Posted on 07/31/2002 9:20:15 PM PDT by FresnoDA
I don't believe it................ they really have a K Mart in Simi Valley?
"However, ‘mud’ in the sense of scandalous of defamatory charges goes back to a time well before the Civil War. In fact, this was an expression at least as long ago as 1846. So it seems most likely that the expression ‘His name is mud’ was well established before Dr. Mudd met his unhappy fate."
"True. The OED lists a usage from early in the 19th century... and I wouldn't be surprised to find it had been used even earlier. The association of mud with worthlessness is obvious and natural."
This Q&A from an English professor is the best I can do, but he asserts it was current in USA as early as 1846, and that is when the German immigration was highest. No one has ever beaten me on these yet! Best, crystalk.
I would agree with you on this.
People's emotions being what they are and from the description we heard of the video clip and some of the jurors reactions I wonder.
I guess we don't have too much longer to go to find out what the answer will be though. I think the closing arguments are going to be rather colorful.
Which would have been a hot commodity in waterless Arabia! Where there's mud, there's water!
After all where there are Simians, there are K mart shoppers. You've heard of planet of the simians, haven't you, which proved that all that humans knew was of Seamyian origin.
You are correct.
If they are "his" and depict actual child porn --than he would be guilty. But I have doubts about your assumptions.
No doubt this incident would make a preexisting phrase popular. It would appear from a net search that the attribution to Dr. Samuel Mudd is universal, but that does not make it truth.
Your exercise in gematria that equates both to 98 is not convincing to me. How many letter combinations can produce the same result? If your answer is only two, your theory will gain great credence with me. I doubt this is the case.
My final feeling about this before I toddle off to a calling pillow:
If there is documentation that the phrase existed before 1865, then the phrase joins a long list of phrases that we use without knowing the true origin.
Play nice while I am gone :)
<shower>...
They could (not should) find him guilty, and sentence him to time already served.
As to your assumption that a majority on FR believe DAW is not guilty of the murder:
This is just one of several discussion forums about this, on the internet. The regulars on FR are a "self selected" group, and you are correct in your assumption that the majority believe him to be not guilty.
However the same is not so, on other discussion forums, where on some a majority think DAW is guilty. Few forums equal the attention to every detail, that one finds on FR, which is what all twelve jurors will need to be willing to trudge through, for a Not Guilty verdict.
It remains to be seen, how the jury will decide, and that is WHAT MATTERS MOST. A lot of the FR regulars are certain the verdict SHOULD BE Not Guilty.
My prediction is:
Acquittal, 10% (all twelve jurors with at least Reasonable Doubt)
Conviction, 30% (all twelve jurors with no Reasonable Doubt)
Hung jury, 60% (all twelve jurors cannot agree on either of the above)
FWIW, indicating a high probability for a lot of unhappy FR regulars. Unless Acquitted, Feldman (or the next attorney) will appeal all sorts of things. If a Hung jury, it is anybody's bet, but the odds are for another trial for DAW.
It could drag on for years, raising the (unlikely) discovery of the "real killer" or a plea bargain by DAW. Remember those pesky motions by Feldman, sealed until appeal ('...if I did it, I was drunk...')? Who knows? Reality can have a hard bite to it.
I believe DAW is probably guilty, but it has NOT been proven to me, beyond a reasonable doubt. (I could change my mind, based on remaining arguments and closing statements.)
So he "accidentally strayed into them" and they magically jumped onto CD's that he kept laying around? Maybe "space aliens" are responsible??
>>>Show me that he knew he had it, knew the people in it were underage, and knew it was illegal to have it.<<<
It was laying around but he knew nothing about it? Westerfield is too ignorant to know that images of kids described as young as Danielle being raped are not illegal? Are you claiming this?
>>>Show me that porn was a part of his life, that he made profits from porn which I assume DAMON DID DO...(!)<<<
What the hell are you blathering about?? I'll tell you what belongs on a trash heap, Your Post 30.
I would question that assumption. All we have is a reportette's overemotional description, which reporterette has consistently been biased against the defendant. (See 'orange fibers that covered Danielle', et al.)
Mot having seen the images in question, I will assume that the media description is incompetent, biased, or an outright lie (always a good assumption IMO). Ergo, no child porn and not guilty on that count also. :-)
Dr. Goff will take into account that some of these feas go home in the luggage of tourists, and the others are consumed by sand crabs and Sea Gulls..the math is definitely not going to be precise...(He gets a pass on this)..
He will, I predict, be called as an expert witness the next time a body in Hawaii washes up on shore.
sw
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.