Replies

i can't figure out how intelligent people on this thread are able to ignore the overwhelming evidence

I agree that the evidence is to me overwhelming but I disagree with your inference that those who conclude differently are unintelligent people.

I believe the outcome on deciding differently is that those who disagree with you and I is they have taken each piece of physical evidence separately and have found a possible innocent explanation. If you do this one at a time then you are left with no evidence.

You and I are probably looking at the existance of the combined total of physical evidence and saying "I cannot come up with a reasonable explanation that is innocent". We end up deciding between what I call the "Big Bad Wolf" vs "Goldilocks" to explain the sum total of the evidence.

Those who disagree with us will take you to task for each and every single item of evidence and individually find a contrary explanation for each piece.

That is why the rope analogy and the guy cheating at 21 examples done by Dusek were important. In his game of 21, the card player won every hand and the chances of him doing that without cheating is nill. But taken one hand at a time its possible that each he could win each individual hand. But common sense tells you that you have to be cheating if you win dozens of hands.

But common sense tells you that you have to be cheating if you win dozens of hands.

THUS explaining the HIGH CONVICTION RATE in San Diego by the DA's office (includes LE,Prosecutor,Judges) while in the meantime children are being kidnapped off the street and raped/killed. While a MAJOR INTERNATIONAL CHILD PORN/RAPE ring is being run out of SD/Poway, and the SD LE's have to be told about it by a group from SWEDEN.

THANK YOU VRWC_minion, you are SO RIGHT. DUSEK did make a point with the card game.

IT is obvious that the reason the SD DA has such a high rate of conviction is from CHEATING !!!!!!!!!

That is why the rope analogy and the guy cheating at 21 examples done by Dusek were important. In his game of 21, the card player won every hand and the chances of him doing that without cheating is nill. But taken one hand at a time its possible that each he could win each individual hand. But common sense tells you that you have to be cheating if you win dozens of hands.

All of that assumes that the DEALER is honest.