Quote:And yet you said that LeerMan was guilty partly because he figured he had nothing to defend on the evidence to date.... and thus had no real obligation to give evidence, since the evidence would not support the prosecution case.
Where the fuq do you get that garbage from? I gave my opinion. I was asked about it. I gave it and I have expalined why I have come to that opinion. If I was on the Jury I would be satisfied beyond
reasonable doubt. There is always a doubt...but...the term is
REASONABLE doubt.
I said that my opinion about his guilt was cemented when he did not give evidence. Why did he not give evidence? It is a simple matter. Get in the box, and make your denial under oath and be cross examined. Why did he not do that. Sure, he has no obligation to do so, but......why would an innocent man in a case like this....ie it either did or did not happen, nothing about consent nuances....NOT be anxious, biting at the bit to get in the box, and say so. Why 'plead the 5th?'
Quote:Even your assumption of guilt shows clearly the prejudice against a defendant.
Are you nuts? I expressed my opinion after the evidence closed. The Jury have to do the same. I was putting myself in their shoes, just like you are in professing he will ultimately get off. If I had posted that I did not believe Higgins, would you be accusing me of a bias against a person who claims to have been raped. You are not making sense, you fool!
Quote:P.S. By your own petard here....... would anyone who was actually guilty of any wrongdoing be so aggrieved over the egregious intrusion with violence by a court into his private life? A honest man tells the story openly and maintains the rage of that form of rape ... a guilty man hides and mumbles while the honest innocent man shouts from the rooftops .... your own ideas there, Aussie.... thank you for raising the issue so it could be shot down again.
Tripe which does not even make sense. Ask Igor to write that again for you.