| re: Meat's latest concert |
|
Posted by:
 |
Smeghead 08:45 pm UTC 05/16/07 |
| In reply to: |
re: Meat's latest concert - tealcyfre 07:02 pm UTC 05/16/07 |
|
The language in a suit, which is by
> definition an adversarial statement within an adversarial
> process, is not of necessity to be taken literally.
A sworn statement as to why he should be given posession of something Jim owns is not meant to be taken as truth? Loafer logic to be sure. Perjury is a crime because it is wrong. Merat committed that crime and Jim gave in and gave Meat what he wanted. Meat should have been charged with Perjury by the court and put behind bars.
|
|
|
|
reply |
|
|
| Previous: |
re: Meat's latest concert - tealcyfre 07:02 pm UTC 05/16/07 |
| Next: |
re: Meat's latest concert - pidunk 12:04 am UTC 05/17/07 |
|
| Thread: |
|