Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: TexKat
I do not like this idea that someone who was not in the trial can be happy because the vedict matches his own judgement, based on information that comes through the press. It seems that Janklow was convicted on this site without a trial. If your sister has diabetes, then you should know that low blood sugar reactions can come without warning. Most posters to this site think that is obsurb. It shows their ignorance, and their arogance that everything in heaven and earth can receive a definitive judgement here.
168 posted on 12/09/2003 7:01:52 AM PST by HapaxLegamenon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 145 | View Replies ]


To: HapaxLegamenon
... you should know that low blood sugar reactions can come without warning.

The contention is that people who KNOW their ability to drive safely can be compromised, without warning, shouldn't drive. Plus, regardless of knee-jerk postings and reactions here, Janklow's conviction came from a jury, not from Free Republic.

169 posted on 12/09/2003 7:08:05 AM PST by Cboldt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 168 | View Replies ]

To: HapaxLegamenon
The man has a terrible driving record, admits himself that he speeds all the time. He's blown the same stop sign before at least once causing a near miss. This is not about being diabetic and driving a car. This is about the jury seeing through his lies and doing the right thing. He lied with the low blood sugar defence and the jusry didn't buy it. Good for them.
171 posted on 12/09/2003 8:09:36 AM PST by dasher
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 168 | View Replies ]

To: HapaxLegamenon
The I did not have any thing to eat for 18 hours was a bald face lie. And to use the illness of diabetes as a defense tactic is lower than a snakes belly.
178 posted on 12/09/2003 1:54:10 PM PST by TexKat (Just because you did not see it or read it, that does not mean it did or did not happen.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 168 | View Replies ]

To: HapaxLegamenon
I do not like this idea that someone who was not in the trial can be happy because the vedict matches his own judgement, based on information that comes through the press.

If you are referring to me, go right ahead. Happy would not be a word I would use in this matter. But for myself I am pleased that the jury saw through this lie and convicted Janklow. There are other aspects of the case that would/should prevent people from rejoicing. One being that the deceased is still dead and his love ones have to suffer the pain and lost. And then there is Mrs. Janklow, possibly some Janklow grandchildren.

One thing for sure diabetes was not on trial. A wreckless inconsiderate vehicle driving individual was.

179 posted on 12/09/2003 2:05:38 PM PST by TexKat (Just because you did not see it or read it, that does not mean it did or did not happen.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 168 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson