- Joined
- Jun 13, 2010
- Messages
- 22,676
- Reaction score
- 4,282
- Location
- DC Metro
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Moderate
Except when it's conveniently agrees with you. Then it's not only proof, it absolutely right, both ethically and legally. :roll:
For me personally, sure. If someone else believes the opposite, they are free to prove it in court. :shrug:
You have been arguing, in this thread, that what the court says is proof, and what the court says is the ONLY proof. Now, you're saying that it's not proof, and trying to weasal word it to make it appear that I've flip-flopped, and then ending by saying that the court is the authority (except when it isn't)
What is proven in court is law, what is not proven in court or what is later appealed is not. It can not be illegal without it specifically violating a law, and the violation proven to have been perpetrated by the suspect. Thinking someone is guilty is not enough to be guilty. That's pretty simple, and there is no weaseling going on.
It's absurd to say something was illegal and then disregard what illegal actually means.