way to stick to your principles.

even the most mediocre criminal defense attorney would make the same argument. it is literally his job to zealously defend his client. it’s not a petty argument or an unfair technicality to forward. the legality of this “deal” is a separate issue. it doesn’t seem like it will fly. but don’t fault the lawyers for doing…

im mad late with this post but hopefully you realize you were rude and defensive to people expressing their love and concern. i’m glad you basked in being a vicitm though. smdh. witch.

it is not a crime to have a film about wall street that is exclusively white and male. had any negative roles been women or ppl of color, we would also be complaining that of course they used “diversity” as excuse to cast minorities in unfavorable light. damned if they do, damned if they don’t. while personal…

not just environmental activists. the Natural Resources Defense Council, the ACLU of Michigan, Concerned Pastors for Social Action and Flint resident Melissa Mays. ACLU/Pastors/Flint resident are perhaps activists, but known environmentalists.

he wants to be socially productive, or management has realized white liberals who listen to rap is a niche market capable of being exploited, i mean, capitalized on?

i understand 99.9% of the iggy critiques in the stratosphere. but why do you say she has zero respect for the history/background of the art form? what would she have to do or not do for you to conclude differently? I get the accent criticism, for example. but would you like her to rhyme about how she has white…

no. you’re wrong and you know it. to use bitch after it shows you it was meant to emasculate and embarrass. if she had no judgment about it, there would be nothing to air out. which is why she didn’t, and wouldn’t, say “he liked his dick sucked!” not groundbreaking.

you make many good points but they overshadowed by your bias for rose. she plays the shit outta him, not just a couple jabs just b/c she’s asked. nothing justifies what he does, but be real. she’s not above calling him out. most recently calling him out for liking a finger in the ass and calling him a bitch because of…

professional dancing takes talent. no it’s not ballet, but it still takes athleticism and hard work.

yes, and they deserve fair wages for sure. but professional athletes are paid so well because they bring in so much money. as much as drunk men love cheerleaders, theyd still be watching the games without them.

my grandma was a runner up in the early 60s. she was born in appalachia (in eastern ky) and was extraordinarily poor. she was a housewife raising 6 kids on a very small amount of money and entered the pageant in hopes of winning money or something that could be sold for money. she is now in her 80s and because she…

right. i agree. i remember being a little confused by that whole part of the documentary. i would have assumed that the make/model and license plate of the car was widely distributed to all law enforcement in a 60 mile radius (at a minimum). Since she was missing, people should be on the look out for her vehicle. But…

i hear you, but it’s the defense’s job to point out the flaws you mentioned (lack of real expertise in expert testimony, unreliability of dna testing by certain labs, etc). and incompetent defense is appealable. the system is designed for these issues to debated. your healthy dose of skepticism actually makes you seem…

how would you explain the *67 during the first two calls (and not the third)? and you do realize that a large number of criminal convictions are based on entirely circumstantial evidence? circumstantial evidence in itself is not invalid. certain kinds of direct evidence may be more persuasive in some situations, but…

i know they wanted to convict him, but it’s hard for me to believe that the police thought they were burning evidence of another killer. i think they really thought avery did it and f they did set him up, that’s why.

is that info not available in police databases? for some reason i thought they could access license and make/model info. i need to rewatch the series!

but you’re using the same instinct-based “logic” that got avery convicted.

i actually think that was completely intentional. he wanted the jury to have the utmost sympathy for her and depicting her as a little girl only makes her that much more vulnerable. only he could not have said that outright, or else the defense would have objected. so he self-corrected, but already planted the seed.…

different juries. i realize it seems unfair but it’s not unethical by legal standards. their theory does not have to be correct, or consistent. they dont even need to present one, so long as they can otherwise establish the mens rea and actus reus