If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(WTSP)   Best pictures of Casey Anthony getting a noogie from her lawyer you will see all day   (wtsp.com) divider line 123
    More: Florida, Casey Anthony, Tampa, sketch artists, courtroom sketch  
•       •       •

23144 clicks; posted to Main » on 04 Mar 2013 at 12:34 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



123 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-03-04 01:46:26 PM

RoyHobbs22: Does anyone else think her trial lawyer banged her?


Gotta get paid somehow.
 
2013-03-04 01:50:16 PM

TheGogmagog: Thanks a lot for reminding us there was a real life lost.


oh noes, a real life lost. guess what, someone else you never knew just died. oops, there goes another. aaaand another. oh my, they just keep dying, more and more strangers are dropping off everywhere all the time. but i guess i should feel flattered that you feel my daughter's death is worth noting. personally, i'm over it.
 
2013-03-04 01:51:15 PM

TheGogmagog: Abe Vigoda's Ghost: numbone: [i83.photobucket.com image 270x360]

That should feel good when it's time to take the tape off.

[i48.tinypic.com image 400x377]

Unless you never need to take the tape off.....

PS. is that photo shopped?  I don't remember seeing that before.
PPS. was the daughter found with duct tape, or is that another case I'm thinking of?

/Thanks a lot for reminding us there was a real life lost.


There's apparently some artist selling duct-tape themed paintings of her, so I guess the inspiration had to come from somewhere.

www.faithmouse.com

This pops to a NSFW one.
 
2013-03-04 01:52:29 PM

Mija: I don't see any bright prospects for this woman's career.


Anal Gangbang Whores vol. 9
 
2013-03-04 01:53:12 PM
I should offer her sanctuary. She's cute, farks, parties, doesn't want kids (big plus!) and who would think to look for her in semi-rural Virginia?
 
2013-03-04 01:55:34 PM
She wasn't judged innocent, she was judged "not guilty".  i.e., Not enough evidence to convict her.  Nobody is asked to prove their innocence here.

There is a difference.
 
2013-03-04 01:56:40 PM

Lee451: I should offer her sanctuary. She's cute, farks, parties, doesn't want kids (big plus!) and who would think to look for her in semi-rural Virginia?


You know, I could almost write off that the whole thing with the kid was due to some freak accident and her just panicking from youth and inexperience, but she's an Ohio State fan, that's just a dealbreaker.
 
2013-03-04 01:57:51 PM

TuteTibiImperes: TheGogmagog: Abe Vigoda's Ghost: numbone: [i83.photobucket.com image 270x360]

That should feel good when it's time to take the tape off.

[i48.tinypic.com image 400x377]

Unless you never need to take the tape off.....

PS. is that photo shopped?  I don't remember seeing that before.
PPS. was the daughter found with duct tape, or is that another case I'm thinking of?

/Thanks a lot for reminding us there was a real life lost.

There's apparently some artist selling duct-tape themed paintings of her, so I guess the inspiration had to come from somewhere.

[www.faithmouse.com image 480x720]

This pops to a NSFW one.


Oh Dan Lacey, you magnificently weird person, you.
 
2013-03-04 01:59:53 PM

hdhale: Because their lawsuits will clearly bring the little girl back from the dead. WTF?


I don't think they are as concerned with bringing back the dead girl as they are for getting even with her trying to blame them for killing the girl.
 
2013-03-04 02:01:20 PM

Abe Vigoda's Ghost: kingflower: Tot mom, tot mom, tot mom, tot mom, TOT MOM.


Ha!!
 
2013-03-04 02:04:53 PM
chriskohatsu.files.wordpress.com
 
2013-03-04 02:05:04 PM
Love this one.

i0.kym-cdn.com
 
2013-03-04 02:11:25 PM
people have a lot of balls to threaten and harass her. she was acquitted. that's supposed to mean something.
 
2013-03-04 02:16:26 PM
KrispyKritter: ...she was acquitted. that's supposed to mean something.

It means that the DA's office was inept.
 
2013-03-04 02:18:56 PM
Zenaida Gonzalez and former meter reader Roy Kronk both plan to sue Anthony. They're fighting the bankruptcy, because if Anthony is successful in going bankrupt, they're worried they'll lose their ability to sue her.

WTF are those people?  Should I be suing her too?
I.  .  .  I. . . .

moviesblog.mtv.com
 
2013-03-04 02:21:34 PM
I that read wrong
 
2013-03-04 02:22:01 PM
He looks like he's getting a little boobage there.
 
2013-03-04 02:24:53 PM

Abe Vigoda's Ghost: KrispyKritter: ...she was acquitted. that's supposed to mean something.

It means that the DA's office was inept.


It means that idiots value popular media's opinion of who is and isn't guilty more than the results of careful deliberation of evidence by 12 jurors. The DA's office doesn't render the verdict, the defendant's peers do. If you can't deal with the fact that the evidence to convict simply didn't exist, you need to grow the hell up.
 
2013-03-04 02:40:34 PM

Abe Vigoda's Ghost: KrispyKritter: ...she was acquitted. that's supposed to mean something.

It means that the DA's office was inept.


Just wait to see how inept you feel when they catch the real killer.
 
2013-03-04 02:40:40 PM

Calypsocookie: RangerTaylor: I want some better fat Casey pics.  I heard she gained hella weight.

Well come on, she's already lost the baby weight.

/all of it


Win.
 
2013-03-04 02:43:41 PM

scubamage: Abe Vigoda's Ghost: KrispyKritter: ...she was acquitted. that's supposed to mean something.

It means that the DA's office was inept.

It means that idiots value popular media's opinion of who is and isn't guilty more than the results of careful deliberation of evidence by 12 jurors. The DA's office doesn't render the verdict, the defendant's peers do. If you can't deal with the fact that the evidence to convict simply didn't exist, you need to grow the hell up.


At least we've moved past the "OMG The Jury was soooo stupid" stage.  Now we're to the "The DA was sooooo stupid" stage.  As Nancy Grace informs us that we should freak out about this less, the country can start to progress.
 
2013-03-04 02:47:57 PM

scubamage: Abe Vigoda's Ghost: KrispyKritter: ...she was acquitted. that's supposed to mean something.

It means that the DA's office was inept.

It means that idiots value popular media's opinion of who is and isn't guilty more than the results of careful deliberation of evidence by 12 jurors. The DA's office doesn't render the verdict, the defendant's peers do. If you can't deal with the fact that the evidence to convict simply didn't exist, you need to grow the hell up.


Go suck on mommas nipple a little more

Everyone knows what went down.

The fact they couldn't prove it does''t make her a good girl.
 
2013-03-04 02:54:18 PM

sloshed_again: The fact they couldn't prove it does''t make her a good girl.


The fact they couldn't prove it makes her innocent. Whether or not shes a dirty, nasty, slutty, tramp of a whore of a slut is irrelevent.
 
2013-03-04 02:57:09 PM

sloshed_again: scubamage: Abe Vigoda's Ghost: KrispyKritter: ...she was acquitted. that's supposed to mean something.

It means that the DA's office was inept.

It means that idiots value popular media's opinion of who is and isn't guilty more than the results of careful deliberation of evidence by 12 jurors. The DA's office doesn't render the verdict, the defendant's peers do. If you can't deal with the fact that the evidence to convict simply didn't exist, you need to grow the hell up.

Go suck on mommas nipple a little more

Everyone knows what went down.

The fact they couldn't prove it does''t make her a good girl.


And 600 years ago everyone thought the world was flat - and they were wrong. "Everyone" can be really farking stupid and blind sometimes. That's why we do our best to prevent mob rule.

We have our system because it's the best thing we've found so far. The evidence available wasn't enough to convict her on the charges, so she went free. She is innocent until proven guilty. Since she was not proven guilty, she is therefore innocent. Simple.

Just because Nancy Grace told you otherwise doesn't change the fact that the evidence simply isn't there. And if you think, "everybody knows..." is a good enough reason destroy someone's life, you really need to never vote because you lack even a basic understanding of how this country and its legal system work.

But please, if you somehow feel that your knowledge of the case via TV is somehow superior to that of the 12 jurors who actually viewed every shred if evidence in the case in the first person in that courtroom and sat through every minute of testimony, do go on. I'd love to see how you can rationalize that.
 
2013-03-04 03:00:56 PM

kumanoki: sloshed_again: The fact they couldn't prove it does''t make her a good girl.

The fact they couldn't prove it makes her innocent. Whether or not shes a dirty, nasty, slutty, tramp of a whore of a slut is irrelevent.


