Posted on 06/24/2002 9:06:32 AM PDT by FresnoDA
False Kim Rape is not a sexual crime it is a crime of violence..it is the resistance that turns them on..not sexy pics
Damon had porn on his computer why do you think that is? And that is a look into the mind of the last person to se her alive..
Same as "bared" anywhere: "Don't come around here no more"
"rubbing this in " (subjective) "JR and AM's face?" to bring it to their attention.
Kim & MizS got a bit pissy, no doubt. But I've seen worse flame wars on FR without folks getting tossed.
FresnoDA got a public "knock it off". Why did Kim & Miz get the 86 ?
The AM (IMO) should have told 'em to take it to mail.
I teach catechism as well-----my daughter's class--- and was very taken aback when one of my students last year appeared occasionally with lipstick! The sleepover play was one thing, but this little girl appearing in public another. And the child I am talking about was getting a religious education.
This could be telling also, Kim.
It was "on his shelf". Not in the disc drive of the computer, where as you speculate, he got himself "in the mood".
There is nothing to indicate he had looked at it recently, or since it was archived, for that matter.
Remember, there is testimony in the PH, that were no recent downloadings of any of the purported porn.
Tell me if you still believe that friday... I'll tell you if I agree, deal? :)
Good grief. You only seem to take a few words of what I say at a time. I said that there is no proof to the motive they are claiming. That's it. That's all I was saying. There is no evidence to his claim of sexual assault because he had thousands of porn. What if he just killed her because he wanted to and because he could? That would have nothing to do with his porn. What would be the motive then? He liked little girls? No, then his motive would be that he killed her because he could. What if it was as simple as that?
http://www.co.san-diego.ca.us/cnty/cntydepts/safety/da/newsroom/westerfield.html
So we'll have to get secondary source.hang on
YOU SAID...I said it can't be proven. Unless there's proof he took her for sexual reasons, you can't make the motive stick. I completely understand the porn, rape, kid aspect. There is no provable evidence that that is what DW did. That's all I'm saying. There is no proof and therefore, there's doubt.
I SAID: I'm not so sure you're right on this one. Think of it like those cases in which a person is convicted of a murder without the body..
YOU SAID: "No proof and no evidence" doesn't seem to matter, does it?
I SAID: Of course evidence matters...but he's not being charged with rape..he's charged with kidnapping, murder and the child porn which shows what kind of state of mind he would have been in. ALthough I wonder what the jury thought when they heard him say he had a blackout.
YOU SAID: Good grief. You only seem to take a few words of what I say at a time. I said that there is no proof to the motive they are claiming. That's it. That's all I was saying. There is no evidence to his claim of sexual assault because he had thousands of porn. What if he just killed her because he wanted to and because he could? That would have nothing to do with his porn. What would be the motive then? He liked little girls? No, then his motive would be that he killed her because he could. What if it was as simple as that?
So to your last comments, sure, it could be simply cuz he killed her cuz he's could..but that doesn't make sense. WHY?
http://www.co.san-diego.ca.us/cnty/cntydepts/safety/da/
A copy is on the earlier threads but I'm too tired to look fo it.. yawn..
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.