i have to quote this **** for a few reasons..

A. it will be exhibt A in the case for proving that helladumb in fact is a dellusional retard

b. It should stick rather well to the side of his face when i throw it at him when this is all over in a year or so..

 

you guys should read up..

http://i.a.cnn.net/cnn/2005/images/10/28/indictment.pdf

 

http://i.a.cnn.net/cnn/2005/images/10/28/statement.pdf

 

Never. Just listen to many lawyers discussing the case and the chance of getting a conviction. I also listened to an interview with the author of the Classified Info Nondisclosure thing referenced in the case, and the author herself says it is being improperly applied in this case.

Just like Bush vs Kerry, I did not need to read every document and poll to conclude that Bush was going to clean house... I think I know enough at this point to assume most of those charges will be beat.

 

I understand the differences between Criminal and Civil lawsuits, but admittedly don't know ALL the differences between standard court procedure and cases where the grand jury is involved (do know some of it though).

I'm helladumb, so I don't know everything.

 

READ THE ****ING INDICTMENTS

YOU DONT EVEN HAVE A CLUE ON WHAT CHARGES ARE BEING BROUGHT ABOUT do you?

**** you are ****ing stupid... it is idiots such as yourself that need to be iradicated from the face of this earth, you server no purpose other then to drag down humanity with your inteptitude...

for the rest of us on earth... please do what you can to stop the cycle of stupidity that you were born into...

READ MY ABOVE LINKS, and then open your ****ing mouth on the topic at hand..


Cliff notes are as follows...

Helladumb doesnt know wtf he is talking about

Patrick isnt bringing charges that they violated the secrecy act that the media latched on to as the culprit. Have you ever gone over a SF86 or any other "contract" that involves security or secrecy in the .gov world?

 

Why bother when you've already convicted him?
To be honest, I'm a cynic and don't think reading the indictment will matter one bit... the guy is going to get a break whether he's guilty or not.

HAHAHAHH you act like you've never committed a felony!!! ahahahahhaha

 

i havent convicted ****, its not my place...

Again have you bothered to read the documents and charges? Just curious, i have.. **** twice now..

Dude ****ed up big time by bsing FBi sa's as well as the grand jury..

Dont doubt he will get a break but that still doesnt allow you to sit there and claim something with out know WTF you are talking about...

Read the ****ing documents before you open your ****ing trap on a subject...

 

...Dre says he's guilty (in his opinion) and most agree...Hella changes the argument and says that he won't be convicted (regardless of guilt) and most agree...


This argument sucks because neither of you listen at all. I believe he is guilty, and that he will be aquited. I think both of you agree by what you have posted.

 

dont think i have ever said he was one thing or another, and it wasnt hte grand juries place to say he was guilty or not All they are supposed to do is find the FACTS, and if the FACTS point towards the LAW BEING BROKEN they then can press charges...


hence the actions that have been taken BASED ON FACTS.. not hearsay, not rumours, not a note scrawled across a bathroom wall.. FACTS

 

Good point I suppose.