posted on Nov, 26 2010 @ 08:42 AM
reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan
Matter of perspective and opinion. I have used truth to refute this. Seems quite a few agree with me. In our justice system we don't use the standard
of "shadow of a doubt", we use "reasonable doubt".
That's not answering my question, good job at misdirection
From the video footage, it is not possible to determine whether the boys penis was
touched or not, any jury would tell you the same, it's called insufficient evidence.
But you cannot refute the official designation of what is classified as sexual abuse. It is not ME that thinks so. It is the definition of the term
that thinks so. You cannot just change the English language to meet your silly whims and need to obfuscate.
Once again, a pat down isn't sexual or done in a sexual manner.
Maybe YOU can. I can't. That is my sexual region. Interaction there is going to be seen as sexual in nature from a biological (if not a conscious)
Okay, I actually agree with you about the biological statement but really are you telling me that a few pats in that region are going to elicit a
No, no need. We have seen your desparate grasping and untrue statements and ignorance of fact. No need to continue to make yourself a spectacle.
I'm not sure what you believe I've said is untrue but I'd say that if anyone, your the one who appears to be grasping, I've used your own quotes
and sources against you numerous times and once again you have failed to answer various questions of mine or attempted to misdirect and confuse.