GET A LOAD OF THE TROLL AND HIS IGNORANCE!!
I asked for sources and you attacked me ad hominem, one of the fallacies off arguments, rather than give an source. You attacked my auto corrected sentences and claimed they were unintelligent yet you do not know the difference between your and you're, yes you used your correctly first then used it again and I took a picture for you in case you decide to edit it. If your source has so much information then send them to the newspapers and tv stations yourself. Once again I am going to say that I never denied anything happening, I am simply asking you to provide a source for your information that you claim to be the "truth" but I cannot find anywhere but you posting about it. Again, I am not saying that there wasn't anything happening, I am simply stating that you claim to know the truth but instead of doing something about it, like having said person go to the news centres or organizing some type of demonstration, you are simply complaining about it on a blog that has a whopping 3 registered members. If what you are saying is true, then yes you are correct that those charges should be levied against the defendant but until enough evidence is collected they can only charge for what they have evidence for so as to not have to worry about double jeopardy (i.e. OJ Simpson's supposed murder weapon which was apparently kept as a souvenir by an officer). Also, if you respond can you please make the text a different colour? Black on a lighter black is not that easy to read.
1. THANKS FOR THE HEADS UP ON THE COLOR ISSUE.
2. DEMAND ALL YOU WANT, BUT I WILL NEVER REVEAL WHERE I GET MY INFO FROM. IN SHORT, I DON'T HAVE TO GIVE YOU ANY INFO ON MY SOURCES!!
3.TRY ASKING THE PEOPLE AT EDDINGTON. MAYBE YOU'LL LEARN THE TRUTH FOR YOURSELF.
4. SEE THE COURIER TIMES. IT WAS BROUGHT TO THE PRESS, I DON'T DO OTHER PEOPLE'S JOBS FOR THEM. (BTW... WHO SAYS IT HASN'T ALREADY BEEN BROUGHT TO THE PRESS??)
5. AS FOR 'MEMBERS' I DON'T GO BY THAT, BUT BY HOW MANY PEOPLE READ MY BLOG.
6. YOU HAVEN'T ANSWERED MY QUESTIONS, TRY DOING THAT FIRST BEFORE YOU CONTINUE TO ACT IN IGNORANCE.
1) No problem, just figured I wasn't the only one who couldn't read it.
ReplyDelete2) Ok that is a fair enough answer and I can respect that more than attacking me but I wasn't actually demanding I was simply asking.
3) It would yield the same results as you. I just was wondering where you were getting your sources because the original title (Jerry...) seemed to disrespect the victims of that original crime regardless of if it is true because what those young men experienced truly is horrifying. You can compare the two cases all you want but I honestly feel it was just disrespectful to those victims yah know?
4) Valid point but if this issue is true then you should continue to bring the issue into the public forum through other means than a blog if you feel so strongly about it.
5) Also another valid point, it's been a long day and I felt as if you were continuing to give a legitimate answer.
6.1/6.2) Yes I agree I would be very vocal about it but I would not stop at blogging. If the local papers, police, etc. refused to publish it I would be attempting to hold a public rally to demand the town call for other victims.
6.3) I never once said it was unfounded, clearly something happened, as charges have been formally brought to court, but only the parties directly involved know the absolute truth and their uncut stories, non exaggerated or made up are the ones which need to be told.
6.4) Generally if they have enough evidence to bring charges then the preliminary hearing is unnecessary.
6.5) Fear of risking double jeopardy if new evidence ever emerges.