Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Albion Wilde

Maybe you should lighten up. I’m not being that tough on you. Your reasoning is still specious though. It assumes that judges and justices are too dumb to look at the case before them and judge it on its merits. That they will look up the cases the attorney before them has represented and make assumptions about the case they are hearing based on an association with a past client/case. If that is the case our entire legal system is an exercise in futility from the get go.


132 posted on 12/20/2008 4:29:47 PM PST by TigersEye (I threw my shoe at Mohammed and hit Allah in the butt.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 129 | View Replies ]


To: TigersEye
I'm pretty much done with your overshooting interpretations of what you want to believe I mean. Here's what I posted to the thread originally: I don't think Berg's case is going to succeed and I would caution FReepers not to get their hopes up too far. That is all.

Good night, and have a pleasant tomorrow and a good Christmas.

133 posted on 12/20/2008 5:45:29 PM PST by Albion Wilde ("Praise and worship" is my alternate lifestyle.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 132 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


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