you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]package 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (3 children)

Evidence that suggests that a person broke the law is not evidence that a person broke the law. That’s the whole point of a trial, but I’m sure you know that. Almost impressive how consistently disingenuous you are in every singe comment you post.

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Why the personal attacks, package? You made your point in the first two sentences. Also, learn what 'disingenuous' means. It's as if you're accusing me of making comments that I don't believe or don't want to make.

[–]package 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child)

Not a single personal attack in my comment, but since you asked it's because you're a massive faggot. And literally the definition of disingenuous as you say absolutely moronic shit that you or anyone with a functioning brain would know is wrong, like you can't have a trial without someone having broken a law.

[–]soundsituation[M] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Please don't drag down discussion with name calling.