• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

New Video And Audio Of Paul Pelosi Attack Raise So Many Questions

Its not me they have to satisfy, but the jury. Crimes of passion vs premeditated offer different defense approaches.

Their not stupid enough to bring those charges or defense (re: crime of passion :rolleyes: ) and the jury isnt stupid enough to believe it. Any responsible jury will be able to evaluate that evidence.
 
Their not stupid enough to bring those charges or defense (re: crime of passion :rolleyes: ) and the jury isnt stupid enough to believe it. Any responsible jury will be able to evaluate that evidence.
Evaluate what evidence?
 
Evaluate what evidence?

Are juries not presented with evidence? Such the video? Broken glass from the outside? And of course there's also testimony. No one involved, including LE, has even hinted at a personal relationship.
 
DePape has not claimed that it was a gay tryst.

So it won’t come up in the trial.

I ask again… what satisfaction do you get out of thinking that Paul Pelosi is gay?
There isn't one scintilla of evidence or facts that point to this being a gay encounter. Not one versus many facts that support the break in as a deliberate act to harm Nancy Pelosi yet VySky insists on pushing his baseless conspiracy theory. It is difficult to understand the need to keep this up no matter the facts but it sure speaks to credibility.
 
There isn't one scintilla of evidence or facts that point to this being a gay encounter. Not one versus many facts that support the break in as a deliberate act to harm Nancy Pelosi yet VySky insists on pushing his baseless conspiracy theory. It is difficult to understand the need to keep this up no matter the facts but it sure speaks to credibility.
If he is doing it simply to troll… that is a valid yet weird pastime.

Just would like some honesty.
 
Are juries not presented with evidence? Such the video? Broken glass from the outside? And of course there's also testimony. No one involved, including LE, has even hinted at a personal relationship.
Remember. The defense job is to expose reasonable doubt. It must be exploited. You don't have to prove a thing, that's the benefit.
 
Remember. The defense job is to expose reasonable doubt. It must be exploited. You don't have to prove a thing, that's the benefit.
The key word is "reasonable" in presenting doubt.

That may be difficult for the defense to provide. :giggle:
 
Remember. The defense job is to expose reasonable doubt. It must be exploited. You don't have to prove a thing, that's the benefit.

As Callen pointed out, there's no such evidence. None. The defense's line of questioning would be shut down immediately. The prosecution would object and point out the lack of evidence.
 
Its not me they have to satisfy, but the jury. Crimes of passion vs premeditated offer different defense approaches.
 
Back
Top Bottom