Quote:
Originally Posted by M.N. Dalvez
Just posted by 'Marcus' at Diggs' forum:
See. This is the kind of person he is, despite his protestations. He didn't care about the truth of the allegations: his whole involvement was for the rich, juicy drama of it all.
The problem is that with a case so serious as his friend Diggs the rapist, you have to treat people, even obvious shit-stirrers, as if they're not just shit-stirring, and that their 'objections' are sincere and not just attempts to milk more drama out of these situations.
Well, as I said: Marcus, you won't be missed. You're obviously happier with Diggs the rapist, Akins the paedophile, and Brenna Wolf the alcoholic liar.
|
Yeah. As time goes by, through the years, one grows less tolerant. I figure these people are either up for drama, or they're dummies who suck at skepticism.
You have a non-political rape case. A jury finds the guy guilty. Unless you have some specific reasons to doubt, you have to assume the jury is right. You're "reserving judgment," oh ok. That's like a little kid trying on mommy's shoes. Yeah, we reserve judgment until the facts are in. The fact is, this man has been convicted of a serious felony.