Absolutely not. It makes her not guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. There's a big difference.
 
2013-03-04 03:06:43 PM

namegoeshere: kumanoki: sloshed_again: The fact they couldn't prove it does''t make her a good girl.

The fact they couldn't prove it makes her innocent. Whether or not shes a dirty, nasty, slutty, tramp of a whore of a slut is irrelevent.

Absolutely not. It makes her not guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. There's a big difference.


True. Not guilty /= Innocent.
However, 'not guilty beyond a resonable doubt' has nothing to dow with whethershes a dirty, nasty, slutty, tramp of a whore of a slut. I just want to make youre everyone gets that.
 
2013-03-04 03:08:53 PM

namegoeshere: kumanoki: sloshed_again: The fact they couldn't prove it does''t make her a good girl.

The fact they couldn't prove it makes her innocent. Whether or not shes a dirty, nasty, slutty, tramp of a whore of a slut is irrelevent.

Absolutely not. It makes her not guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. There's a big difference.


Wrong. The presumption of innocence is a legal right. The burden of proving her guilty lies on the accuser (the DA). They failed at proving her guilty, therefore, she remains innocent. The defendant is always assumed to be innocent up until the accuser has proved beyond a reasonable doubt that that fundamental assumption is wrong.

She is innocent.
 
2013-03-04 03:11:47 PM
Casey Anthony comes out of hiding in Tampa courtroom for bankruptcy hearing

When I first read the headline I thought she'd been in the judge's chambers all this time.
 
2013-03-04 03:22:45 PM

scubamage: sloshed_again: scubamage: Abe Vigoda's Ghost: KrispyKritter: ...she was acquitted. that's supposed to mean something.

It means that the DA's office was inept.

It means that idiots value popular media's opinion of who is and isn't guilty more than the results of careful deliberation of evidence by 12 jurors. The DA's office doesn't render the verdict, the defendant's peers do. If you can't deal with the fact that the evidence to convict simply didn't exist, you need to grow the hell up.

Go suck on mommas nipple a little more

Everyone knows what went down.

The fact they couldn't prove it does''t make her a good girl.

And 600 years ago everyone thought the world was flat - and they were wrong. "Everyone" can be really farking stupid and blind sometimes. That's why we do our best to prevent mob rule.

We have our system because it's the best thing we've found so far. The evidence available wasn't enough to convict her on the charges, so she went free. She is innocent until proven guilty. Since she was not proven guilty, she is therefore innocent. Simple.

Just because Nancy Grace told you otherwise doesn't change the fact that the evidence simply isn't there. And if you think, "everybody knows..." is a good enough reason destroy someone's life, you really need to never vote because you lack even a basic understanding of how this country and its legal system work.

But please, if you somehow feel that your knowledge of the case via TV is somehow superior to that of the 12 jurors who actually viewed every shred if evidence in the case in the first person in that courtroom and sat through every minute of testimony, do go on. I'd love to see how you can rationalize that.


"Jurors who viewed every shred of evidence in the case"?

The jurors saw LESS evidence than you or I. Not more. One of the jobs of the defense team is to get as much "evidence" as possible thrown out. The jury sees an abridged version of the events.

I'm not saying its a horrible system, I'm just saying that if you think the jury is seeing everything, you are very mistaken.
 
2013-03-04 03:22:51 PM
Wow, people white-knighting this chick.
 
2013-03-04 03:27:02 PM

Abe Vigoda's Ghost: Wow, people white-knighting this chick.


Not white-knighting anyone. Trying to get idiots to understand how the legal system works. It could be you, the guy down the road, hitler, whoever.

There is always a presumption of innocence. If the state doesn't prove otherwise beyond a reasonable doubt, they remain innocent.
It's not.that.farking.hard.to.understand.

VespaGuy: scubamage: sloshed_again: scubamage: Abe Vigoda's Ghost: KrispyKritter: ...she was acquitted. that's supposed to mean something.

It means that the DA's office was inept.

It means that idiots value popular media's opinion of who is and isn't guilty more than the results of careful deliberation of evidence by 12 jurors. The DA's office doesn't render the verdict, the defendant's peers do. If you can't deal with the fact that the evidence to convict simply didn't exist, you need to grow the hell up.

Go suck on mommas nipple a little more

Everyone knows what went down.

The fact they couldn't prove it does''t make her a good girl.

And 600 years ago everyone thought the world was flat - and they were wrong. "Everyone" can be really farking stupid and blind sometimes. That's why we do our best to prevent mob rule.

We have our system because it's the best thing we've found so far. The evidence available wasn't enough to convict her on the charges, so she went free. She is innocent until proven guilty. Since she was not proven guilty, she is therefore innocent. Simple.

Just because Nancy Grace told you otherwise doesn't change the fact that the evidence simply isn't there. And if you think, "everybody knows..." is a good enough reason destroy someone's life, you really need to never vote because you lack even a basic understanding of how this country and its legal system work.

But please, if you somehow feel that your knowledge of the case via TV is somehow superior to that of the 12 jurors who actually viewed every shred if evidence in the case in the first person in that courtroom and sat through every minute of testimony, do go on. I'd love to see how you can rationalize that.

"Jurors who viewed every shred of evidence in the case"?

The jurors saw LESS evidence than you or I. Not more. One of the jobs of the defense team is to get as much "evidence" as possible thrown out. The jury sees an abridged version of the events.

I'm not saying its a horrible system, I ...


You know how I can tell you've never sat through a criminal trial?

/interned for 2 years as a legal assistant while in pre-law.
//Quit because I didn't have the stomach for some of the things defense attorneys needed me to do.
 
2013-03-04 03:29:51 PM
Why does Casey Anthony look like Jared Leto?
 
2013-03-04 03:38:47 PM

scubamage: Abe Vigoda's Ghost: Wow, people white-knighting this chick.

Not white-knighting anyone. Trying to get idiots to understand how the legal system works. It could be you, the guy down the road, hitler, whoever.

There is always a presumption of innocence. If the state doesn't prove otherwise beyond a reasonable doubt, they remain innocent.
It's not.that.farking.hard.to.understand.


She was found not guilty. It does not mean that she did not kill her daughter.
If I was on the jury, I probably would have voted not to convict also. That would be based on the case presented, not on my gut feeling that she was the one to kill her daughter.
It's not.that.farking.hard.to.understand.
 
2013-03-04 03:42:01 PM

Abe Vigoda's Ghost: scubamage: Abe Vigoda's Ghost: Wow, people white-knighting this chick.

Not white-knighting anyone. Trying to get idiots to understand how the legal system works. It could be you, the guy down the road, hitler, whoever.

There is always a presumption of innocence. If the state doesn't prove otherwise beyond a reasonable doubt, they remain innocent.
It's not.that.farking.hard.to.understand.

She was found not guilty. It does not mean that she did not kill her daughter.
If I was on the jury, I probably would have voted not to convict also. That would be based on the case presented, not on my gut feeling that she was the one to kill her daughter.
It's not.that.farking.hard.to.understand.


The real failure was the prosecutor not bringing lesser charges as fall-backs.  I have a feeling they could have gotten a conviction for criminal negligence if they'd tried for it.
 
2013-03-04 03:44:09 PM
i586.photobucket.com
 
2013-03-04 03:52:13 PM

namegoeshere: kumanoki: sloshed_again: The fact they couldn't prove it does''t make her a good girl.

The fact they couldn't prove it makes her innocent. Whether or not shes a dirty, nasty, slutty, tramp of a whore of a slut is irrelevent.

Absolutely not. It makes her not guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. There's a big difference.


In US Law, as previously pointed out, Not Guilty is the same as Innocent.

In Scottish Law there is a verdict of "Not Proven" that is seperate from "Not Guilty", but the US legal
system does not recognize that distinction.
 
2013-03-04 04:01:28 PM

Abe Vigoda's Ghost: scubamage: Abe Vigoda's Ghost: Wow, people white-knighting this chick.

Not white-knighting anyone. Trying to get idiots to understand how the legal system works. It could be you, the guy down the road, hitler, whoever.

There is always a presumption of innocence. If the state doesn't prove otherwise beyond a reasonable doubt, they remain innocent.
It's not.that.farking.hard.to.understand.

She was found not guilty. It does not mean that she did not kill her daughter.
If I was on the jury, I probably would have voted not to convict also. That would be based on the case presented, not on my gut feeling that she was the one to kill her daughter.
It's not.that.farking.hard.to.understand.


