From: gazelle@shell.xmission.com   
      
   In article <105e545$8ui$1@reader1.panix.com>,   
   Mark Shaw   wrote:   
   >Adam H. Kerman  wrote:   
   >> Mark Shaw  wrote:   
   >   
   >> >>THE HOMEOWNER DID NOT COMMIT A CRIME.   
   >   
   >> >Whether the cable was a mantrap or not would be for a court to decide.   
   >   
   >> Wow. You're just not listening. In order for it to have been a trap   
   >> intended to harm a motorist on an e-bike or a bicycle rider, and not   
   >> just intended to keep trucks and vans from being parked illegally on the   
   >> grass, there must be actual evidence of intent.   
   >   
   >That would be for a court to decide.   
      
   Well, yes, obviously, but what do you hope to accomplish by pointing out   
   the obvious?   
      
   (I'm serious about that.  I'm sure everyone here understands that   
   ultimately what matters is what the various branches of whatever judicial   
   system(s) is/are involved end up deciding, but again, who benefits from   
   having that pointed out for the umpteenth time?)   
      
   --   
   I've learned that people will forget what you said, people will forget   
   what you did, but people will never forget how you made them feel.   
      
    - Maya Angelou -   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)