No I don't. I assume that you'll read the actual decision before you start yapping about the law, but I guess that makes me an @ss for assuming you'd actually inform yourself before pronouncing what is right, just, lawful, etc.
You're right, I did but what I find is more important than "he said, she said", is the fact that a judge (who've I've already demonstrated MAY be incapable of reaching correct decisions) can just over turn such a sacred document as a man's will- AFTER his demise.
Right, and there is no such thing as 100% proof positive of guilt. That is your assumption, and your problem.
Oh, like in the case of one of Clifford Olson's victims where he personally took the cops to a remote area in the bush where no one else had been for ages and showed the cops where he buried her.
You can, but you'd be wrong again. That doesn't appear to impede you though.
Oh, so I can assume that you are in favour of executing Olson and Bernardo, as opposed to sentencing them to something like house arrest where they would report to the probation officer periodically?
You didn't. In case it wasn't clear, I was returning to you a courtesy you won't give me. You have no problem pronouncing what I seem to think. Food for thought old fart.
I can only "pronounce" on what I read or question what is not made clear. Sorry if that offends you.
I never said I trust the judge to be RIGHT... I said I trust the judge to know more about the case than Prax does having read a news article. Presumably he knows a bit more about what went on in the lives of those women than you me or Prax do.
Oh, OK Karrie, but Prax does appear to be pretty wise on this case, more convincing to me than any judge.