Dude. At 14, he should know better than calling “disassembling someone elses work, not changing anything functionally, and claiming it as your own work”. That’s not engineering. He didn’t make anything.

Calling “disassembling an alarm clock and putting the parts in a box” “engineering” is an insult to engineering. I say this as an actual engineer.

This makes me think of the old “safari” porsches.

Definitely explains why Krispy Kreme doughnuts are so addictive.

Do the kidnappers know what a Mother-in-law is?

The molten texture of american cheese is much different from other cheeses... But, if you want your mind to be blown, you can add melting salts and a little milk to any cheese to make it melt like American cheese.

It probably depends on whether or not they think she will still refuse to testify... Additionally, they can’t delay trial forever. It may have been the choice between “throw her in Jail” and “let the accused go”.

Spending 60K on a less reliable, harder to work on, impossible to source parts for car that’s essentially exactly the same as a Jeep CJ5?

That’s the most expensive $20 part I can think of.

It would be unlikely, however, that they could testify in open court for the prosecution and be cross examined by deposition. It likely would have resulted in a mistrial... and if it didn’t it would be unusual enough to be grounds for an appeal.

I’m passionate about legal defense and defendant’s rights.

I kindly refer nameless internet person who claims to hold a law degree to the sixth amendment, and case law surrounding it. Video testimony or depositions have to be conducted with the defendants counsel present giving them an opportunity to cross examine or is not admissible as evidence in their trial. See Crawford…

That’s not what it says. It says you cannot imprison someone without due process.

How did they “clearly” go to far? You’re claiming knowledge of this woman’s state of mind, knowledge of the questions being asked, and knowledge of how they were being asked.

First: they don’t specify if it was during prosecution or defense that she broke down. Second: It’s not up to you how they question her. They should be allowed to challenge her version of events which is bound to be confrontational.

Because it’s guaranteed by the constitution that a defendant has the right to confront their accuser. Does that justify what they did? No... But the defense has to be allowed to question the witness.

It’s not that it was fast... It’s that it was so much faster than it’s contemporaries. The McLaren came out in 1993... so it’s “Road Car” competitors were the F50 and XJ220. It wasn’t till Porsche and Mercedes started slapping VIN numbers on the GT1 and CLKGTR that it had equals in street cars.

What? No “Captain Slow-hand” jokes?

Touche, whitey. Touche.

I’m not sure about that... Honestly, her toughness and aggression and willingness to kick ass are some of Hillary’s strong points.