Recent content by mr_sniffles

  1. mr_sniffles

    September 2009 Nominations

    Has not been an RA member for 30 days, isn't even an RA member right now. Otherwise I'd second.
  2. mr_sniffles

    The North Pacific v. Blue Wolf II DISCUSSION

    OH YEAH! Sideshow Bob.
  3. mr_sniffles

    The North Pacific v. Blue Wolf II DISCUSSION

    I always loved that joke but could never remember where it came from, was it Seinfeld or somewhere else?
  4. mr_sniffles

    The North Pacific v. Blue Wolf II

    Very well, once again. Is Exhibit C an honest representation of the transcript you submitted to Rhindon Blade? (Obviously discounting the blocking out of your name and the arrow for emphasis.)
  5. mr_sniffles

    The North Pacific v. Blue Wolf II

    The defence opened this line of questioning by insinuating that there were no evidence evidence of sedition and treason, this is to merely show that while the witness may not have any further evidence, such evidence does indeed exist. My question is about the actual discussion between the...
  6. mr_sniffles

    The North Pacific v. Blue Wolf II DISCUSSION

    That was directed at you, one look at your recent comments to me will make it obvious. I thought quoting each and every one would add to an already torturously long thread. And maybe give you some dignity. I do wonder how you'll twist this so you can call me an idiot again. Though one can't...
  7. mr_sniffles

    The North Pacific v. Blue Wolf II

    Thank you. Now looking back on Exhibit C... Is this the evidence you submitted to Rhindon Blade? (Obviously discounting the blocking out of your name and the arrow for emphasis.) And if so, I ask the following the questions to which a simple yes or no will suffice. Does the accused freely...
  8. mr_sniffles

    The North Pacific v. Blue Wolf II DISCUSSION

    And where and when did I dispute this? Also, temper, temper BLUE WOLF... You know such sudden rise to anger is a sign of desperation.
  9. mr_sniffles

    The North Pacific v. Blue Wolf II DISCUSSION

    Thought so, can't name one.
  10. mr_sniffles

    The North Pacific v. Blue Wolf II DISCUSSION

    Please, show me one RL trial where the defence asked the witness to empty their pockets for further evidence.
  11. mr_sniffles

    The North Pacific v. Blue Wolf II

    This witness has already provided evidence in Exhibit C, which why the defendant is on trial. Why would the witness need to provide more and why is the Defence asking for this? Relevance? Also, is the Defence going to ask a question or are they just going to bloviate until his accusers die of...
  12. mr_sniffles

    The North Pacific v. Blue Wolf II DISCUSSION

    It's up the Defence to find their own proof that absolves them, not to beg witnesses on the stand for a freebie. I'd do a facepalm and wonder if you even know what you're doing, but it's been pretty obvious for a while now.
  13. mr_sniffles

    The North Pacific v. Blue Wolf II DISCUSSION

    I think in your case, you're trying to find the shooter on the grassy knoll. WHERE'S THE BIRTH CERTIFICATE?1 WHERE'S THE BIRTH CERTIFICATE?!11
  14. mr_sniffles

    The North Pacific v. Blue Wolf II

    Objection, all of these questions relate to exhibit C. Asking the witness to provide more evidence is either irrelevant or at worst, insinuating that exhibit C is irrelevant. The onus is own the defence to defend themselves against exhibit C, not for the witness to prove their own relevance.
Back
Top