Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: TimF who wrote (142800)	2/20/2002 2:48:11 AM
From: hmaly	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1577025

Tim Re...Not exactly. Saying legally the rape did not occur implies that the law specifically says there was no rape. <<<<<<<< The law specifically says a person is innocent until proven guilty. So you cannot say someone raped someone else until a court of law agree with you. You can only say in Bill's case; Juanita alleged or Juanita charged Bill of raping. You cannot say Bill did rape her, and not be subject to libel, until the court agrees with you. Of course, in our case, we aren't worth Bill's trouble, so we likely can say anything we want and not get sued. <<, but even though he was found innocent if he tried to sue me for libel and my lawyer could show that a proponderence of evidence shows that he did do it then I would still win the lawsuit. <<<<<<<< How could your lawyer do that without another trial declaring OJ guilty, which could never happen because of double jeopardy. AFAIK you would have to abide by the courts decision. In OJ's case, a court of law found him innocent. You can't change that verdict, without a superceeding verdict. So my educated guess is your lawyer won't win the case, because the court can't retry OJ , because of double jeopardy, so you can never prove OJ did it,.