM
Yes, I do.
I know that they couldn't find sufficient evidence to convict anyone in a court of law, in 7 years, from Guantanamo Bay, in spite of the fact that it would have been politically expedient. In spite of the fact of electrolytic torture and waterboarded testimony. This is first hand evidence. I know this, as well as you.
This I also know, first hand. Michael Jackson, busted 3 times in his candy colored bedroom, playing hide the pickle, innocently, of course, acquitted, go figure. Still, paying 20 million dollars of settlement money, hours of testimony, much of which lurid, on the other hand. Publically accessible. I've also worked in the justice system with these kinds of cases and there is simply no way the state would even consider bringing charges against such a high profile offender without overwhelming evidence. It's bad enough to charge some dude in a trailer park who hasn't any money to defend himself. These cases are always very subjective and complicated. The fact that the case wasn't thrown out of court is evidence in itself. I know this, as well as you.
Both of these observations are evidence enough for me.
That's good enough for this member of the jury.
Lesson to be learned. If you want to diddle kids, be sure you can dance. If you want to kill people in hate crimes, and NOT be labeled a terrorist, or an enemy combatant, or whatever, have a christian evangelical background.
I know that they couldn't find sufficient evidence to convict anyone in a court of law, in 7 years, from Guantanamo Bay, in spite of the fact that it would have been politically expedient. In spite of the fact of electrolytic torture and waterboarded testimony. This is first hand evidence. I know this, as well as you.
This I also know, first hand. Michael Jackson, busted 3 times in his candy colored bedroom, playing hide the pickle, innocently, of course, acquitted, go figure. Still, paying 20 million dollars of settlement money, hours of testimony, much of which lurid, on the other hand. Publically accessible. I've also worked in the justice system with these kinds of cases and there is simply no way the state would even consider bringing charges against such a high profile offender without overwhelming evidence. It's bad enough to charge some dude in a trailer park who hasn't any money to defend himself. These cases are always very subjective and complicated. The fact that the case wasn't thrown out of court is evidence in itself. I know this, as well as you.
Both of these observations are evidence enough for me.
That's good enough for this member of the jury.
Lesson to be learned. If you want to diddle kids, be sure you can dance. If you want to kill people in hate crimes, and NOT be labeled a terrorist, or an enemy combatant, or whatever, have a christian evangelical background.