- Joined
- Dec 30, 2011
- Messages
- 4,161
- Reaction score
- 1,373
- Location
- Here
- Gender
- Undisclosed
- Political Leaning
- Private
Yet you are responding. :doh
Clearly I know you look at your subscriptions. So gee, your alleged reason you attribute to me for whatever is asinine. :doh
So lets get back to the last on topic response that you can't back up even after being asked to explain.
Your deflection isn't going to save you. Either back up what you previously said, or push on. It is that simple.So why do you do it? You have to perform an extra step each time. For what purpose?
Your deflection isn't going to save you. Either back up what you previously said, or push on. It is that simple.
You have shown you understand nothing but your convoluted assertions.It's ok, we all understand why.
Except that I clearly did discuss them and pointed out to you how you were wrong and even asked you to explain why you thought otherwise. from which all you have done is deflect.You don't seem that keen to disicuss your own words from a few posts back either,
:dohYou want to paint your deflection like someone else's deflection... and that's ok, too. Don't worry, sweetheart, you're safe in that little cocoon.
You have shown you understand nothing but your convoluted assertions.
Except that I clearly did discuss them and pointed out to you how you were wrong and even asked you to explain why you thought otherwise. from which all you have done is deflect.
And yes we all know why you are deflecting from it. You were being dishonest and making false claims.
:doh
What you just said only applies only to you.
As was already stated.
Your deflection isn't going to save you. Either back up what you previously said, or push on. It is that simple.
So either honestly engage in discussion and answer post #646 or push on. It doesn't get much more simpler than that.
That is becasue it is true.Again, you accuse me of dishonestly engaging in discussion
:boohoo:you are afraid to let the system notify me that you replied
And again. What does the Defense not releasing evidence have to do with the Prosecutor trying to suppress it.You're own words claimed the tape is damning to the prosecution's case, and that the Prosecutor was trying to suppress it so that public opinion couldn't favor the defendants...yet when pointed out that the tape has been "releasable" since June 26 (as part of discovery), and for some reason has not been released, well, your little fiction starts to unravel.
That is becasue it is true.
:boohoo:
This is nothing but a manifestation of your own lame thoughts, and just isn't true.
Again.
Clearly I know you look at your subscriptions. So gee, your alleged reason you attribute to me for whatever is asinine.
And again. What does the Defense not releasing evidence have to do with the Prosecutor trying to suppress it.
Let me tell you again differently. It has absolutely nothing to do with each other.
Your argument is lame.
Not only that, but what do you not understand about not releasing something while a Judge is determining a motion to prevent release? It is something that just isn't done.
Do you really not know that?
Bottom line is the the Defense not releasing evidence has absolutely nothing to do with the Prosecutor trying to control the narrative as you absurdly assert.
By trying to prevent the release the Prosecution is trying to control the narrative.Who is the prosecution trying to keep from exposing the evidence?
Yep clearly you are not thinking this through and even lack an understanding of what I have claimed.Who has a vested interested in exposing the evidence if it does what you claim it does (without having seen it yourself)? Yeah that's the defense, buddy.
This is you not knowing what you are talking about, which of course, is of no surprise at all.Leaks are a standard operating procedure... and I'm not all that surprised that you don't know that.
And? You have no valid point.The motion was also kicked out days ago and still, no tape.
:lamo:lamo:lamoYour own words being used against you... that must sting.
:dohAnd yet...
...still no tape.
:doh
iLOL :lamo
And yet...
...still irrelevant to this specific discussion.
Another failed rebuttal, especially as you have not shown that they have to release the tape. Nor could you.Yet another day gone, and still no tape.
And you're still gaming the system so quotes aren't reported. That is a coward's move.
Another failed rebuttal, especially as you have not shown that they have to release the tape. Nor could you.
And this new and failed rebuttal is total different then your previously lame argument which you were presenting.
Your surprise has nothing to do with your other arguments. :dohIf it's such a damning piece of evidence, I'm surprised we haven't seen it yet.
:boohoo:But please, keep doing that coward's trick that keeps the system from reporting quotes. Every time you do it, it reinforces the notion that you're afraid of rebuttal and not having the last (incorrect) word. Truly sad. But, hey, it's your journey.
Your surprise has nothing to do with your other arguments. :doh
:boohoo:
This is a lame argument as well, as we both know (as you even confirmed), you look to see if there are any new responses. Which just shows you are making things up to believe. :2rofll:
:boohoo:So why do you take the extra step? I'm sure this works with other people in other, busier threads, even though it's not working here. But cowardly habits are hard to break.
:boohoo:
You clearly have no clue as to what you speak. That is funny. :2funny:
But you are still failing to focus on the topic I see. :yawn: Yawn.
:dohYou haven't focused on the topic in 67 pages.
Another dishonest argument. Go figure. Providing what has been reported is not my position, but what has been reported.After all this time, you still don't have a first-hand source to corroborate your opinion of how you think things really went down at a place you weren't even at.
:boohoo:The fact you continue to game the website so it doesn't provide notification of quotes is just cowardly and sad.
The only one who had problem with the reported information was you in not understanding that the reporter attributed the quotes to the witness. That hasn't changed.I suppose it's no surprise, seeing what trouble you had earlier with the definition of "quote".
:doh
Your comment is nothing but dishonesty and hilarious coming from the one who actually hasn't.
And as typical, you have again shown that you are still failing to focus on the topic. :yawn: Yawn.
Another dishonest argument. Go figure. Providing what has been reported is not my position, but what has been reported.
:boohoo:
Again.
You attributing motivations and meaning to another based solely on whatever you think, when you clearly have no clue (as I said) is hilarious. :2funny:You clearly have no clue as to what you speak.
The only one who had problem with the reported information was you in not understanding that the reporter attributed the quotes to the witness. That hasn't changed.
And again. Even the Prosecutor has acknowledged those as being snippets of what he said. Which further shows you had/have no valid argument.
More reported information.
Defense says prosecutors withholding evidence Freddie Gray 'attempted to injure himself' in previous arrest
Prosecutors have information indicating that Freddie Gray "attempted to injure himself" during a previous arrest, but have intentionally withheld it from their criminal case against the six Baltimore police officers charged in Gray's apprehension and death in April, the officers' attorneys said in a court filing Thursday.
"Based upon information and belief, the State's Attorney's Office was informed of this fact, yet failed to disclose to the Defendants any statements, reports, or other communications relating to this information," they wrote.
Defense says prosecutors withholding evidence Freddie Gray 'attempted to injure himself' in previous arrest
:dohProvide the definition of "quote".
:boohoo:Seeing as how you go out of your way to make sure quotes don't register,
:doh
Lame.
So you want to double back to this absurd argument huh?
Again.
Don't need to.
You are the one that needs to explain what you do not understand about the actual quotes in the article not being attributed to anyone else but the witness.
Again. "His statement is contained in an application for a search warrant," You clearly do not understand what you read.
What did you not understand about the wording "His statement" indicating that is what was quoted?
So as to complete this circle before it gets started.
Again.
The only correct interpretation of those words, because of the actual wording, paragraph construction and quotations, was that the author was quoting the prisoner's words.
The quotes were attributed to the witness. "His statements". Not anyone else's.
But of course you do not want to recognize that.
Your argument based on the information in the OP is 100% wrong, and it is you who can't get around that fact.
It wouldn't even matter if what you say turns out to be factual correct. Based on the wording, paragraph construction and quotations, the author was attributing the quotes to the witness.
I even acknowledged that it may have been badly written, but the attribution was still to the witness. Not anyone else.
:boohoo:
:lamo
Tissue?
It is also funny how you quoted the new report yet didn't comment on it. :doh
:doh As already shown repeatedly, that would be you who doesn't know and are unable to admit to being wrong, as the quotes were there for you to read and clearly they were attributed to the witness. No one else.You still either don't know what a quote is, or can't bring yourself to admit you were wrong.
:boohoo:And STILL gaming the system like a coward. I feel sad for you.
:doh As already shown repeatedly, that would be you who doesn't know and are unable to admit to being wrong, as the quotes were there for you to read and clearly they were attributed to the witness. No one else.
What is funny is that even the other poster participating in this specific acknowledge they were attributed to the witness you still refuse.
And then on top of that the Prosecutor acknowledged those snippets were from him, yet you still refuse to acknowledge reality.
So all you have is outright dishonesty, denial and deflection.
Your whole position sad.
:boohoo:
Tissue?
:2funny:
Just more convoluted asinine assertions from you and just shows that you can not focus on the topic. That is what is sad.
I see you are still making delusional and cowardly arguments and still persist in personal attacks. Truly a shame.Let's see the tape. Coward.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?