Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="trplnkl" data-source="post: 743328" data-attributes="member: 13254">[FONT=&quot]LOL. Texan, having authorities in a place gives a good start for whatever on the investigation, and the video might not prove anything, but it’s very useful, and it also brings witnesses to the investigation. But, as I’ve told you: It’s still under investigation. You seem to be heck of a good detective.[/FONT]  [FONT=&quot]You should explain just how this video is useful. [/FONT]  LOL. I love YOUR editing, Cowboy. Really, you need to read and think that sentence over and over and over again. “Flawless WRITTEN laws.” It’s not the same as “Writing Flawless Laws.” I told you already not to say it’s the same.  [FONT=&quot]I’m sorry that you don’t want to face the reality that the two sentences are saying the same thing. Please enlighten me, how in your dream world do you obtain “Flawless written laws”?[/FONT]  [FONT=&quot]LOL, haven’t you seen them? I thought you have read the law, already.[/FONT]  [FONT=&quot]Man, just google SB1070 or go to the azleg website. And start reading. You’d be able to see how absurd it is what it has been written. I think a high school student would do a better writing than that. Well, I’m not sure if you can see the absurdity, but just give it a try and start reading the law. There are mistakes of every kind.[/FONT]  [FONT=&quot]I’ve read the law several times. I knew you couldn’t show me all the glaring mistakes. It’s your claim that the mistakes are there, show em to me.[/FONT]  [FONT=&quot]Please don’t tell me it’s not a controversial bill. PLEASE. And please don’t tell me something political.[/FONT]  [FONT=&quot]My question was clear, why are most opponents against the law? Please don’t say because it’s a flawed law, most probably have no idea what it says. I never said it wasn’t controversial. That alone does make it a bad law.[/FONT]  [FONT=&quot]LOL. You’re spinning in the same wheel like a little hamster. I still don’t see your claims as a justification or if those arguments make Anastasio Hernandez(RIP) liable for his own death. May be if you got evidence of some kind or something you could talk about him being responsible. But those arguments you give don’t’ have any foundations to what you’re claiming for his liability of his death. We better sit back, and let the proffesionals do their jobs. They’ll determine the details.[/FONT]  [FONT=&quot]No spinning, just straight forward, linear logic. I’m sorry it evades you so consistently.[/FONT]  [FONT=&quot]That’s why it is still under INVESTIGATION. Besides you’ve been talking about aggressive behavior and force, and electrice shocks and everything, and that that could have caused the death. Of course they won’t put Beaten to Death on the report, come on, Cowboy. You’re changing your mind, and you’ve be changing your statements, and you will change them in the future if you keep talking about this incident because it still is under INVESTIGATION.[/FONT]  [FONT=&quot]Yea, that is what I have been talking about, that’s what the coroner’s report says as well as the claims by Hernandez’s family and friends and the video you posted.[/FONT]  [FONT=&quot]The following quote is taken from the description of the video that you posted, which implies that he was beaten to death.[/FONT]  “This is the compilation of videos recording by a witness to the beating, tasing and subsequent death of Anastasio Hernandez Rojas.”  [FONT=&quot]You’re right, the coroner probably would not use the exact phrase “beaten to death”, however they probably would include wording that describes that conclusion. Why would the Coroner not mention anything they believed to be contributing factors? Of course the coroner’s report is only superficial compared to a full autopsy.[/FONT]  [FONT=&quot] I have not changed my mind, I have changed statements to try and find words you would understand.[/FONT][FONT=&quot][/FONT]</blockquote>

Verification