Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: nickcarraway

It is no ones business but hers and his... and she is dead by the hands of someone else... and this man’s life was ruined because of it. Whether he slept with her or not, is not relevant in any way.

LLS


4 posted on 11/01/2010 2:11:33 PM PDT by LibLieSlayer (WOLVERINES!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: LibLieSlayer

I agree.


6 posted on 11/01/2010 2:13:25 PM PDT by MissMagnolia (Obad. 1:15: As you have done, it will be done to you; your deeds will return upon your own head.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies ]

To: LibLieSlayer

What if he did have something to do with it? No big deal, right?


7 posted on 11/01/2010 2:14:58 PM PDT by nickcarraway
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies ]

To: LibLieSlayer

While it may or may not have been relevant, he was there under oath and it should have been up to the judge to decide what he has to answer and to compel him if he refused.

I assume the defense wanted to imply he could have had a motive to be the killer? In any event, in effect he answered the question. It wouldn’t be difficult to say “no”.


8 posted on 11/01/2010 2:15:47 PM PDT by Williams (It's the policies, stupid.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies ]

To: LibLieSlayer; ridesthemiles; MissMagnolia

You make not like the U.S. justice system, but it has a little thing called presumption of innocence. The accused has the right to present alternate theories of the crime. In this crime, per Occam’s Razor, Condit murdering her is a pretty good alternate theory, since he had a very strong motive to want her dead. If you don’t believe accused criminals should have this right, I suggest you form some kind of organization to change the laws.


11 posted on 11/01/2010 2:19:25 PM PDT by nickcarraway
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies ]

To: LibLieSlayer
Whether he slept with her or not, is not relevant in any way.

It is relevant to the other dudes defense. Of course he wants to cast doubt on another potential suspect.
13 posted on 11/01/2010 2:20:30 PM PDT by TalonDJ (>;D)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies ]

To: LibLieSlayer; ridesthemiles; MissMagnolia

I might add, I can’t have as much sympathy for his privacy being invaded, since he was having this affair on our dime. And perhaps, in Levy would have lived, the lawsuit she filed would have been paid by taxpayers.


14 posted on 11/01/2010 2:22:37 PM PDT by nickcarraway
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies ]

To: LibLieSlayer

Is or was there a Mrs. Condit? ...she may have cared.


25 posted on 11/01/2010 2:39:39 PM PDT by TexasCajun
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies ]

To: LibLieSlayer

I beg to differ. Gary was having an affair with this young lady. That is why he was being investigated. Right?
An affair is very much part of any murder investigation if TV crime shows are right. Most people are murdered by people they know. He ‘ruined’ his own life by breaking the rules. Not innocent in any way.

“there is no physical evidence linking him to the crime”
Why is this guy, the suspect, being prosecuted for then? Somebody said somebody said somebody he did it or one of those who said “I killed the Lindbergh baby”.


36 posted on 11/01/2010 2:58:12 PM PDT by Doulos1 (Bitter Clinger Forever)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies ]

To: LibLieSlayer

It is relevant as to a possible motive of Condit and a defendant has a constitutional right to present a complete defense. If the only evidence is an alleged prison confession, Condit’s relationship certainly is relevant.


53 posted on 11/01/2010 4:41:11 PM PDT by SeaHawkFan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson