(02-26-2021, 04:38 PM)TheO-LineMatters Wrote:

(02-26-2021, 03:41 PM)flsprtsgod Wrote: I get the difference, it's you who can't accept the fact that you are wrong. What is "undeniable" really sometimes isn't, and your "hard facts" have been PROVEN to be less than factual in some cases. If you want to go with the Forensic Evidence bit the IP has plenty of additional cases where that evidence was tossed as well. The simple fact is that the idea that a person convicted of a capital offense should not get the opportunity to appeal is foolish bluster. The system we have takes time to get it right before we execute someone and even then is still shown to be wrong sometimes. But I know you don't care that innocent people get executed and you won't right up until that innocent person is you.

If you're not going to cite any specific cases using the guidelines I stated to prove your argument, then there is not point continuing this discussion. If your opinion "held water" then you would be able to point to a case and say, "here is where "undeniable evidence" was wrong." I'm not gonna continue to go back and forth when you just throw out vague, generalizations.