But it is irrelevant what you think.  It's irrelevant what the rest of the world thinks.  A court of law found her not-guilty of the death of her daughter.  Yes, therefore she is legally innocent.  If you believe in a higher power that will ultimately judge her, then you can be comforted that she is probably not innocent.  Fortunately, our legal system doesn't work that way.  The DA failed to convince a jury of her guilt.  Sorry if that irritates you, but that's the fact.

Not white knighting her.  I think she deserves a lifetime of pain and torment.  But someday, you might be the one in court, and it would really suck if the influence of Nancy Grace was the one who got you put away for life.
 
2013-03-04 04:09:58 PM

Close2TheEdge: Abe Vigoda's Ghost: scubamage: Abe Vigoda's Ghost: Wow, people white-knighting this chick.

Not white-knighting anyone. Trying to get idiots to understand how the legal system works. It could be you, the guy down the road, hitler, whoever.

There is always a presumption of innocence. If the state doesn't prove otherwise beyond a reasonable doubt, they remain innocent.
It's not.that.farking.hard.to.understand.

She was found not guilty. It does not mean that she did not kill her daughter.
If I was on the jury, I probably would have voted not to convict also. That would be based on the case presented, not on my gut feeling that she was the one to kill her daughter.
It's not.that.farking.hard.to.understand.

But it is irrelevant what you think.  It's irrelevant what the rest of the world thinks.  A court of law found her not-guilty of the death of her daughter.  Yes, therefore she is legally innocent.  If you believe in a higher power that will ultimately judge her, then you can be comforted that she is probably not innocent.  Fortunately, our legal system doesn't work that way.  The DA failed to convince a jury of her guilt.  Sorry if that irritates you, but that's the fact.

Not white knighting her.  I think she deserves a lifetime of pain and torment.  But someday, you might be the one in court, and it would really suck if the influence of Nancy Grace was the one who got you put away for life.


Read my farking post. I never said that the jury was wrong.
 
2013-03-04 04:14:44 PM

scubamage: namegoeshere: kumanoki: sloshed_again: The fact they couldn't prove it does''t make her a good girl.

The fact they couldn't prove it makes her innocent. Whether or not shes a dirty, nasty, slutty, tramp of a whore of a slut is irrelevent.

Absolutely not. It makes her not guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. There's a big difference.

Wrong. The presumption of innocence is a legal right. The burden of proving her guilty lies on the accuser (the DA). They failed at proving her guilty, therefore, she remains innocent. The defendant is always assumed to be innocent up until the accuser has proved beyond a reasonable doubt that that fundamental assumption is wrong.

She is innocent.


Just because a court of law doesn't find her guilty does not mean shes "innocent". She is only innocent in the eyes of the court, that hardly translates that she didn't commit the crime. I have no opinion one way or another, but by your logic anyone that kills someone and never gets caught is innocent.. hardly the case.
 
2013-03-04 04:23:59 PM
If you're a US citizen and you think she needs to be punished for what you think she may have done even though she was found not guilty by a jury of her peers then kindly leave my country.

/unfamiliar with any details of the case and that doesn't farking matter
 
2013-03-04 04:26:52 PM

scubamage: namegoeshere: kumanoki: sloshed_again: The fact they couldn't prove it does''t make her a good girl.

The fact they couldn't prove it makes her innocent. Whether or not shes a dirty, nasty, slutty, tramp of a whore of a slut is irrelevent.

Absolutely not. It makes her not guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. There's a big difference.

Wrong. The presumption of innocence is a legal right. The burden of proving her guilty lies on the accuser (the DA). They failed at proving her guilty, therefore, she remains innocent. The defendant is always assumed to be innocent up until the accuser has proved beyond a reasonable doubt that that fundamental assumption is wrong.

She is innocent.


The presumption of innocence is a legal tenet. She can not be legally punished for that crime. However, we, the public, are under no such restriction. We do not need to believe her innocent just because the court found her not guilty.
 
2013-03-04 04:28:02 PM

ifly4fun: Just because a court of law doesn't find her guilty does not mean shes "innocent". She is only innocent in the eyes of the court, that hardly translates that she didn't commit the crime. I have no opinion one way or another, but by your logic anyone that kills someone and never gets caught is innocent.. hardly the case.


Unfortunately, that's all that we have though. If there is no evidence that proves her guilt she is innocent. Without this evidence, why are people saying that she did it? Does everyone but the court have some secret knowledge of the events in question?

