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 : Impeach George W. Bush -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: ManyMoose who wrote (15050)	9/28/2002 2:59:33 AM
From: jttmab	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 93284

Very clever! Your own composition? Original. Right off my keyboard, direct to your inbox. I've since copied it off the thread into a Word doc and corrected the spellings of "relevant" and "defendant" [or their variants]. I need to check up on a couple of historical points...when did the right to remain silent enter into English Common Law...I think it was with 15th century abolishment of the Star Chamber [not to be confused with Ken Starr]. I'd also like to research the precise role that the "Patriots" had in the tea business. Plenty of references about that they were involved, but nothing specific. In case you forgot, that trial never happened because we won and we get to write history. Attention to detail, my friend. Note the use of "hypothetical trial" early in my text. jttmab

To: ManyMoose who wrote (15050)	9/28/2002 3:45:12 AM
From: jttmab	Respond to of 93284

I've been toying around with some other ideas on the "trial" ...e.g., I've had some thoughts on expanding the conclusion....after the Prosecution rests... [Muttering at Defense council's table] The Court: Does Defense Council wish to address the Court. Defense Coucil: Yes your honor. After consultation with co-defendants. Co-defendants wish to state that they no prior knowledge that Mr. Adams would testify, let alone what he might have said. In light of Mr. Adams testimony, co-defendants request a separate trial. The Court: Co-defendants should have thought about that before Mr. Adams testimony. Denied. Defense Council: Uh...Defense council requests a recess to discuss a plea bargain with prosecution. The Court: [glancing at the Prosecution Counsel]....Denied. Defense Council: Defenses Council wishes to change the defendants plea to "not guilty by reason of insanity" The Court: Mr. Adams seems to be quite reasoned to the Court, not bright, but reasoned. Denied. Defense Council: Defense motions for a mistrial. The Court: On what grounds? Defense Council: Insanity! The Court: I thought we went through that. Defense Council: Not the defendant. Defense council. I must have been insane to have allowed my client to testify. The Court: Huh? Defense Council: Never mind, just a thought. The Court: Does Defense Council have any questions for the witness, Mr. Adams. Defense Council: [Muttering: What the hole isn't deep enough?]...No your Honor, we have no questions.