Liberal Forum

Skans » 23 May 2025, 10:13 am » wrote: ↑

23 May 2025, 10:13 am

She did it. I'm sure of it. I

Check out the dirty games the judge is allowing the state to play. Just look at the level of the witnesses that the state relies on. 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=go9pnA4Id4Q&t=217s
 
 

Cannonpointer » 23 May 2025, 10:39 am » wrote: ↑

23 May 2025, 10:39 am

Check out the dirty games the judge is allowing the state to play. Just look at the level of the witnesses that the state relies on. 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QVcNIfJLwbI

Not sure what you are getting at.  I saw a lawyer grilling some dude over a linked In page where the guy said he had a Bachelor of General Studies, concentration in math, rather than a Bachelor of Science in math, as referenced on the Linked In site. I mean, this questioning went on for about 5 minutes.  Then, I got bored and tuned out.
 

Skans » 23 May 2025, 10:45 am » wrote: ↑

23 May 2025, 10:45 am

Not sure what you are getting at.  I saw a lawyer grilling some dude over a linked In page where the guy said he had a Bachelor of General Studies, concentration in math, rather than a Bachelor of Science in math, as referenced on the Linked In site. I mean, this questioning went on for about 5 minutes.  Then, I got bored and tuned out.

You didn't watch it through. What you saw was the prophylactic direct examination by the prosecutor. This "expert witness" misrepresented his qualifications and was allowed by a dirty prosecutor to give opinion evidence which only ecpertts can give. But let's get closer to the actual crime of framing ms. read. Let's watch one of the cops lie on the stand.

EDIT: BTW, sorry for the *** - just blaze through his **** to the cross examination/implosion/perjury.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1DrwgivN9dY
 

Skans » 23 May 2025, 10:45 am » wrote: ↑

23 May 2025, 10:45 am

Not sure what you are getting at.  I saw a lawyer grilling some dude over a linked In page where the guy said he had a Bachelor of General Studies, concentration in math, rather than a Bachelor of Science in math, as referenced on the Linked In site. I mean, this questioning went on for about 5 minutes.  Then, I got bored and tuned out.

Just so you know, in the second trial, they have video evidence that the disgraced lead investigator went to the police station where the SUV was improperly impounded and did SOMETHING to the taill light BEFORE the pieces of it were "discovered" on a scene that had already been searched and opened to the public. That police station - very importantly - was recused from the investigation AND farther from the place where the vehicle was seized than two different state police barracks with secure garages, where the vehicle SHOULD have been taken by the tow truck that seized it for evidence. It should never have been taken to the recused police department - but that's where it was taken, for reasons investigators cannot explain. 

The video that shows the crime was handed over to the defense after it was subpoenaed. But the video was inverted, to make it appear that the dishonorably discharged trooper was **** around furtively with the LEFT rear brakelight. The defense experts discovered this trick and forced the state to own up to it. "Oops," said the investigators - "that was an accident." This was a middle of the night visit to the improperly held vehicle by the fired lead investigator, who just happened to be lifelong friends with the alberts, in whose house the cop actually died of a beating. 

All of this is being proved by the defense. This is literally a prosecution of the state, at this point. Ms Read is walking if she stands up and shouts "I did it!" - that is the level of doubt the defense has raised. Indeed, the defense has already proved through cross that the state's case is impossible, self-contradictory, all muddled up and improperly "investigated."

Cannonpointer » 23 May 2025, 10:51 am » wrote: ↑

23 May 2025, 10:51 am

You didn't watch it through.

I got bored.  I watched some of it, which is more than I usually watch when it comes to boring videos.

What you saw was the prophylactic direct examination by the prosecutor. This "expert witness" misrepresented his qualifications and was allowed by a dirty prosecutor to give opinion

****, the guy admitted to having a minor error in what kind of degree he had in a linked in profile.  Who F-ing Cares!  Its not like He went to Retard Community College and tried to pawn that off as graduating from Duke Medical School. That kind of **** needling someone over a trivial point in their on-line advertised credentials falls flat on me - the BITCH killed her HUSBAND.  Guilty!

 
 

Skans » 23 May 2025, 11:29 am » wrote: ↑

23 May 2025, 11:29 am

I got bored.  I watched some of it, which is more than I usually watch when it comes to boring videos.

****, the guy admitted to having a minor error in what kind of degree he had in a linked in profile.  Who F-ing Cares!  Its not like He went to Retard Community College and tried to pawn that off as graduating from Duke Medical School. That kind of **** needling someone over a trivial point in their on-line advertised credentials falls flat on me - the BITCH killed her HUSBAND.  Guilty!

He miseld multiple courts and juries - dozens of them. Every case that relied on this lying self-aggrandizer/perjurer now has excellent grounds for appeal. 

Tell ya what - just pick a witness for the state at random. Just name one. I will provide you with powerful evidence of perjury. I'm not talking about tricky cross-examinations that make a witness for the state look foolish or dishonest. I'm talking about an attorney catching witnesses in outright, undeniable lies based on hard science, previous testimony, buried reports, new evidence, incriminating text messages, video of misbehavior, you name it. 

The entire case is falling apart in real time. Early retirements, bar sanctions, and criminal charges will flow from this prosecution like a river of stinky troll blood. Dirty, DIRTY cops all throughout this mess of a trial. This WAS a frame job. Now it's a hill that a rather large crew of overweaning pups are dying on. It's a slow motion truck wreck. 
 

Skans » 23 May 2025, 11:29 am » wrote: ↑

23 May 2025, 11:29 am

I got bored.

And not fer nuthin? If you're too bored to get your facts straight, you oughtn't to even HAVE an opinion.

When I don't know enough about an issue to take a hard stand, I might take a QUALIFIED position on a topic. But I won't suggest that someone ought to be convicted of murder based on an obviously loose understanding and an uninterested, "bored" perusal of the evidence.

Again - name a cop in the case. He's a perjurer, and he's been exposed. And in several cases, he has been caught destroying evidence or planting evidence or both.

Which of those crimes by police officers do you doubt I can show proof of?
 

Cannonpointer » 23 May 2025, 2:20 pm » wrote: ↑

23 May 2025, 2:20 pm

He miseld multiple courts and juries - dozens of them. Every case that relied on this lying self-aggrandizer/perjurer now has excellent grounds for appeal. 

Tell ya what - just pick a witness for the state at random. Just name one. I will provide you with powerful evidence of perjury. I'm not talking about tricky cross-examinations that make a witness for the state look foolish or dishonest. I'm talking about an attorney catching witnesses in outright, undeniable lies based on hard science, previous testimony, buried reports, new evidence, incriminating text messages, video of misbehavior, you name it. 

The entire case is falling apart in real time. Early retirements, bar sanctions, and criminal charges will flow from this prosecution like a river of stinky troll blood. Dirty, DIRTY cops all throughout this mess of a trial. This WAS a frame job. Now it's a hill that a rather large crew of overweaning pups are dying on. It's a slow motion truck wreck.
 

Like I said, if I were on the Jury, I'd be able to ignore all of this noise and convict the bitch for 2nd Degree Murder.  Then, go home. Pop open a cristp Yuengling Light and think nothing of it.
 

Skans » 23 May 2025, 3:12 pm » wrote: ↑

23 May 2025, 3:12 pm

Like I said, if I were on the Jury, I'd be able to ignore all of this noise and convict the bitch for 2nd Degree Murder.  Then, go home. Pop open a cristp Yuengling Light and think nothing of it.

Yeah yeah - sure sure.
 

Cannonpointer » 23 May 2025, 5:39 pm » wrote: ↑

23 May 2025, 5:39 pm

Yeah yeah - sure sure.

I can guarantee you whoever the trial is for if Skans is on the jury theyz be guilty.

Ya think there is any chance they'll trade the red hat for a thinking cap?
 

JohnnyYou » 23 May 2025, 5:41 pm » wrote: ↑

23 May 2025, 5:41 pm

I can guarantee you whoever the trial is for if Skans is on the jury theyz be guilty.

Ya think there is any chance they'll trade the red hat for a thinking cap?

Come now, he's not wearing a maga hat. 

There's no room. He's wearing a dunce cap.

Cannonpointer » 23 May 2025, 5:43 pm » wrote: ↑

23 May 2025, 5:43 pm

Come now, he's not wearing a maga hat. 

There's no room. He's wearing a dunce cap.

Whatever he is wearing.. It has one of those Elon Newrahlynk Thangs in it.

Skans » 23 May 2025, 3:12 pm » wrote: ↑

23 May 2025, 3:12 pm

Like I said, if I were on the Jury, I'd be able to ignore all of this noise and convict the bitch for 2nd Degree Murder.  Then, go home. Pop open a cristp Yuengling Light and think nothing of it.

You're a blue line bunny, is my bet.

Here's the truth about one of your heroes, on whose word you would convict an innocent woman:

Trooper Michael Proctor was fired from the Massachusetts State Police for several reasons related to his conduct during the investigation of the Karen Read case, including sending derogatory and defamatory text messages about Read, sharing confidential information with non-law enforcement personnel, and consuming alcohol on duty and driving a cruiser afterward. A trial board found him guilty of these violations, leading to his dismissal.

 That bit about "sharing confidential information with non-law enforcement personnel" has to do with him helping to shield the actual perpetrators of the murder. The cop was beaten to death by other cops in the residence of a cop = and bitten and clawed by the cop's dog, which was then destroyed.

One of the cops received an order to preserve evidence - the evidence being his own cell phone. But he got the heads up, and the day before he was served, he went to a military base, and he broke his cell phone and put in in a bag and threw it in a dumpster. In that same bag he also placed the phone's sim card, which he had cut and mangled. Most of the exculpatory evidence the defense has found has come by way of subpoenaing the dirty cops' cell phones. 
 
 

Cannonpointer » 23 May 2025, 6:22 pm » wrote: ↑

23 May 2025, 6:22 pm

You're a blue line bunny, is my bet.

Here's the truth about one of your heroes, on whose word you would convict an innocent woman:

 That bit about "sharing confidential information with non-law enforcement personnel" has to do with him helping to shield the actual perpetrators of the murder. The cop was beaten to death by other cops in the residence of a cop = and bitten and clawed by the cop's dog, which was then destroyed.

One of the cops received an order to preserve evidence - the evidence being his own cell phone. But he got the heads up, and the day before he was served, he went to a military base, and he broke his cell phone and put in in a bag and threw it in a dumpster. In that same bag he also placed the phone's sim card, which he had cut and mangled. Most of the exculpatory evidence the defense has found has come by way of subpoenaing the dirty cops' cell phones.
 

None of that matters.  It was a domestic dispute where she, in a fit of rage, killed her husband.
 

Dig the tentacles

https://youtu.be/ipd85hGJHxs?si=FzKeNxcl7k8a0phi

Skans » 24 May 2025, 12:48 pm » wrote: ↑

24 May 2025, 12:48 pm

None of that matters.  It was a domestic dispute where she, in a fit of rage, killed her husband.

K

Who was at the meme coins dinner?

https://music.youtube.com/watch?v=Bvzdt ... Fg9TQ6TaVx

 

Skans » 24 May 2025, 12:48 pm » wrote: ↑

24 May 2025, 12:48 pm

None of that matters.  It was a domestic dispute where she, in a fit of rage, killed her husband.

Yeah, yeah - we get the picture.

"I'm Skans, and I lack the integrity to ever admit error - no matter the evidence against my thesis. When I purchase a new vehicle, I refuse to leave the lot until the shop removes reverse gear."
 
 
 

Cannonpointer » 24 May 2025, 1:49 pm » wrote: ↑

24 May 2025, 1:49 pm

Yeah, yeah - we get the picture.

"I'm Skans, and I lack the integroty to ever admit error - no matter the evidence against my thesis. When I purchase a new vehicle, I refuse to leave the lot until the shopremoves reverse gear."

Who was at the secret meme coin dinner?

I am hungry..

https://music.youtube.com/watch?v=BfrUQ ... xOOmcGgAIN

Skans » 24 May 2025, 12:48 pm » wrote: ↑

24 May 2025, 12:48 pm

None of that matters.  It was a domestic dispute where she, in a fit of rage, killed her husband.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AEGNfg0J27w