Replies

I am watching some TV of the trial but I don't watch it that much. I never purported to know all that went on in court. I thought I made it clear that I am forming my opinions on all I have gleaned about the case, from whatever source, both in and out of court. That includes what Brenda van Dam has said, whether you dismiss it as a lie or not. I am not a lawyer nor am I trying to be one. And apparently it needs to be said again, this is not a court of law.

OK. NO problem. You have stated this. You are an ill-informed casual watcher, who mostly is going by the testimony of the person that was drinking,doing drugs while her child was in danger, and has repeatedly lied to the press, the police, and in court. No wonder you believe what you do!

I have not based my views mostly by what Brenda van Dam has said, as you erroneously state, although I do not totally dismiss her input as you do. Her statements actually contributed to a small portion of my posts.The greatest weight of my opinions have been formed by what I consider to be the multiple lies of a kidnapper, pedofile, rapist, and murderer. As you finally seem to have understood, I am not on the jury and thus do not have to reserve judgement until the end of the trial nor limit my opinions to what has been presented in court.I am free to pick and choose as I see fit, and this I have done. So the sum of all that I know, ill-informed as it is in your opinion, with which I, of course, disagree, leads me to the opinion that the defendant is guilty of all charges.Perhaps the jury will be able to reach the same conclusion, limited as they are to what they see and hear in court.I suppose you will not consider them ill-informed if they should do that.