[small_l_libertarian]

Oh! I see what you mean. But that just makes me even MORE suspicious (of the cops, I mean). This case really is scaring the you-know-what out of me. Every time I really examine a piece of evidence being used against DW, there are doubts. Every single time.

[pinz-n-needlez]

I agree.

Last night, someone lamented that people aren't willing to pay attention to the defense's arguments.

All you really need to do is to try to follow the prosecutions arguments. It is impossible to move from step to step. Even Dusek knows that, when he whined that he didn't HAVE to prove how DW did any of if, I about split a gut. That's the best statement made in that courtroom on behalf of DW.

[the-gooroo]

I may be wrong but I think Susan L. (DW's former girlfriend) identified the comforters from the drycleaners during cross exam. I'm not really sure if that helps or hurts your theory.

[Kerensky]

Click here to see a list of USENET postings by/about Damon van Dam going back at least to 1990

[185JHP]

Bob Leuci (wrote "Prince of the City") was interviewed and asked "What's the deal with these guys (cops)?" And he said "Well, about 10% are almost always honest. And about 10% are almost always crooked - they'd be crooks if they weren't cops." And in "Presumed Innocent", one of the lawyers counsels "They're hard, and they're crazy." That said, the best ones are amazingly admirable people - the best.