- Joined
- Aug 31, 2009
- Messages
- 17,868
- Reaction score
- 9,832
Don’t care what nobody says if someone sees me driving my teachers car I’m telling everyone we’re banging.
Don’t care what nobody says if someone sees me driving my teachers car I’m telling everyone we’re banging.
Why are we putting her pic up if she is not guilty?
Take down her pic, ts
Glad you were able to make such an informed opinion based off of a horribly written and half assed article. Surely the jury had less to work with and now feel like fools for acquitting her in less than a couple hours.How many people actually read the article?
She wasn't found innocent by any amazing revelation.
It was a he said/she said situation. The jury chose to believe the teacher - even though she had suspicious/questionable 'outside school' contact with the student (ride, teaching him to drive on her car).
Student had no given motive for lying and trying to destroy her. Sometimes kids just hate teachers, because "authority figure", "gave me a bad grade", etc. However, that seems highly doubtful, given how "incredibly nice" she was to him.
If she went through all this while innocent, it is horrible.
If I had to bet my life on the information given here, I'd bet she did it.
Glad you were able to make such an informed opinion based off of a horribly written and half assed article. Surely the jury had less to work with and now feel like fools for acquitting her in less than a couple hours.
It's a half assed article that leaves out a lot of info. It includes a quote of "I was able to establish the student wasn’t telling the truth", but doesn't include any details. Other articles mention that it was determined the kid lied, but again don't go into detail. But the fact she was acquitted of 11 different charges and guilty of zero strongly suggests the prosecution couldn't prove a thing. And if there were actually text messages like the kid said, they would have been shown in court.I didn't say I had great certainty about it. I said I put the odds at more than 50% that she did.
Unlike other people in the thread who just read the thread title and decided "Oh yeah, a sex case with no evidence. I'm sure the jury got that one right, because they get 100% of those correct."
Juries, by design, are primarily made up of fools. I've never had the displeasure, but I've spoken with numerous friends, family, acquaintances who are educated and intelligent and were just horrified at the disinterest, ignorance, bias, and broken logic they encountered.
It's a half assed article that leaves out a lot of info. It includes a quote of "I was able to establish the student wasn’t telling the truth", but doesn't include any details. Other articles mention that it was determined the kid lied, but again don't go into detail. But the fact she was acquitted of 11 different charges and guilty of zero strongly suggests the prosecution couldn't prove a thing. And if there were actually text messages like the kid said, they would have been shown in court.
In the second link.Text messages aren't mentioned in the article at all. You're doing additional reading, apparently, which is great, but I qualified my statement with "based on the information here".
He stated the trainer had proposed exchanging telephone numbers, and so they later traded textual content messages earlier than agreeing to fulfill for his or her first encounter within the Kmart car parking zone.
And the start of a second chin.She has FOUR first names! GREEDY.