Robert Bonomi wrote:
In article , Dan wrote:
snip

I'm not a lawyer, but I saw one on TV. As much as I'd like to see
yawn receive some wall to wall counsellings if I sat on your jury I'd
vote against you based on what has been presented here thus far.

Based on _that_, you wouldn't get on the jury in the first place.
You've already decided you know what the law is, without listening to
the judge's instructions.


Two procedural points: you assume facts not in evidence in that I
have not received judge's instructions as yet and, law or not, several
people have said just as "libelous" things as yawn is accused of.
Example: the donkey act comment. My decision would be based on the
"clean hands" concept. To me this means don't come to me to side with
you when you have done the same.

Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired