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

To: Dan from Michigan
It's unknown how Pikkarainen discovered the check. His secretary said the judge wouldn't comment because the case is pending.

It's perfectly clear to me that since judges don't normally see checks, the one who should be held in comtempt is the mental midget who decided the judge should see it.

52 posted on 12/15/2002 8:51:04 PM PST by Publius6961
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


I suspect it was the second sentence ("Suck on it") that actually got the court's ire and gave them any grounds to pursue the contempt charge. Had the defendant merely written the first sentence alone, he probably would have gotten away with it.
53 posted on 12/16/2002 5:21:04 AM PST by George W. Bush
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | 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