Matthew on 25/9/2006 at 12:55
Quote Posted by Thief13x
ffs do either of you mind giving us a
pragmatic example of these "atrocities"
What on earth has that do you with the part of Jonesy's post you quoted?
Rogue Keeper on 25/9/2006 at 13:25
Quote Posted by Aerothorn
Correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't the DNA thing only work if they have your DNA in the system?
Since rape is such intimate and violent act, it shouldn't be hard for the offender to leave several DNA traces on the victim. It's not just body fluids, but upon detailed forensic examination of the victim's body, they often find some offender's hair or skin behind victim's fingernails.
But the DNA thing works only if they have one or more serious suspects in custody with other material evidence / motive / insufficient alibi pointing at them. They just take compare their DNA with the unknown DNA found on the body.
fett on 25/9/2006 at 14:26
Is this the part where Slyfox's method of rebuttal totally detracts from Stronts initial dumbass post? Just trying to keep up...
Paz on 25/9/2006 at 14:32
An idiotic post made worse by an idiotic style of presentation probably trumps a merely idiotic post in TTLG bingo, if that's what you mean.
However, I don't think any amount of linguistic subterfuge will save this thread.
(wait, that's not how you play bingo ... um ...)
Starrfall on 25/9/2006 at 14:45
Quote Posted by SlyFoxx
Well if you could point that one out to me that would be great. But I fail to remember the line in the constitution where it applys to the rest of the world. Again, if you could point out the particular line I would be happy to change my view here.
Article 3, Section 2
If you want caselaw where the USSC has rejected jurisdiction over foreign parties because it violated Due Process try Asahi Metal vs Superior Court of CA or Helicopteros v Hill.
SlyFoxx on 25/9/2006 at 15:25
I must admit that in the light of day that was an embarrassing display of self righteous twattyness. :o:
@ Starfall...I'l' check that out thanks.
Agent Monkeysee on 25/9/2006 at 15:27
Jingoist vs. Lawyers WHO WILL WIN??!
jingoist 'cuz they never change their fuckin' mind
Between the torture thread, global warming thread, and this one Slyfoxx is my new favorite poster. You're on the watch list, buddy!
Rug Burn Junky on 25/9/2006 at 15:27
Quote Posted by Starrfall
Article 3, Section 2
If you want caselaw where the USSC has rejected jurisdiction over foreign parties because it violated Due Process try Asahi Metal vs Superior Court of CA or Helicopteros v Hill.
Show off. ;)
SD on 25/9/2006 at 15:43
Quote Posted by fett
Is this the part where Slyfox's method of rebuttal totally detracts from Stronts initial dumbass post? Just trying to keep up...
Slyfoxx's hilarious line-by-line rebuttal was directed at a post from Mingan, not me.
Keep up the good work though; it's not often the biggest troll on an internet forum is one of its moderators, and I applaud you for breaking with convention :thumb:
Shug on 25/9/2006 at 16:02
Quote Posted by Strontium Dog
and I applaud you for breaking with convention :thumb:
more like award you for remaining in contention
