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 : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: D. Long who wrote (106071)	3/26/2005 1:32:20 PM
From: Ilaine	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 793718

If I were making the rules we wouldn't even get to the question of whether the husband loved the wife or not. His uncorroborated testimony would not equal "clear and convincing evidence," period. That is sufficient for "preponderance of the evidence" but not "clear and convincing."

To: D. Long who wrote (106071)	3/26/2005 3:44:53 PM
From: KLP	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 793718

Derek...there have been too many people sign affidavits that testify to the fact that Michael certainly has some 'splaing to do....Is there any truth to the law suit filed in 1990 or 1991 that Terri had many broken bones, all unexplained? Why are so many of the court files still sealed? Were the nurses that came forward in 2003 telling the truth, or not? The court never took any of their testimony into consideration, as far as I can tell. Seems to me that the court has ruled on the Process, not the Content of the items that have happened SINCE 1993....