Re: [wc] Re: am I crazy to go to London in October?

Mon, 14 Aug 2006 09:48:18 -0700

Do you ever wonder if you have enough information to make a decision about a case like that? I read a lot and last week when this whole terrorist plot was coming out of the UK I just felt like I didn't have enough information to make a decision about guilt or innocence. I try to not rush to judgement about people without know the details. I understand that you may not feel the need for all the details but I don't believe everything that I hear. Especially in the first few days after something like this. I remember when the Murrow Federal Building in Ok was blown up the first thing that was said was it was Islamic terrorists... we often jump to conclusions.

 
On 8/14/06, Ellen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

because I often believe someone is guilty even after the trial has
proven them not guilty, so the outcome of the trial doesn't always
have much impact on how I feel about the case. Like in the case of
the guy who they are accusing of killing his wife and kid in their
house--if he's found not guilty I'm still gonna definitely still
think he did it.

--- In [email protected], "Daria Akers"


<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> WOOOOHOOOO Yes... that is all we wanted. It is the semantics of the
> argument. It's all about splitting hairs and doing it with great
> passion. All the while knowing people here will still laugh at your
jokes.
> Got to love community.
> Daria
>
>
> On 8/14/06, Ellen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > OK that was DEFINITELY the wrong choice of words, which is
probably
> > the root of the confusion. You don't need a trial to BELIEVE
someone
> > is guilty. My fault, sorry.
> >
> > --- In [email protected]<weingartenchatters%
40yahoogroups.com>,

> > "dvm8375"
> >
> > <muellerdana@> wrote:
> > >
> > > In America you do.
> > >
> > > --- In [email protected]<weingartenchatters%
40yahoogroups.com>,

> > "Ellen"
> > > <ellengoodman6@> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > I'm getting the impression that they have good reason to
believe
> > > the
> > > > majority of them are guilty. Sorry, I'm convinced. You don't
> > > need a
> > > > trial to prove someone is guilty.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --- In [email protected]<weingartenchatters%
40yahoogroups.com>,
> > "denisesudell"
> > > > <dsudell7781@> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > --- In
[email protected]<weingartenchatters%
40yahoogroups.com>,

> > "Ellen"
> > > <ellengoodman6@>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > "Those people they arrested should rot in hell. . . . Yes
it's
> > > > > possible they arrested some people that were innocent, but
I am
> > > > > certain they aren't all innocent. . . . This is sick and
these
> > > people
> > > > > deserve whatever is coming to them."
> > > > >
> > > > > Boy, if I ever get arrested and charged with a crime, I hope
> > you
> > > don't
> > > > > serve on the jury.
> > > > >
> > > > > Ever hear of "innocent until proven guilty"?
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
>


__._,_.___

YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS



__,_._,___

Reply via email to