To: Yaelle
Legal beagles, tell me: WHY is it so necessary to have a clear motive for the crime, when the evidence will (I believe) show that Scott's the murderer? Three words: Orenthal James Simpson. The prosecutors should be taking NOTHING for granted.
310 posted on
11/06/2003 5:00:17 PM PST by
LisaMalia
(Buckeye Fan since birth!!)
To: LisaMalia
Hi Lisa!!
311 posted on
11/06/2003 5:05:45 PM PST by
Devil_Anse
(Since birth? And when would that be?)
To: MaggieMay
KFI reporting
Swabs were never tested from Scott's hands (yet?)
316 posted on
11/06/2003 5:20:10 PM PST by
clouda
(terrisfight.org)
To: LisaMalia
Lisa - I don't think it is absolutely necessary to have a clear motive. Not when you have a mountain of evidence and OUTRAGEOUSLY BAD CHARACTER that is more than proveable. Snott is not just a bad boy, he's a PIG!!
340 posted on
11/06/2003 5:57:22 PM PST by
Canadian Outrage
(All us Western Canuks belong South)
To: LisaMalia
I know what you mean by not taking anything for granted BUT the Simpson Jury was a clearly NULLIFIED JURY. You don't get that too often. This case does NOT have the race factor and I do believe they will get a much different Jury.
342 posted on
11/06/2003 5:59:15 PM PST by
Canadian Outrage
(All us Western Canuks belong South)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson