RE: Murder vs. Adultery

RE: Murder vs. Adultery (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

DomYngBlk -> RE: Murder vs. Adultery (9/23/2010 5:55:44 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: JstAnotherSub quote: ORIGINAL: DomYngBlk And of course DNA is never adulterated at the scene. Mark Fuhrman? I didn't realize OJ had finally been convicted based on that evidence. Yay!!! Nice of you to avoid the obvious answer. If you want to add in that minorities are routinely given the death penalty in far greater numbers than whites doing similar crimes.....then you have another good reason to abolish the death penalty

TheHeretic -> RE: Murder vs. Adultery (9/23/2010 6:34:59 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl Was there or was there not DNA evidence in this case? What is it evidence of, Tazzy? If I had been on that jury, the hair wouldn't have proved any part of the prosecution's case.

Hillwilliam -> RE: Murder vs. Adultery (9/23/2010 6:41:11 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DomYngBlk quote: ORIGINAL: popeye1250 quote: ORIGINAL: DomYngBlk Pops you need to read more. DYB, they could put two blood samples in a blender and still get two dna samples from it. Do you think the two sets of dna would "merge" with each other or something? "Hey wait a minute! O.J. and Mark Furman didn't do this crime! This is BILL CLINTON's dna! Pops, DNA isn't like a set of car keys. You put it in a blender and it is going to break down. You put DNA in a blender, it does NOT break down. The only thing that will break it down is extreme time or chemical attack.

tazzygirl -> RE: Murder vs. Adultery (9/23/2010 6:41:29 AM)
Was that ever part of my statement? Did i say the verdict was made on the evidence of DNA alone? In the past, there was NO DNA evidence used in any case... wasnt until 1986 that DNA was even allowed into court rooms. DNA determined the body they found was Laci's and her child. mDNA determined the hair strand they found on the boat was Laci's. In this particular case, Scott hung himself. His lies caught up with him. Even his own sister believes he is guilty. But that was never the contention of my statement. Unless you can find a case where there was no DNA presented in trial... my statement still stands.

JstAnotherSub -> RE: Murder vs. Adultery (9/23/2010 6:53:55 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DomYngBlk quote: ORIGINAL: JstAnotherSub quote: ORIGINAL: DomYngBlk And of course DNA is never adulterated at the scene. Mark Fuhrman? I didn't realize OJ had finally been convicted based on that evidence. Yay!!! Nice of you to avoid the obvious answer. If you want to add in that minorities are routinely given the death penalty in far greater numbers than whites doing similar crimes.....then you have another good reason to abolish the death penalty Show me the obvious answer I missed. The system worked for OJ. I believe it had to do with his money more than his innocence, but he still is not locked up for murder. As I said before, we now have ways of knowing 100% that someone is guilty. If we know that, they should be killed, no matter their race, sex, age, religion, nationality or sexual preference. I hope the same technology is used to set many innocent folks free, as it has been doing. You can not say it is good enough to set one free, then refuse to believe it is good enough to convict also.

TheHeretic -> RE: Murder vs. Adultery (9/23/2010 7:12:10 AM)
Well silly me, Tazzy. Here I was thinking the "evidence" is supposed to actually establish something in a trial... Have a great day, Tazzy

SL4V3M4YB3 -> RE: Murder vs. Adultery (9/23/2010 8:22:43 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: TheHeretic Well silly me, Tazzy. Here I was thinking the "evidence" is supposed to actually establish something in a trial... Have a great day, Tazzy Not since they introduced forensic psychologists We know you are guilty because we can read your mind through the wacky art of psychology. Also add to this other kinds of 'expert witnesses' that for the most part are just guessing based on their limited experience in the field. Evidence in the court context used to mean something physical such as an eyewitness report, DNA or finger prints. Now it's just a load of conjecture dressed up as expert opinion. You may as well just ask the experts who is guilty and dispense with the jury.

DomYngBlk -> RE: Murder vs. Adultery (9/23/2010 8:23:41 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Hillwilliam quote: ORIGINAL: DomYngBlk quote: ORIGINAL: popeye1250 quote: ORIGINAL: DomYngBlk Pops you need to read more. DYB, they could put two blood samples in a blender and still get two dna samples from it. Do you think the two sets of dna would "merge" with each other or something? "Hey wait a minute! O.J. and Mark Furman didn't do this crime! This is BILL CLINTON's dna! Pops, DNA isn't like a set of car keys. You put it in a blender and it is going to break down. You put DNA in a blender, it does NOT break down. The only thing that will break it down is extreme time or chemical attack. Wrong, try googling it at least before pulling the answer out of your ass. So they blend while extracting? LOL...come on man

DomYngBlk -> RE: Murder vs. Adultery (9/23/2010 8:25:55 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: JstAnotherSub quote: ORIGINAL: DomYngBlk quote: ORIGINAL: JstAnotherSub quote: ORIGINAL: DomYngBlk And of course DNA is never adulterated at the scene. Mark Fuhrman? I didn't realize OJ had finally been convicted based on that evidence. Yay!!! Nice of you to avoid the obvious answer. If you want to add in that minorities are routinely given the death penalty in far greater numbers than whites doing similar crimes.....then you have another good reason to abolish the death penalty Show me the obvious answer I missed. The system worked for OJ. I believe it had to do with his money more than his innocence, but he still is not locked up for murder. As I said before, we now have ways of knowing 100% that someone is guilty. If we know that, they should be killed, no matter their race, sex, age, religion, nationality or sexual preference. I hope the same technology is used to set many innocent folks free, as it has been doing. You can not say it is good enough to set one free, then refuse to believe it is good enough to convict also. You are assuming that DNA testing is always done correctly. Real World it isn't. Add to that the obvious bias against people of Color in the Court system and guess what? We are burnt a hell of a lot more than you are. Death Penalty? No thanks.

tazzygirl -> RE: Murder vs. Adultery (9/23/2010 9:24:29 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: SL4V3M4YB3 quote: ORIGINAL: TheHeretic Well silly me, Tazzy. Here I was thinking the "evidence" is supposed to actually establish something in a trial... Have a great day, Tazzy Not since they introduced forensic psychologists We know you are guilty because we can read your mind through the wacky art of psychology. Also add to this other kinds of 'expert witnesses' that for the most part are just guessing based on their limited experience in the field. Evidence in the court context used to mean something physical such as an eyewitness report, DNA or finger prints. Now it's just a load of conjecture dressed up as expert opinion. You may as well just ask the experts who is guilty and dispense with the jury. Guess you would prefer a system that stones a woman to death for having an affair.

SL4V3M4YB3 -> RE: Murder vs. Adultery (9/23/2010 9:25:49 AM)
Guess again.

tazzygirl -> RE: Murder vs. Adultery (9/23/2010 9:26:14 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: TheHeretic Well silly me, Tazzy. Here I was thinking the "evidence" is supposed to actually establish something in a trial... Have a great day, Tazzy That DNA evidence DID establish something... the bodies of Laci and her baby. Ask the family what that was worth to them. You tend to get snarky... alot... when you are proven wrong.

tazzygirl -> RE: Murder vs. Adultery (9/23/2010 9:27:21 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: SL4V3M4YB3 Guess again. LOL now you want a guessing game when you were just demanding hard core evidence... man, what a joke.

SL4V3M4YB3 -> RE: Murder vs. Adultery (9/23/2010 9:29:28 AM)
I don't know how you even came to this strange conclusion from what I wrote.

tazzygirl -> RE: Murder vs. Adultery (9/23/2010 9:48:05 AM)
quote: Evidence in the court context used to mean something physical such as an eyewitness report, DNA or finger prints. Now it's just a load of conjecture dressed up as expert opinion. You may as well just ask the experts who is guilty and dispense with the jury. Not only did this case involve DNA and mDNA evidence, it also was loaded with eye witnesses to events before and after, tapped phone conversations, conversations between parties again before and afterwards, and then there was the matter of his truck and its possessions when he was arrested. For a list, click here Yeah, a fake ID, tents, 4 cell phones, a map quest print out the day before to Amber's job, multiple credit cards from many family members, ect ect... all those i would need to play golf.... sure.

SL4V3M4YB3 -> RE: Murder vs. Adultery (9/23/2010 10:10:02 AM)
I made a comment in general, unrelated to this case, and you read something into that which wasn't there. Now you want to argue with me about case specifics which I haven't even contradicted at any stage? If you are reading that I am one side or the other in relation to this case then we are obviously failing to communicate.

juliaoceania -> RE: Murder vs. Adultery (9/23/2010 10:25:29 AM)
You know, if you do not agree with the death penalty in the USA, that by default means you want to stone women to death... surely you can see the connection?[;)]

tazzygirl -> RE: Murder vs. Adultery (9/23/2010 10:27:08 AM)
Then you obviously have not been following the line of debate between Rich and myself and, instead, jumped into the middle without understanding the discussion. Perhaps next time, you may want to read a bit more before doing so.

tazzygirl -> RE: Murder vs. Adultery (9/23/2010 10:28:10 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: juliaoceania You know, if you do not agree with the death penalty in the USA, that by default means you want to stone women to death... surely you can see the connection?[;)] LOL your such a silly woman.

juliaoceania -> RE: Murder vs. Adultery (9/23/2010 10:35:04 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl quote: ORIGINAL: juliaoceania You know, if you do not agree with the death penalty in the USA, that by default means you want to stone women to death... surely you can see the connection?[;)] LOL your such a silly woman. And here I was thinking that you were.... I quote: Guess you would prefer a system that stones a woman to death for having an affair. What a complete fallacy and illogical thing to deduce from the things thatsl4v3m4yb3 has posted on this thread, a complete and total straw man.

Page: << < prev 4 5 [6] 7 8 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875