Quote:
Originally Posted by fraleyight
No, it is brought up constantly as a reason for manitwoc to frame avery. Not that that is why it was brought up in this case but it is important to clarify that he was never getting anywhere near 36 million because the person I quoted was specifically asking if he was still eligible to sue for more since he didn't get 36 million.
Among the problems with all this armchair spitballing about what
might have happened if the lawsuit was allowed to proceed is that
a) Even now we don't know how it would have turned out.
b) The people under investigation for sure didn't know what would be uncovered and what their liability would be.
Therefore it just makes sense to me to talk about the amount the lawsuit was seeking, since that is what the people involved were seeing in the headlines of their morning paper.
Quote:
I mean think about it, if someone is arguing that the 36 million dollar suit is a good reason to frame avery that argument becomes very weak if avery was only going to get a couple million instead of the 400k they already paid him.
Actually, when you think about it $20 million is a pretty strong motive. $10 million is a pretty good motive. Even $5 million is a strong motive. Plus saving the reputations and careers of the people who were involved are pretty good motives.
And the reputation of the whole department would be stained. Steven would be riding high and these formerly respected cops would be living under a cloud of shame.
****, we live in a country where cops are willing to
kill when they get 'disrespect' from uppity civilians!
All this blather about the motive suddenly becoming 'weak' because in the end the amount won by Steven might be
less than the full $36 million plastered on the front page of the newspapers is what's weak.
Quote:
The special pleading with you is amazing. So we can't call avery a rapist unless hes convicted, yet when he is convicted of something (murder) we can't call him a murderer because according to you there is a lack of evidence he murdered anyone. So when can we call him a murderer?
I can't recall ever writing anything along the lines that
you can't call him a murderer.
I myself don't call him a murderer because in my view the evidence we have proves he is innocent of crimes against Teresa in 2005 just like he was innocent of any crimes against Penny in 1985.
Quote:
Furthermore, you use even worse logic to argue that kratz is a rapist when he was never even accused of rape yet we have multipe women claiming avery raped them with some of averys own family supporting the allegations.
I was simply demonstrating the folly of your screaming about Steven being a rapist when it is very easy to make allegations. Just like I can use the allegations about Kratz to call him a serial rapist.
If the logic I am using is bad, remember I am just showing you where
your logic leads.