It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: blackaspirin
The question about the different OJ trials was quite relevant to my point about what a verdict tells us, but that was skipped over. Should I ask it again, or will that mean it's my fault for repeating myself?
I even point out that as late as 2011, they're still in this together - Garrison only speaks to affirm that he agrees with everything Pepper just said. Nothing.
originally posted by: audubon
You didn't actually ask an answerable question. You wrote a sentence with a question mark at the end. They are not the same thing. It's not my job to figure out what you are going on about when you can't express it properly for yourself.
If you want to ask a coherent question, go ahead.
originally posted by: audubonIs this meant to be sinister in some way? You seem to be relying on some kind of innuendo here, but it's far from clear why you think it significant.
"The OJ Simpson situation highlights this - you have two cases with two different results (and two different standards). What does that tell us about whether or not OJ did or did not kill Ron and Nicole? Which case do we point to in the manner that you're pointing to the MLK case?"