ilovewings
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Mar 11, 2009
- Messages
- 9,277
- Reaction score
- 70,920
I must have missed the memo. I thought this was a murder trial about child custody, as all the evidence supports to-date.
I didnt realize the murders were about a grow ops, especially with cartel involvement. Im pretty sure there was a much larger ops in Peebles that was raided after the murders. No cartel involved there.
I understand therories but shouldnt therories be supported by known facts?
I'll out any victim blame. The Rs worked their butts off doing hard physical labor. They werent making a killing on a few MJ plants.
I know i have a public edcuation from southern ohio and decades in the u.s. military, do i dont get wrapped up in conspiracy stuff without evidence to support. Sometimes the truth is as simple as it appears. In this case, a family feud over child custody. It is that simple. IMO
I am not watching this trial, but the trials I have watched, I see that judges allow the defense to put up all kinds of spurious defenses, which have no evidence to support them. Think of Casey Anthony. say no more: there was not one iota of evidence to support
the theory Baez put forth: it worked for him: she was acquitted. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't, but it really is up to the judge to decide to allow such defense or not.