WEATHER »

Comments by sacjon

Page 1 of 29 | Next

Posted on May 21 at 11:26 a.m.

Well, according to http://www.marinetraffic.com/, there are only 2 "anti-pollution" vessels (and 3 fishing vessels) in the area of the spill. So, there's either not much oil to be cleaned up or nobody is really doing squat to help.

Not sure which is the case.

On As Refugio Oil Slick Spreads, Spill Estimate Rises

Posted on May 20 at 4:32 p.m.

Well, at least we know there is someone on here /\ /\ that's crazier than pardall!

On Big Oil Spill Along Refugio Coast

Posted on May 20 at 1:13 p.m.

Pardall - You're a f@#*ing idiot. I'm done now.

On Students Stage Sit-In at Cheadle Hall

Posted on May 20 at 12:17 p.m.

Pardall's last post made the only the point that he has ZERO understanding of the legal system (despite being a juror, hahaha) and has only the capability to make false and unfounded accusations that anyone who disagrees with his legal expertise (again, as a juror), must be pro-rape.

That is ALL he has done this entire thread.

On Students Stage Sit-In at Cheadle Hall

Posted on May 20 at 11:53 a.m.

`Miss X, yes or no, did you say `I find Mr. X attractive once.''? She answers `yes'. `Miss X, in your interview on XX/XX, you swear you said that to him twice.''

You have got to be kidding, right? That is NOT a lie in any sense of the word. That's pointing out a discrepancy in the witness' testimony. Basic trial procedure 101. It's called cross-examination. If you don't like it, too bad. That's how the attorney gets THE TRUTH out of a witness.

God grief man.

On Students Stage Sit-In at Cheadle Hall

Posted on May 20 at 10:21 a.m.

JJ - No, Pardalls SOLE and ONLY argument is that attorneys and judges should be required to take the same "whole truth and nothing but..." oath that witnesses are required to take before testifying in court. THAT IS ALL.

And anyone who dares to disagree with his "logic," is clearly a rape enthusiast. Right Pardall?

On Students Stage Sit-In at Cheadle Hall

Posted on May 20 at 10:09 a.m.

"sacjon, you overlook that I have explicitly quoted the oath taken by California attorneys and their ethical code:"

For the last time, you blithering half-wit, the code NEVER says "the whole truth and nothing but..." because it is a LAW, not an OATH that governs attorneys conduct. It never says your one-liner because attorneys read that LAW and understand the legalese that says the SAME GD EFFING THING but in a more comprehensive and professional manner, SINCE IT IS A FREAKIN LAW! Your one-liner oath that you are OBSESSING about is something that the witnesses (non-attorneys) must take is because they are the ones being questioned. Neither the attorneys nor the judge are being questioned during trial, it's the exact opposite as they are the ones doing the questioning. SO THE OATH DOES NOT APPLY. That is why they have a code of conduct governing their actions in court and an entire set of evidence laws that limit what type of questions they can and cannot ask.

And your accusation of me of thinking rape is "no big deal" is just proof positive of your utter lack of ability to argue with any minutia of logic. I'm not wasting another minute of my time trying to explain your flawed logic on that one.

And....done.

On Students Stage Sit-In at Cheadle Hall

Posted on May 20 at 8:53 a.m.

JJ - Despite direct quotes from the Business & Professions code, Pardall still thinks attorneys have no duty to tell the truth in court, and you will never convince him otherwise because Jon Krakauer wrote books about the outdoors and climbing Mount Everest and then one about a rape trial.

On Students Stage Sit-In at Cheadle Hall

Posted on May 19 at 1:13 p.m.

$1.6 million for attempted murder plus the other charges (burglary, etc) is not that high. This same DA was holding people arrested in the dispensary shut-downs for close to this amount. And that was for pot! This guy is being charged with breaking into a home/apartment and trying to kill another human being. That's all the back-story needed I'd think.

On Suspects in Isla Vista Shooting Charged

Posted on May 19 at 11:52 a.m.

JJ - how do you know either party was selling or buying? NO drugs were reported as being found. Don't you think the SBSO would have proudly displayed the seized drugs if there were any?

JEEZ people! "Drug-related" could even mean that they were just high on drugs and got into a fight.

Why do you all have such a hard-on to prosecute the students who were shot by these thugs?

On Suspects in Isla Vista Shooting Charged

Page 1 of 29 | Next

event calendar sponsored by: