Finally a judge with some sense?

Ayahuasca said:
As usual you've taken something said and made a horrendous assumption out of it.

I don't see how her comments which are entirely common sense for any rational thinker mean she made bad rape case decisions throughout her career?
Click to expand...

Well if you are right then she changed her mind right before she retired, which is clearly BS.
 
asim18 said:
What on earth?

Saying that she probably felt this way many years before she actually said something, suddenly means Sliver loses credibility?

I despair at the intelligence levels here sometimes.

She could have been thinking what she's finally said for the last 30 years lol. And it's most likely there was a substantial period of time between her initial thoughts and then actually saying something about it.
Click to expand...

You despair at intelligence levels yet your whole post is made on assumptions.

I don't see how even if she has thought that for 30 years makes any difference either, it's an entirely rational way to think.
 
Ayahuasca said:
I don't see how even if she has thought that for 30 years makes any difference either.
Click to expand...

Because young Padawan, beliefs influence actions. If your beliefs are not aligned with reality and you are a Judge, then your sentencing and decision making will be awfully out of step.
 
Ayahuasca said:
You despair at intelligence levels yet your whole post is made on assumptions.
Click to expand...
???

What on earth?

Are you saying the ability to make assumptions means you're not intelligent?

lmao I think it's clear you're a troll, or you simply have no grasp of cause and effect.

She's not the retard here, she could have been thinking about it for a VERY long time. Just because she said something now doesn't mean it literally came into her head the second she said it lmao. :D
 
No, I'm saying making assumptions to try and prove an already poor point makes no difference.

Questioning her decisions as a judge on the assumption she's had those thoughts for 30 years is laughable.
 
Ayahuasca said:
No, I'm saying making assumptions to try and prove an already poor point makes no difference.

Questioning her decisions as a judge on the assumption she's had those thoughts for 30 years is laughable.
Click to expand...

Why is it laughable? The only thing funny here is you right now. Ever thought about a career in stand-up?
 
Ayahuasca said:
No, I'm saying making assumptions to try and prove an already poor point makes no difference.

Questioning her decisions as a judge on the assumption she's had those thoughts for 30 years is laughable.
Click to expand...

You can still judge/sentence people in line with guidelines and still not agree with them personally. lol.

A lot of judges probably take drugs, or may be completely against the silly and damaging drug laws. Doesn't mean they're going to start letting of drug dealers in court.
 
...and my work here is done, those last 2 post show exactly why you're 2 of the worst posters in this section.

A lot of judges probably take drugs, ahahahahahahahahahaha
 
So BBC article just up accusing her of victim shaming.

Utterly moronic.

Its like telling someone to wear a seatbelt or look both ways before crossing the street.

People need to get a grip, we don't live in a utopian society, so taking basic precautions is not shaming its just ******* SENSIBLE.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom