[Byron_the_Aussie]

Reg, wouldn't it be best to find out whether Ritter was convicted, before cranking up the smear campaign? Regards, By.

[AppyPappy]

So you think it was just a coincidence that he was arrested. OK

[BOBTHENAILER]

Reg, wouldn't it be best to find out whether Ritter was convicted, before cranking up the smear campaign?

You mean like the left has treated Pickering?

[Taliesan]

Reg, wouldn't it be best to find out whether Ritter was convicted, before cranking up the smear campaign?

No, we're conservatives. It's ok.

[dead]

The presumption of innocence is required in the court room, but is not mandatory on humorous internet chat room threads.

Bill Clinton and OJ Simpson were never convincted of anything either, but we slam them for sport too.

It is our right as free citizens to mock and scorn freely.

[Registered]

Reg, wouldn't it be best to find out whether Ritter was convicted, before cranking up the smear campaign? Regards, By.

Thanks Byron, We already found out he was arrested and charged. Then did a deal with the DA and had the records sealed.

Now, do you have any Sex Chat Screen Name suggestions?

 

[Burkeman1]

Interesting- a high profile opponent (and not a left wing lunatic) of the proposed war with Iraq is busted in an internet "sex scandal" and the case is adjourned (basically dismissed) by the local prosecutor. And yet the guy is somehow guilty on this site? Maybe I am wrong- but this smells real bad.

[TommyDale]

Technically, he was convicted. He was given a very lenient "wipe off the blotter" by staying clean for 6 months. In North Carolina, this would be equivalent to a "Prayer for Judgment". It is similar to a "guilty" or "No contest" plea, with the stipulation that after the 6 month period, the conviction would just disappear.

[Johnny Gage]

Reg, wouldn't it be best to find out whether Ritter was convicted, before cranking up the smear campaign

You're right..

we really should defend:

Scott "Saddam-ite, Ima U.N. lovin, Anti-USA, traitorous, Iraqi whore" Ritter

shouldn't we?

I don't think so.