Posted on 09/17/2012 9:08:09 AM PDT by Bratch
Of course.
And OJ was found not guilty by a jury so therefore he was not guilty of murdering those two people he murdered..
And your proof in this case that there wasn’t an honest prosecutor and an honest judge is...?
Palin seems to be falling into the “hell hath no fury like a woman scorned” stereotype. It doesn’t seem like a good use of her time to try and start a vendetta against this guy who treated her badly on a personal level. The country has bigger villains to worry about than this. And since few people have been directly or indirectly affected by McGinnis, this just seems like Palin is using up her face time to wage her own personal revenge against him.
I didn’t pull it from anywhere...I was simply restating the defense argument to illustrate why the poster’s analogy was wrong
Well, that wasn’t the defense argument, it was just an idea McGinniss came up with after the fact. Still, calling it “diet pill rage”, as if the idea is as laughable as the “twinkie defense”, is just silly. Diet pills were amphetamines, which are dangerous drugs that can be readily linked to many violent crimes.
I agree. This seems petty.
We are six weeks away from the presidential election. And THIS is what Palin chooses to spend her time on? Attempting to settle a score with someone from her past?
Really????
While I love what Palin has said and her point, I always felt that the blood evidence pointed to McDonald.
http://www.macdonaldcasefacts.com/html/blood_evidence.html
All 4 family members had different abo blood types. It really points to macdonald.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.