Posted on 03/16/2005 1:39:19 PM PST by Hillary's Lovely Legs
Verdict reached in ROBERT BLAKE CASE- will be live in courtroom 2:30 PST
Judge allowing cameras.
BooHoo!
Buckwheat spent most of his life in prison for serious felonies such as Armed Robbery, Assault, etc.
The last time he was released from prison a press conference was called but very few reporters attended. The press conference didn't last longer than the 1st question.
A reporter asked "Buckwheat are you going to go straight this time?"
Buckwheat angrily replied he had embraced Islam during his latest time in prison and demanded the reporters address him as KAREEMAWHEAT! End of press conference.
California trial process is impossible to give a good conviction -- not a fully informed jury,. too far from it.
In the time that you could have written four lines responding sarcastically, and accusing me in defending the evil killer, you could have said, so and so witnessed him killing her, or they found a knife with his finger prints on it near the bay, or her bloodied dress was found in his car,.....
AS a matter of fact many killers have had LIFE IN PRISON with much more evidences than that. Honesty is not important when you hate somebody. The media made us hate that dude, because his wife had a pretty smile, and was pregnant, and HE HAD AN AFFAIR!
You really don't know what you're talking about.
You admit you didn't pay attention to the trial, and yet those of us who DID pay attention to the trial details every day aired on FNC and Court TV are being accused by you of being misled by the media just because he had an affair. Wow. You need help. Seriously.
And thankfully the people who were in the courtroom, like the jury, found more than ample evidence to find him guilty. And just about every single lawyer/commentator who attended the trial every single day also thought he was guilty.
But keep pontificating about something which you ADMIT you paid little attention to. It's proving a point...that you don't know what you're talking about.
Heh heh!
I did not say he was innocent, I don't know because I did not follow the trial closely, however, from general headlines and TV news I DID NOT SEE ANY SMOKING GUN EVIDENSES. I am saying, may be I missed it. But, you and all the hang him crowd are not interested in the truth or the facts simply because the media told you he is evil because he cheated on his wife.
In the time that you could have written four lines responding sarcastically, and accusing me in defending the evil killer, you could have said, so and so witnessed him killing her, or they found a knife with his finger prints on it near the bay, or her bloodied dress was found in his car,.....
As a matter of fact many killers have had LIFE IN PRISON with much more evidences than that (OJ is one). Honesty is not important when you hate somebody. The media made us hate that dude, because his wife had a pretty smile, and was pregnant, and HE HAD AN AFFAIR!
For a couple of years empty headed American followed the trial of Peterson or the killing of the little girl by the name Bonet Ramzy, or whatever stupid subject that our media choose to get our retarded population to be occupied with rather than getting interested in two subjects that controls our lives and destiny; namely POLITICS & RELIGION! We are told since childhood not to discuss politics or religion. If you don't discuss politics, how are you going to claim that you live in a democracy? If you don't discuss religion, how are you going to find the truth?
Our media rather have us all preoccupied with OJ trial, Peterson Trial, Brad Pitt divorce, sport news, and other unimportant subjects. Well informed population is too challenging to the power base. Granted I may have gone out on a tangent here, but, I was trying to illustrate the reason I don't focus on stupid tid bits that the media wants to feed us.
Yezzzzz. Izzz fine with me.
You aren't making sense, have contradicted yourself and your spelling and grammar are atrocious.
Oh, and did you think the red head was the only jury member? And as I've said several times now, if you are really interested in learning more about why the jury found Scott Peterson guilty, why don't you do research on the internet? In the time you've spent posting your drivel filled name calling post, you could have found countless facts.
But you aren't interested in learning anything about the case. You just want to pontificate and condemn those who believe Peterson is guilty. And yet you admit you didn't pay attention to the case. And don't see anything wrong with condemning those who did pay attention and found him guilty. That's sad.
At no time does the absence of politically correct behavior become an excuse for rudeness. No time.
I'll deal with it.
Now they are inundated with California refugees, and are well on their way to being mini versions of the "Golden State" themselves...
Yeah, you Californians would never want to live in New Jersey! All we have is twenty minute commutes, the highest per-capita income in the nation, and no problems with hyper-growth. It's Hell on Earth, I tells ya!
Ok, let's all get together for one last California Bash. It's completely obvious to me that the actions of a couple of jurys can sum up the total community that is the Golden state no matter WHAT color the county voted! No matter WHAT presidential campaign the people may have worked!! :) So! Gotcher pitchforks ready oh, mighty grime smeared New Jersey Coal Miners? Gotcher torches there Alabamie Gator Hunters? Gotcher Mommy/aunt there Arkansas Beer Toters? Got a clue as to how damn annoying it is to have Freepers act like juvenile bozos stereotyping an entire state because some guy MIGHT have killed his PORNO star wife so let's blame the STATE it happened in and insult ANYONE who lives there? Got a clue how ridiculous that is?
PUT SOME ICE ON IT. SHHEEEESHHH.
PS: The surf sucks in New Jersey. You have nothing to worry about.
The juries in California are the least of your problems.
*snort*
This has firstly blinded them to the fact that when they can't found circustantial evidence probably means the guy didn't do it, instead they're relying on testimony to give them a case.
Secondly, usually the testimators (is that a word?) are usually not solid citizens, and the jury only believes them if the defendant has the same background, or the DA can destroy his/her reputation. This only works against nonenities who don't have good lawyers.
So my spelling mistakes are preventing you from tell me about the smoking gun proof. You have been brain washed by the media, and should not participate in intellectual discussions. Go watch Oprah, or Dr. Phil.
You, who have said you don't know anything about the Peterson case, are pointing fingers at people who did pay attention to the case? That's rich.
Careful. You're ignorance is showing.
Countless facts my foot. You can't find one single irrefutable evidence to name for me. You are so preoccupied with my spellings instead of stating the facts. I simply made a big mistake thinking that I can carry a rational or intellectual discussion with you or your like. For me, I don't know Scott, or his wife, and I would like to be impartial in my feelings and judgment, however, that seems to be difficult for you.
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.