To: redgolum
Still need proof. No proof he did. No proof he didn't.
To: DoodleDawg; redgolum
RE: No proof he did. No proof he didn’t.
So, by America’s laws, what should the presumption be?
40 years have passed and where’s the proof?
Anyone? Anyone? Bueller?
To: DoodleDawg
No proof he did. No proof he didn't. Well hells-bells, that's enough in our society, right DoodleDawg?
19 posted on
11/17/2017 10:26:46 AM PST by
COBOL2Java
(John McCain treats GOP voters like he treated his first wife)
To: DoodleDawg
No proof he did. No proof he didn't. The question everyone is really asking is did Dawg do it?
30 posted on
11/17/2017 10:44:41 AM PST by
itsahoot
(As long as there is money to be divided, there will be division.)
To: DoodleDawg
That is the insidiousness of these accusations. No proof can be provided to support or refute them. Without the accusers filing police reports at the time the incidents occurred means there is no paperwork to even lend credence to the claims. On the flip side, proving that something didn't occur is an even harder, if not impossible, task. Especially 40 years after the majority of the claims stated they occurred. Even the newer accusations are 30 plus years ago.
I do not see how anyone could be convicted, nor totally vindicated. Blame the accusers for not reporting their claims at the time they occurred, and perhaps blame the accused for stupidly by getting involved with females much younger than he was.
Thus the bottom line for making these accusations can be attributed to nothing more than political attacks designed to impugn the accused.
To: DoodleDawg
It’s impossible to prove a negative.
44 posted on
11/17/2017 11:15:22 AM PST by
chesley
(What is life but a long dialog with imbeciles? - Pierre Ryckmans)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson