Quote:
Originally Posted by PoorSkillz
I would think that in addition to agreeing that:
- your opinion about Steven's trial being a sham is worthless* as your knowledge of the case is based almost entirely on watching the Netflix advocacy piece;
- your opinion that Steven is factually and/or legally innocent is worthless as your knowledge of the case is based almost entirely on watching the Netflix advocacy piece.
we could also agree that:
- your opinion about any cops being corrupt is worthless as your knowledge of the case is based almost entirely on watching the Netflix advocacy piece and not on any actual evidence of corruption (no, the settlement of a lawsuit where the scope goes beyond corruption is not evidence of corruption);
- your opinion about Ryan, Bobby, Scott, etc. being factually guilty of anything case-related is worthless as your knowledge of the case is based almost entirely on watching the Netflix advocacy piece and not on any actual evidence.
Of course, that is all correct.
I guess the real question here is why you and a few other posters such as Corpus Vile and Fraley act as if that was ever in dispute.
Let me run this down for you (again):
1. I watched the film (and, even though it is beside the point, I enjoyed the film and thought it was well done);
2. Based on the film and nothing else, I formed the opinion that the film raises what appear to be legitimate issues with the case. I feel comfortable not listing them all as I have done so many times before in this thread.
3. From this thread, and nothing else, I reached the understanding that my opinion is not universally held. As clearly stated in this thread, there are a number of posters that take issue with the documentary, its premise, and related issues which reach out in a variety of directions.
4. Nevertheless, I have made it clear that regardless of the efforts those arguing against the film, I still hold my original opinion which is based on the show and nothing else.
5. At no time have I attempted to convince anyone that my opinion matters to the point it should be considered as any authority for changing their own opinion. Again, it is simply my own opinion, and given the fact the process is ongoing and Appellate Courts are not involved, I am very comfortable waiting to see what happens.
6. At some later point, if I have any interest, I may look further into the case, or, I may not. This matter is receiving a good amount of coverage and treatment and I believe a deep dive into source documents is not necessary at this point. This is in direct contrast to the Amanda Knox case which suffered from unreliable reporting and access to official documents.
7. The extent of my opinion on this matter reaches only what was presented in the film - that there are concerns with the process and that further treatment of/investigation into these concerns is necessary to determine whether SA and BD received a fair trial. I do not now, nor have I ever held an opinion as to whether SA is factually guilty, or not. Since watching the film, based on information in this thread and from the Appellate Courts, however, I believe BD is factually NOT GUILTY - and I do not care if anyone else holds that opinion, or not.
8. Again, I recognize that a number of posters are very concerned that I adopt their opinion that the process was bullet proof and free of prejudicial errors, etc., but as stated many times, I have not been swayed. In fact, given the ham-fisted and (in my opinion dishonest) tactics used by you, and others sharing your agenda, it is my default position at this time to reject just about everything you present out-of-hand.
So there. I still believe there are serious concerns with the trial. I do not believe that to hold that opinion that I am required to prove that S.A. is innocent, etc. For one thing, that is completely ridiculous, but more importantly, I am not even sure that issue is ever reached - if the process was/is sound, at this time, I do not believe there is any reason to dispute the result.
As to B.D. I believe he is factually innocent. I have not been presented any physical facts which suggest he participated in the crime in any way. If you disagree, that is fine by me. If you intend to convince me otherwise, that is your own business. However, I can assure you I am comfortable with my opinion(s) at this point in the game, especially since the appellate process is ongoing.
- So, carry on. Please understand that if you somehow expect that you will convince me of your position, that at this time, you are 180 degrees off - especially since I am prepared to rely on an actual authority handling this matter - the court system (which includes all the courts, not just the trial court).
- And just in case you have any doubt, I believe you are a complete lemming.