|
|
"Larry" <larry@x.com> wrote
>
>> If we're not relying on
>> demeanor, then why present it, as they did at the end?
>
> No one presents demeanor. It's just there.
The problem I see is that it seems impossible to separate demeanor from the
cont
|
|
|
Chris wrote:
> We live near an old air force base that was closed in the '60s and one
> night, my son with some friends decided to explore some of the
> abandoned buildings in search for answers to some of the questions he
> and his friends have had f
|
|
|
Theodore A. Kaldis wrote:
> Kent Wills wrote:
>
> > Theodore A. Kaldis wrote:
> > > solar wrote:
> > > > Tobin wrote
> > > > > Kent Wills wrote:
>
> > > > > > Ken's on vacation right now, and no, I won't tell you where.
>
> > > > > Inpatient psy
|
|
|
On Sat, 04 Jun 2005 09:36:33 -0700, "Theodore A. Kaldis"
<kaldis@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>Kent Wills wrote:
>
>> Theodore A. Kaldis wrote:
>>> Kent Wills wrote:
>>>> Jon Beaver wrote:
>
>>>>>> I liked it. Of course, I'm sure you noted when I s
|
|
|
On Sat, 04 Jun 2005 09:52:49 -0700, "Theodore A. Kaldis"
<kaldis@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>solar wrote:
>
>> Tobin wrote
>>> Kent Wills wrote:
>
>>>> Ken's on vacation right now, and no, I won't tell you where.
>
>>> Inpatient psychological cou
|
|
|
On Thu, 2 Jun 2005 08:54:39 -0600, " \"- Prof. Jonez©\""
<jonez@norcom.ca> wrote:
}Phil Allison wrote:
}> <moanin@hotmail.com
}> >
}> > How big is 4 kilo of cannabis.
}>
}>
}> ** In this case it was a bag the size of a smallish bed pillow.
}>
|
|
|
In article <v1koe.8786$Cz3.1074831@monger.newsread.com>,
"Mike" <no.spam@please.com> wrote:
> "Larry" <larry@x.com> wrote in message
> news:larry-106A5E.10572104062005@news1.east.earthlink.net...
> > In article <S%ioe.8776$Cz3.1073300@monger.newsr
|
|
|
"Larry" <larry@x.com> wrote in message
news:larry-106A5E.10572104062005@news1.east.earthlink.net...
> In article <S%ioe.8776$Cz3.1073300@monger.newsread.com>,
> "Mike" <no.spam@please.com> wrote:
>
>> "Gordon Burditt" <gordonb.upx0w@burditt.org> w
|
|
|
"Larry" <larry@x.com> wrote
>> >No one needs to commit perjury for the jury to decide what they believe
>> >to be proven to them.
>>
>> Truce over. Now for another 5000 posts where these two guys (and JB)
>> repeat themselves.
>
> Not from m
|
|
|
Kent Wills wrote:
> [continues to beat a dead horse]
Time to cut your losses. Admit it, you f***ed up. Get over it and move on.
--
Theodore A. Kaldis
kaldis@worldnet.att.net
|
|
|
In article <mrg3a1pu8omtac9kmcrr12i9gtg7nsuvku@4ax.com>,
RHR <RHR@nospammy.com> wrote:
> On Sat, 04 Jun 2005 14:57:22 GMT, Larry <larry@x.com> wrote:
>
> >> Legally, at the present time, you are correct. The state does allow
> >> conviction on o
|
|
|
In article <S%ioe.8776$Cz3.1073300@monger.newsread.com>,
"Mike" <no.spam@please.com> wrote:
> "Gordon Burditt" <gordonb.upx0w@burditt.org> wrote in message
> news:11a28ldiqaqgm99@corp.supernews.com...
> > >The case is just one person's word for it
|
|
|
"Gordon Burditt" <gordonb.upx0w@burditt.org> wrote in message
news:11a28ldiqaqgm99@corp.supernews.com...
> >The case is just one person's word for it.
>
> Which is more than sufficient for conviction.
