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.

Strategies & Market Trends : Anthony @ Equity Investigations, Dear Anthony, -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: SI Dave who wrote (93659)	11/29/2005 3:20:36 PM
From: Dale Baker	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 122087

I see a lot of wishful thinking here based on Tony's recently published spin. I don't recall the prosecution insinuating 9/11 into the transcripts hardly anywhere, or the judge being negligent about dealing with the 9/11 issue very, very carefully. The venue issue was addressed very early on. I would be amazed if a Federal appeals court decided one of its lower judges was suddenly incompetent to hear a case with a New York connection, or that the outcome would have been drastically different with a southern California jury. Lots of straw reaching and shaky branch walking involved here. They have to overcome a connect-the-dots prosecution that a jury found compelling. I doubt extraneous factors can accomplish that.