What's worse: Pedophiles or Murderers?

Started by bigbran88 pages

Originally posted by Starhawk
Acutally no, in a court of law if the other side makes a claim it's up to you to disprove it. For example they say that your client was at a certian place at a certain time then you have to prove they are wrong.
You also have to have proof to support your side as well.

Im giving him the chance to prove me wrong.

Originally posted by Starhawk
Im giving him the chance to prove me wrong.
Wait, don't you need proof and statements to actually say that, "he was here so and so"?

You need proof to make a claim in court.

Not always, I've gvien him the oppertunity to prove me worng, now he just has to take it.

Originally posted by Starhawk
Not always, I've gvien him the oppertunity to prove me worng, now he just has to take it.
So, you can just say anything without proof?
Makes you look pretty damn stupid when soemone calls you on it, hey?

Maybe he is sleeping?

Also, why does Pittman have to work, while you sit there doing nothing, waiting for him to own you?

I never said he has to do it tonight. I can wait, i'm actually a very patient person.

Continuing to prove what a positively pathetic attorney you'll make? There is no burden of proof on Pittman to disprove your claim, when you've provided absolutely nothing as evidence of it.

How about you provide proof positive of your claim. Since you're the one making a claim.

Asking for proof of negative is a logical fallacy, just as the several strawman statements and false dichotomies you've written are, I thought being a LAW STUDENT you should already know that.

again with the law student crap?

not only that, but his dad totally owns a dealership

Originally posted by Starhawk
Not always, I've gvien him the oppertunity to prove me worng, now he just has to take it.
Starhawk seriously though, are you in pre-law or actually in law school? Anyone and their grandmother’s donkey can be in pre-law but to actually be in law school is a different story.

Let’s put this into a court situation which you seem to be all so powerful at, you made a claim that you were correct with your 90% (your alibi) and I accused you of being wrong with the evidence, enough evidence for a reasonable conclusion of guilt. Now I have rest my case because I have proved to the jury (other readers of this thread) that there is merit to my case against you. Now as the defendant you must defend yourself and prove the 90%, or otherwise your alibi. I have provided evidence of your guilt, now it is your turn to defend yourself.

Originally posted by ThePittman
Starhawk seriously though, are you in pre-law or actually in law school? Anyone and their grandmother’s donkey can be in pre-law but to actually be in law school is a different story.

Let’s put this into a court situation which you seem to be all so powerful at, you made a claim that you were correct with your 90% (your alibi) and I accused you of being wrong with the evidence, enough evidence for a reasonable conclusion of guilt. Now I have rest my case because I have proved to the jury (other readers of this thread) that there is merit to my case against you. Now as the defendant you must defend yourself and prove the 90%, or otherwise your alibi. I have provided evidence of your guilt, now it is your turn to defend yourself.

Still to scared to look it up I see.

Originally posted by PVS
not only that, but his dad totally owns a dealership

a bullshit dealership?

Originally posted by Starhawk
Still to scared to look it up I see.
Oh yes I’m so scared of you, do you even read this posts? Answer the question, are you pre-law or actually in Law School?

So are you afraid to prove me wrong? I gave you a legal scenario as you did to explain why I should look this up but your don’t even seem to understand that, you fail.

Originally posted by ThePittman
Oh yes I’m so scared of you, do you even read this posts? Answer the question, are you pre-law or actually in Law School?

So are you afraid to prove me wrong? I gave you a legal scenario as you did to explain why I should look this up but your don’t even seem to understand that, you fail.

As did I last night to explain that you claim I'm wrong now prove it.

Originally posted by Starhawk
As did I last night to explain that you claim I'm wrong now prove it.
I showed you last night facts and figures to disprove your claim that were accepted by the majority that your information is incorrect so now it is your duty to refute my claim and provided information that refutes mine. This is how a debate or trial works but you don’t seem to understand that. How do you expect to be a lawyer if you can’t even understand the basic concept of debating?

Also answer my question, are you pre-law or in Law School?

the burden of proof is on the side which gives a positive statement (it exists, this is, etc) as opposed to the side which gives the negative statement (it doesnt exist, this is not, etc)

this is simple common logic in a debate, of which you have none.

yeah yeah, i know: "you make jokes about the pain and suffering of victims and their families and my sand ridden bug filled vagina yadda yadda"

This thread contains [a] poster(s) who are/is a ****.

Originally posted by Victor Von Doom
This thread contains [a] poster(s) who are/is a ****.

you made a grammatical error. HA!!!!! IT HAPPENED!!!!!

Originally posted by Victor Von Doom
This thread contains [a] poster(s) who are/is a ****.
hum

Originally posted by PVS
you made a grammatical error. HA!!!!! IT HAPPENED!!!!!

Hehe, he did indeed. Idiot.