Getting serious here, JLA.
Since you bring this up fairly frequently:
Neither BIA who was vile, crude and vituperative and who got what she spewed (much like yourself) nor E were menaced by a creep who threatened to reveal intimate personal information or who intimated publicly that there was some kind of relationship where there was none.
That rather succinctly sums up the case you put on trial here for many months, with extensive support from E as your star expert witness.
You sought a guilty verdict by the SI jury. Eventually, the most you got was a hung jury. Here's my view on where the jurors stood (jurors being familiar, interested SI posters):
Guilty: JLA, E, LL, Bill.
Not Proven Guilty: (mind you, in no way do I speak for the following. This MY opinion, based on either a "telling silence" or actual affirmative comments): kholt, Rambi, X, tfowler, JC Dithers, Solon, the former Mrs. Peel.
I no doubt have left people out, through faulty memory. I apologize. I expect to be corrected.
Yet the point is clear. The SI jury was nowhere near to a conviction.
Doesn't that make you wonder?
As I see it, there are only two possibilities to explain this outcome:
(1) The case lacked merit. (2) Counsel was ineffective.
Which would you prefer that we believe? I, for one, do not believe you are ineffective counsel. |
