I'm an attorney and while admit to being emotional about this case and passionate about my feelings that jodi is guilty and that Travis deserves justice, my profession renders me particularly capable of examining evidence and argument clinically, dispassionately and divorced from my emotions. Thus, despite my dislike of both defense counsel for what I felt was a ruthless defense based on allegations they knew were lies, despite my dislike if their styles, I was able to see that technically, they did a good job for their client with the facts they had and I didn't buy into the vitriol about their looks or outfits or how they sat or adjusted their junk.
Bottom line, zero credible evidence of pedophilia tendencies on part of Travis. In fact, her allegations about Travis viewing pornographic media of young boys and breaking her finger when she caught him was thoroughly refuted. Thoroughly.
Finally, as an attorney, I am well able to use logic when analyzing facts and evidence. But that ability is not unique to my kind. Thousands of my sleuth friends here clearly demonstrate their intelligence and wisdom and ability to set emotion aside and utilize logic. And frankly, I find your post to contain the inference that people who don't see evidence of pedophilia are irrational people letting their emotions get in the way of reality. And I think that's offensive. Especially since I believe that a finding that some basis for those revolting allegations exists, is not based in reality.
hoh:
