*Huey » 11 Jul 2024, 9:01 am » wrote: ↑
THat is lie. I refuse to answer questions where concerning comments you did not read, or used strike thru. I also refuse to answer questions that you have asked dozen of times.
Mary, if you recall, I clearly marked part of that OPINION.
1. It is OBJECTIVE FACT the JURY rejected the rape "charge".
2. It is OBJECTIVE FACT that the Judge stepped in to interpret the Jury's findings.
3. It is OPINION as to why the Judge did so, as I pointed out in the original comment YOU DID NOT READ.
What else you got, Boston Coward.
@Blackvegetable
That is what is relevant and I was, according to your post that validated it, 100% correct.