If someone kills and there's no evidence, how do we know they have killed? You can believe or guess or whatever, but if there is no evidence then you're just spouting air.
 
2013-03-04 04:30:20 PM

namegoeshere: However, we, the public, are under no such restriction. We do not need to believe her innocent just because the court found her not guilty.


Bingo. But, saying that someone did a crime with no evidence is slander, if I'm not mistaken (hey, I'm obviously no lawyer, so it's likely). You can try to punish them for a supposed crime, but you'd be committing a crime by doing that, correct?
 
2013-03-04 04:33:55 PM

moto-geek: namegoeshere: However, we, the public, are under no such restriction. We do not need to believe her innocent just because the court found her not guilty.

Bingo. But, saying that someone did a crime with no evidence is slander, if I'm not mistaken (hey, I'm obviously no lawyer, so it's likely). You can try to punish them for a supposed crime, but you'd be committing a crime by doing that, correct?


In most states defamation is not a criminal violation, it can be a civil one but she is going to have to prove monetary damages. Since everyone thinks she did it, good luck.

/I think
//IANAL
///I ANAL too every chance I get
 
2013-03-04 04:36:19 PM

namegoeshere: scubamage: namegoeshere: kumanoki: sloshed_again: The fact they couldn't prove it does''t make her a good girl.

The fact they couldn't prove it makes her innocent. Whether or not shes a dirty, nasty, slutty, tramp of a whore of a slut is irrelevent.

Absolutely not. It makes her not guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. There's a big difference.

Wrong. The presumption of innocence is a legal right. The burden of proving her guilty lies on the accuser (the DA). They failed at proving her guilty, therefore, she remains innocent. The defendant is always assumed to be innocent up until the accuser has proved beyond a reasonable doubt that that fundamental assumption is wrong.

She is innocent.

The presumption of innocence is a legal tenet. She can not be legally punished for that crime. However, we, the public, are under no such restriction. We do not need to believe her innocent just because the court found her not guilty.


That's fine.  As long as the court system never devolves to the point where public viewpoint becomes somehow relevant.  If it ever does, then we are all truly farked.  And does it really justify harassment of her after she has been tried in court?  I don't personally think so.  I can't help but wonder what type of person took time out of their life to hold a "How much was your baby worth?" sign up as Case Anthony was being brought into a bankruptcy hearing.  Jesus Christ, get a farking life people.
 
2013-03-04 04:39:52 PM

moto-geek: namegoeshere: However, we, the public, are under no such restriction. We do not need to believe her innocent just because the court found her not guilty.

Bingo. But, saying that someone did a crime with no evidence is slander, if I'm not mistaken (hey, I'm obviously no lawyer, so it's likely). You can try to punish them for a supposed crime, but you'd be committing a crime by doing that, correct?


I'm not for the active vigilante justice. I think shunning, which is totally legal in all fifty states, is the best punishment for this whole horrible family. Ignore them completely. They do not exist. Them and the WBC.

As for slander, I don't think you could raise a slander case if, based on a person's interpretation of the evidence, that person was of the opinion that she was guilty. It's not like I'm saying that Glen Beck raped and murdered a girl in 1990, for which there was absolutely no concrete evidence whatsoever. So we really can't even speculate as to his guilt.
 
2013-03-04 04:41:02 PM
Close2TheEdge:  I can't help but wonder what type of person took time out of their life to hold a "How much was your baby worth?" sign up as Case Anthony was being brought into a bankruptcy hearing. Jesus Christ, get a farking life people.

This is Nancy Grace's target audience.
 
2013-03-04 04:47:49 PM
So let's see the picture, asshole.
 
2013-03-04 04:51:22 PM

moto-geek: namegoeshere: However, we, the public, are under no such restriction. We do not need to believe her innocent just because the court found her not guilty.

Bingo. But, saying that someone did a crime with no evidence is slander, if I'm not mistaken (hey, I'm obviously no lawyer, so it's likely). You can try to punish them for a supposed crime, but you'd be committing a crime by doing that, correct?


As a broke woman who could easily prove slander in this case (assuming not-guilty = innocent), why isn't she pressing on with any slander lawsuits?
 
2013-03-04 05:35:56 PM
I can't think of a good metaphor, so I'll just say that I'd like to have sex with her.
 
Displayed 50 of 123 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report