- Feb 20, 2013
- Reaction score
Chelly, don’t expect a response which will answer your questions. (I know you don't expect that :giggleScarlett, Why are the R's so important to you that you ignore reason and evidence? Why have you come here day-after-day for nearly a year (perhaps longer) to defend them in such a manner that is obviously embarrassing to you? You frequently say here, "That doesn't make sense" What does not make sense is your blindly defending the R's. Why? Really?
The percentage of GJ’s getting it right are very high. However, the gist of this thread is “solved or not”.
Respectfully, excluding the IDIs’ or fence-sitting posters , from last year’s GJ revelation, those who’ve read up on this case, or even have a modicum of knowledge beyond the electronic sound bites, have made up their mind as to who was responsible. (I’ve seen a poll with 93% believing the R’s responsible and 7% think an intruder.) So maybe it is solved in the public’s mind. Moo
Cover-up? Permitting? Unless one of the R’s were running a little pedophile club out of their basement, the idea that the R’s were covering up for an intruder is pretty out there. No?
We all wish the GJ True Bill info was more definitive as to which one of them struck her and which one strangled her, but I’ve given some weight to the private words of one of the jurors (spoken to Brennan) that “they didn’t know who (of the R’s) did what.” “And someone could have gotten her help and they didn’t.”
Back to the legal discussion of this. Before the knowledge of the GJ opinion back in 2001 when Marcia Clark spoke to CS, criminal defense attorney, and asked why the DA couldn’t charge the two adult R’s and let the jury figure it out. (Marcia Clark said “we do that in California.” Back then CS opined that he believed the GJ was weighing whether to charge someone with being an accomplice or an accessory after the fact. But he didn’t think they could go to trial as it was. I believe there was more to AH’s decision than not knowing how to proceed. But that’s only my opinion.
Perhaps PW’s new book is aimed to highlight the R’s innocence, once again. Yet, another book, more religious avowals, and there are still individuals on public forums who are firmly RDI. And the Internet seems to thrive and live on. I know many many young people who only get their news from the Internet. So it’s a new ballgame now. If the RST managed to “pr-hornswoggle” the mainstream media rotten luck that they haven’t been able to silence the Internet. JMHO