Whiskey Tango Foxtrot?
1 posted on
09/25/2006 7:13:58 PM PDT by
SmithL
To: SmithL
Lying to a Judge is a serious offense, and she should be sanctioned. Hopefully the printouts should suffice.
2 posted on
09/25/2006 7:17:05 PM PDT by
ozoneliar
("The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots & tyrants" -T.J.)
To: SmithL
You can make a mistake in real life. But to make a huge jaw-dropping dumber-than-a-sack-of-rocks mistake, you need government "help".
3 posted on
09/25/2006 7:17:10 PM PDT by
BipolarBob
(I get homesick when I look up in the skies and see my home planet.)
To: SmithL
Throwing away evidence is not conducive to building a strong case.
4 posted on
09/25/2006 7:18:49 PM PDT by
Graybeard58
(Remember and pray for SSgt. Matt Maupin - MIA/POW- Iraq since 04/09/04)
To: SmithL
Incompetent is an understatement for this prosecutor.
5 posted on
09/25/2006 7:19:21 PM PDT by
nmh
(Intelligent people recognize Intelligent Design (God) .)
To: SmithL
6 posted on
09/25/2006 7:20:03 PM PDT by
Ellesu
To: SmithL
Karr can end up a wealthy man, once the lawsuits against the DA's in CA and CO are settled.
Karr may be a creepy little guy, but the incompetence of the DA's in both states has been astounding. Maybe they are trying to replace Nifong of the Duke La Crosse case as the most Keystone-Kop DA's in the Nation.
8 posted on
09/25/2006 7:23:11 PM PDT by
TomGuy
To: SmithL
They should have left him in Thailand. Now he's here, and soon free, and very creepy.
9 posted on
09/25/2006 7:28:28 PM PDT by
Sender
(* Pre-cooked weight. Your mullah may vary.)
To: SmithL
10 posted on
09/25/2006 7:35:06 PM PDT by
Shermy
To: SmithL
This is from AP about August 23rd. : [Five misdemeanor counts of child pornography possession have been pending against Karr in Sonoma County since April 2001, when authorities arrested him and seized his computer, alleging that the hard drive contained five sexually oriented images of children.]
I've been trying to find out what the charges are specifically but this is all I've found. It's pretty ambiguous since "sexually oriented images of children" could be anything from pictures of nude 16 year old girls to pictures of preteen children being raped. I'd believe that it's probably closer to the former considering that each charge is only a misdemeanor. However, if the prosecutor is as incompetent as the McJournalists covering this story then it could be anything.
11 posted on
09/25/2006 7:36:05 PM PDT by
spinestein
(I'm spending this year clinically brain dead......for tax reasons.)
To: SmithL
Whose in charge there, Nifong?
12 posted on
09/25/2006 7:39:34 PM PDT by
OldFriend
(I Pledge Allegiance to the Flag.....and My Heart to the Soldier Who Protects It.)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson