• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Man admits to raping daughter, 12, gets 60 days

VanceMack said:
I did. So you are saying the defendant SHOULD have gotten someone as good at getting a child rapist off as HRC and just got lucky with the judge. I get ya.
Click to expand...

Wow. That's low.
 
VanceMack said:
Well...if that were the case the perp would have just 'grabbed her by the *****'. I believe the comparison you are looking for is Bill Clinton's rape of Juanita Broderick.
Click to expand...

Nah. Rape is a form of sexual assault.
 
VanceMack said:
man raped 12 year old...lawyer gets man off with 2 month sentence. Man rapes 12 year old so brutally that the girl required reconstructive surgery and was in a coma for 5 days. Lawyer gets man off on time served. Man that gets off on 2 month sentence has people expressing outrage. Man that gets off on time served for brutally raping a 12 year old child...why...thats just good lawyerin, son!
Your continued poutrage over the facts does not change the facts.
Click to expand...

Poor Vance. Doesn't understand context or how things aren't quite as simple as he believes them to be.
 
VanceMack said:
1-Snopes is a slanted leftist website. But...2-None of that is relevant to the fact that both cases involve a man raping a 12 year old child (except in HRCs case the rape was far more physically brutal, causing damage that required surgical repair and leaving the child in a coma for 5 days) and in both cases the lawyers managed to get their clients off on ridiculously low sentences. We dont know if this new case involved the lawyer laughing about the credibility of lie detector tests). All that the snopes cite 'refuted' was the claim that Hillary wanted the case...a claim no one here is making. In this most recent case everyone is up in arms about the sentence. In the HRC child rapists case, they just applaud great lawyer work.
Click to expand...

Actually, in reading more about THIS case and what the judge said, from a legal perspective, his decision has support.
 
VanceMack said:
I did. So you are saying the defendant SHOULD have gotten someone as good at getting a child rapist off as HRC and just got lucky with the judge. I get ya.
Click to expand...

Actually, what she is saying is that you don't understand context and nuance. But then again, we ALL know that about you. When you start using lots of smilies, it's a good indication that you don't really have a grasp of the issue being discussed.
 
CaptainCourtesy said:
Actually, what she is saying is that you don't understand context and nuance. But then again, we ALL know that about you. When you start using lots of smilies, it's a good indication that you don't really have a grasp of the issue being discussed.
Click to expand...
:lamo

Huh...I could have sworn what you all meant is that you will **** yourself over a horrible sentence of a man that rapes his 12 year old daughter but feel like a man that gets off on time served for brutally tearing a child apart and putting her in a coma...why...thats just good lawyering.
 
CaptainCourtesy said:
Nah. Rape is a form of sexual assault.
Click to expand...
Oh sure. No doubt. We can all agree to the terms. "Sexual Assault" in its most direct definition is any unwanted intional contact with an individuals breasts, buttocks, loins, and groin. In that you are 100% correct...grabbing someone by the ***** is a sexual assault. Rape is a sexual assault. No one would like to have either done to them. But they arent "the same thing"...certainly not in scope.
 
VanceMack said:
:lamo

Huh...I could have sworn what you all meant is that you will **** yourself over a horrible sentence of a man that rapes his 12 year old daughter but feel like a man that gets off on time served for brutally tearing a child apart and putting her in a coma...why...thats just good lawyering.
Click to expand...

Poor Vance. Still doesn't understand context and nuance. Nor does he understand how our legal system works, Nor does he actually understand what happened in the case. Seems to me that the list of things you don't understand goes on forever. :lol:
 
CaptainCourtesy said:
Poor Vance. Still doesn't understand context and nuance. Nor does he understand how our legal system works, Nor does he actually understand what happened in the case. Seems to me that the list of things you don't understand goes on forever. :lol:
Click to expand...

Poor CC. I'd say it was because he sadly will forever be a mindless HRC shill, but you know...poor CC...just...in general. Sad. Very sad.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
VanceMack said:
Poor CC. I'd say it was because he sadly will forever be a mindless HRC shill, but you know...poor CC...just...in general. Sad. Very sad.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Good job, Vance. Once again, when shown that you have no understanding of the issue at hand, you resort to projection. Seems to me that this is consistent with people who are hacks. Show then that the issue is not black and white and they have no coherent answer.
 
CaptainCourtesy said:
Good job, Vance. Once again, when shown that you have no understanding of the issue at hand, you resort to projection. Seems to me that this is consistent with people who are hacks. Show then that the issue is not black and white and they have no coherent answer.
Click to expand...

You have offered zero by way if contributing to any conversation. Instead, you persist in your obsession with me. It's kinda cute, though not a little bit creepy.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
VanceMack said:
You have offered zero by way if contributing to any conversation. Instead, you persist in your obsession with me. It's kinda cute, though not a little bit creepy.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Poor Vance. Keeps confusing "obsession" with enjoyment of watching you get upset when I show that your stupid partisan rants are... just stupid partisan rants. If you don't want me to respond to you, stop saying stupid partisan things. Bet you can't.
 
CaptainCourtesy said:
Poor Vance. Keeps confusing "obsession" with enjoyment of watching you get upset when I show that your stupid partisan rants are... just stupid partisan rants. If you don't want me to respond to you, stop saying stupid partisan things. Bet you can't.
Click to expand...

I don't care if you act creepy. I don't care if you insist on commenting on me and not the topic. I REALLY don't care if you 'respond' to me. I do care that your schtick is just...so...boring.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
VanceMack said:
I don't care if you act creepy. I don't care if you insist on commenting on me and not the topic. I REALLY don't care if you 'respond' to me. I do care that your schtick is just...so...boring.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

See? I knew you couldn't resist. Predictable and still confusing "obsession" with the enjoyment of showing just how poor you are at this. You're anger is always amusing.
 
Maybe an entrepreneur could offer a deal. Some 12-year old (virgin) for some number of dollars upfront. And, you get legal representation that guarantees no more than 60 days in jail time. If sentenced for more than 60 days, you get paid every day thereafter on a sliding scale. Do you think there's a market for that?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom