Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Convicted By Suspicion -- Why Scott Peterson May Be Innocent
The Hollywood Investigator ^ | 11/30/2004 | J. Neil Schulman

Posted on 11/30/2004 10:26:51 AM PST by J. Neil Schulman

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 241-260261-280281-300 ... 381-395 next last
To: J. Neil Schulman
who was so clumsy in his lies that even the clueless Amber Frey figured it out...

I'm going to Amazon and write a review of ALL your books, cautioning would be buyer's that you have a bad habit of NOT knowing the facts you're writing about.

She did NOT figure it out.

261 posted on 11/30/2004 8:59:41 PM PST by Howlin (W, Still the President)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 251 | View Replies]

To: onyx

I remember quipping in law school "and if you don't have the law or the facts, run like hell."


262 posted on 11/30/2004 9:00:42 PM PST by Petronski (One night in Bangkok makes a hard man humble, not much between despair and ecstasy.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 260 | View Replies]

To: J. Neil Schulman
That's playing with words.

That's laughable coming from you.

263 posted on 11/30/2004 9:00:58 PM PST by Howlin (W, Still the President)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 253 | View Replies]

To: J. Neil Schulman
That's playing with words.

Yeah, that technical jargon...who needs it? LOL

You did not read the transcripts...did you?

264 posted on 11/30/2004 9:01:37 PM PST by Velveeta
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 253 | View Replies]

To: .38sw

.38sw wrote:

"*sigh* If this is an example of your ability to think and reason, then I won't be buying any of your books."

If your demonstrated skill is writing unsupported personal attacks, you have a future as a Democratic Party operative.

JNS


265 posted on 11/30/2004 9:03:04 PM PST by J. Neil Schulman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 256 | View Replies]

To: onyx

Please continue...

Impugn the fairness of the process and you're a Geragos shill.


266 posted on 11/30/2004 9:03:20 PM PST by Velveeta
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 255 | View Replies]

To: J. Neil Schulman

Okay, this is both a personal smear and completely irrelevant to proving your case.

You have all the qualifications to have been on the prosecution team in the trial of Scott Peterson.







Personal smear? HA! Your writing speaks for itself.

I do not have a case to prove.
Your premise is bogus.
You have not made a legitimate arguement.

Your musings are simplistic.
They fail in the face of the massive circumstancial evidence.

You're trying to peddle your 'book.'




267 posted on 11/30/2004 9:04:09 PM PST by onyx
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 257 | View Replies]

To: J. Neil Schulman

Ya know, I supported all of my statements. What I wrote is pretty mild in the real of "personal attacks". If saying that you make no sense and that I question your ability to think and reason because you aren't making any sense, then fine. Attack me by saying I belong in the Democrat party. You may as well report me to the mods while you're at it.


268 posted on 11/30/2004 9:05:15 PM PST by .38sw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 265 | View Replies]

To: Velveeta

I think this poster wishes he were on SP's team. LOL.
Imagine, Geragos could have used ALL these marvelous arguements.
Silly Geragos, he must need a refresher course from this poster.



269 posted on 11/30/2004 9:06:40 PM PST by onyx
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 266 | View Replies]

To: Petronski


I remember quipping in law school "and if you don't have the law or the facts, run like hell."





Or write a book? LOL.


270 posted on 11/30/2004 9:08:36 PM PST by onyx
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 262 | View Replies]

To: onyx

onyx wrote:

"You're trying to peddle your 'book.'"

That particular book came out seven years ago. Six more of my books have been published since, and none of them have anything to do with this topic. Neither does my next book.

I've already had one poster to this forum threaten to write bad reviews of all my books on Amazon.com for spite.

Yeah, that must be it. I came here to sell my old book.

JNS


271 posted on 11/30/2004 9:10:17 PM PST by J. Neil Schulman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 267 | View Replies]

To: J. Neil Schulman
Okay, this is both a personal smear

Since when is the truth a personal smear?

Almost without exception, your posts are YOUR articles, with links back to YOUR sleazy web site.

272 posted on 11/30/2004 9:14:20 PM PST by Howlin (W, Still the President)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 257 | View Replies]

To: J. Neil Schulman


I checked your forum posts.
All I found were articles penned by you.
THAT is what I call a self promoting use of FR.


273 posted on 11/30/2004 9:14:40 PM PST by onyx
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 271 | View Replies]

To: onyx

I think this poster very well could be Mark Geragos.........LOL.


274 posted on 11/30/2004 9:15:55 PM PST by Howlin (W, Still the President)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 269 | View Replies]

To: onyx

*FWEET*

Personal attack!! Smear!!

Flag on the field.


275 posted on 11/30/2004 9:16:42 PM PST by .38sw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 273 | View Replies]

To: Howlin


BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHA!

Is it the sleaze?


276 posted on 11/30/2004 9:16:54 PM PST by onyx
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 274 | View Replies]

To: onyx

It's the complete detachment from reality that is the big tipoff.


277 posted on 11/30/2004 9:17:36 PM PST by Howlin (W, Still the President)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 276 | View Replies]

To: .38sw

ROTFLOL!
Too funny.
Thanks, I needed a great laugh.


278 posted on 11/30/2004 9:18:08 PM PST by onyx
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 275 | View Replies]

To: Howlin

And the arrogance.
Geeeeeeeeeez.
How I ever managed to not cross paths with
this one, I will NEVER know!

LOL!


279 posted on 11/30/2004 9:20:06 PM PST by onyx
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 277 | View Replies]

To: Velveeta

Velveeta wrote:
"[Quoting me] 'In the absence of a corpse, how are we to know that a murder has occurred?'

"Just one example, but there are many: Person X is missing and reported as such by her husband. The husband has replaced carpeting in the bedroom, but the blood stain is still illuminated with luminol. The area of the blood stain to the volume of blood loss can be calculated to determine that anyone losing that volume of blood would be dead."

Good example!

The trouble in this case is that nothing equally as inculpatory as a positive luminol reading exists.

JNS


280 posted on 11/30/2004 9:23:00 PM PST by J. Neil Schulman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 259 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 241-260261-280281-300 ... 381-395 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson