Blackvegetable » 6 minutes ago » wrote: ↑
Huey » 33 minutes ago » wrote: ↑
Which article are you using? Pick one. We using the linked article or the one you copied and pasted. They say two different thinks. Why are such a coward to link your source?
What you deleted:
Lil one, I am not interested. He is not being prosecuted right now. What I want to know is how was the daily beast article changed? You didn't do it but whoever told you about it did. So, iuf yo are going to go with the what you cut and pasted, link to it. If not, you have no case.
Now source it, Puss
This one....you should have continued reading.
The state supreme court overturned the conviction and remanded the case to Grafton County Superior Court after finding the trial judge had made improper evidentiary rulings, CNN reported. Rosen confirmed this occurred in a call with the Daily Beast, saying, “I am now innocent.” He is now in mediation with the New Hampshire attorney general’s office over the charges.
It is EXACTLY as I surmised...by remanding the case back, the Supreme Court tested Rosen's bluff...
There's no chance the gardener will take the fall.
1. Post the **** source. Because what you cut and pasted into the OP does not match the Daily Beast link.
2. You did not surmise ****. You are repeating what you are told.
3. Contrary to the words in your OP he is not being prosecuted. He is an innocent man. Post the **** sure ******. Isn't that what you called people who do not post their sources?
Yo are **** coward.