Well, RP is on the 3 DM-related cases now and his track record is...less than stellar.
DM is an "old stock" Canadian - ain't no one gonna feel sorry for him.
I keep thinking how he happily gained weight and denied all involvement when he first went to jail...but now he's a wraith, unkempt, unwashed, and thin.
I take that as a sign that he is now living in the same reality as the rest of us.
Personally, as a Canadian from a long line of Canadians, I find the term 'old stock Canadian' highly offensive. Should we now judge how Canadian someone is by how many generations their family may or may not have been here? Is there some sort of privilege and social standing that comes from being born into the 'right' Canadian family, and how does one go about accomplishing that? I had always thought that judging someone for the uncontrollable circumstances of their birth was wrong, whether it is to judge them on the colour of their skin, their gender, how many generations their family has lived where, or their family's financial status. I wonder, does it just make it more okay to be prejudiced against them since all of these old-timey families must be the same? Surely they are from the same old stock at least?
What about the poor unfortunates who chose to be born to lesser families, the ones who may have only been here a couple of generations, how should we treat them, should they get more or less sympathy? I'm confused now. How many generation should be born here before we start to treat them differently? Or how about we all act like traditional Canadians and treat everyone equally no matter what family they were born into?
When I look around I don't see the rest of us looking wraith, unkempt, unwashed and thin, that's not the same reality most of us here in Canada are living in. To me, hearing that a prisoner in solitary confinement had gone from previously healthy and clean to frail and dishevelled would suggest gross mistreatment. Personally, I would not think it would be something to celebrate, as a citizen of Canada, a country that doesn't approve of torturing our prisoners, traditionally.
What surprises me is you seem to think this is a courtroom and we are absolutely determining guilt
We are not . It is a discussion forum and we express the opinion we think there is guilt
And you tend to express the opinion there is no reason to assume guilt
It would appear you feel your opinions are acceptable and ours are not
Yet you are unable to provide one speck of information showing the possibility of innocence
I fail to see how that contributes to a true crime discussion forum
But hey, this isn't a courtroom, it's only the Internet. It's like a conversation between old friends, no one will ever judge you later for the things you say, it's not like the words are being recorded forever and ever. No one here ever has to feel bad if they advocate for the continued cruelty and suffering of another human being, or if they call some victim they have never met an alcoholic in denial, because it's all just gossip after all, what could it hurt? We are all just contributing in our own way, I think, even if we just want to nail down the exact amount it takes to constitute a lack of something. I don't think that there is any reason to deny someone else has made contributions just because we might not agree with them.
All just my opinion only.
