Re: jury nullification, jury veto, jury pardon

On Sat, 18 Oct 2003 20:57:44 GMT, "Yardpilot" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:

>
>"Larry" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Yardpilot"
>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> >"Larry" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> >news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> >> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Ken Smith
>> >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> >(Whether
>> >> >Bush was busted for cocaine possession is debatable, but I tend to
>> >> >accept the assertion as fact, given that the document which would
>> >> >have indicated that fact has mysteriously been destroyed.)
>> >>
>> >> You accept it as true because the document that would prove it to be
>true
>> >> has been destroyed?  What would you think if the document existed?!?!!
>> >
>> >The argument that "it must be true because there is no evidence" sounds
>very
>> >much like a J. Edgar or J. Reno sort of spin. It is also the argument of
>a
>> >great many conspiracy theorists.\
>>
>> Which makes sense, since Ken (i) is a conspiracy theorist, and (ii) thinks
>> he was denied a law license on the basis of protected first amendment
>> speech, something for which there is simply no evidence.
>
>Evidently. I'm underwhelmed by his arguments.

That can only mean you are part of the conspiracy!


- Jon Beaver