>
> If the case has N charges of <X>, and you
|
|
|
On Sat, 04 Jun 2005 14:36:34 GMT, "Mike" <no.spam@please.com> wrote:
>Taking
>someone's word as proof at trial for the charges derived from that same
>person's word is an obvious logical error; it's called begging the question
>or petitio princip
|
|
|
On Fri, 03 Jun 2005 21:20:55 -0700, "Theodore A. Kaldis"
<kaldis@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>Kent Wills wrote:
>
>> Jon Beaver wrote:
>
>>>> I liked it. Of course, I'm sure you noted when I stated to MeowMeow, "If
>>>> you're me, then who is Jon?"
|
|
|
We live near an old air force base that was closed in the '60s and one
night, my son with some friends decided to explore some of the
abandoned buildings in search for answers to some of the questions he
and his friends have had for years (underground
|
|
|
Kent Wills wrote:
> Theodore A. Kaldis wrote:
>> solar wrote:
>>> Tobin wrote
>>>> Kent Wills wrote:
>>>>> Ken's on vacation right now, and no, I won't tell you where.
>>>> Inpatient psychological counseling, I think they call it.
>>> Welll
|
|
|
On Sat, 04 Jun 2005 14:57:22 GMT, Larry <larry@x.com> wrote:
>> Legally, at the present time, you are correct. The state does allow
>> conviction on only one person's word. But that is no argument that they
>> should convict. Morally and logically,
|
|
|
http://news.moneycentral.msn.com/provider/providerarticle.asp?feed=FT&Date=20050604&ID=4866740
In a note to Judge Bowdre, the jurors said: "We regret to inform the
court that after many days of deliberating we are unable to reach a
verdict of either
|
|
|
solar wrote:
> Jon Beaver wrote
>> But nobody has to think hes a nice person and nobody has to think hes
>> sane.
> Another Beaver classic.
And when he's talking about Ken Smith, he's right.
--
Theodore A. Kaldis
kaldis@worldnet.att.net
|
|
|
solar wrote:
> Tobin wrote
>> Kent Wills wrote:
>>> Ken's on vacation right now, and no, I won't tell you where.
>> Inpatient psychological counseling, I think they call it.
> Wellllllllllll, could be worse; he could be calling himself "MeowM
|
|
|
Kent Wills wrote:
> Theodore A. Kaldis wrote:
>> Kent Wills wrote:
>>> Jon Beaver wrote:
>>>>> I liked it. Of course, I'm sure you noted when I stated to MeowMeow,
>>>>> "If you're me, then who is Jon?". You weren't all that well hidden.
>>>
|
|
|
Jonny "Meow" Beaver wrote
>"But nobody has to think hes a nice person and nobody has to think hes sane."
Another Beaver classic.
-----------
have a GREAT day !!!!!!!
Solar
|
|
|
MeowMeow wrote
>"And its up to each individual like be and the judges adn teh bar committe what is fact and what is only insane hounding."
And the winner of the Larry Glasser Spelling Bee is..... JON BEEEEAVER
!!!!!!
---------
have a GREAT da
|
|
|
Tobin wrote
>Ken's on vacation right now, and no, I won't tell you where.
">Inpatient psychological counseling, I think they call it."
Wellllllllllll, could be worse; he could be calling himself "MeowMeow"
OR have recently lost a 995 motion....
|
|
|
Jon "Meowzers" Beaver wrote
>"I thought not. I didn't do anything but post from a different news reader on the same computer."
Thanks for sharing.
>"Acting dumb was the easy part."
Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight.
So.... are the voices in your head
|
|
|
Prof. Jonez wrote
>"That your stinky sock, eh Jon?"
So, Jon Beaver is revealed to be a lil pussy .... whattashock <g>
---------
have a GREAT day !!!!!!
Solar
|
|
|
|
|
|
"Mike" <no.spam@please.com> wrote:
<snip - molester-enabler/sob-sister - crap>
Michelle, you need to pop a midol, sip on a 40, and lay down
for a while.
Girl, you be making yo-self look all foolish and #@($.
|
|
|
>The case is just one person's word for it.
Which is more than sufficient for conviction.
If the case has N charges of <X>, and you provide N witnesses each
testifying about incidents relating to only one charge, and most
of them are believable,
|
|
|
The case is just one person's word for it. There is not one other person to
corroborate the testimony of another concerning each of the alleged separate
acts. And the things stated could have been read in one of the prior tell
all books on the marke
|
|
|
On Fri, 03 Jun 2005 14:48:57 -0700, Jon Beaver <jbeaver@NO.com> wrote:
>> I liked it. Of course, I'm sure you noted when I stated to
>>MeowMeow, "If you're me, then who is Jon?".
>> You weren't all that well hidden.
>
>I thought not. I didn't do
|
|
|
>Yes, but there have to be rules about what is allowed as evidence
Evidence or the lack of it, is the element which determines justice or
even rough justice. It is not about the truth nor is it to do with any
strict sense of fact. As the law turns on
|
|
