From: "John D. Giorgis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: guilty until proven innocent in Louisiana
Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2003 08:17:29 -0500
At 06:11 PM 1/14/2003 -0600 The Fool wrote:
>http://www.washtimes.com/national/20030114-73728234.htm
*Blink*. Umm... how does
At 06:11 PM 1/14/2003 -0600 The Fool wrote:
>http://www.washtimes.com/national/20030114-73728234.htm
*Blink*. Umm... how does a DNA test make one "presumed guilty"?
The people driving these trucks are not charged with a crime and are not
required to prove their innocence.Rathe
At 10:32 PM 1/15/2003 -0600, you wrote:
The Fool wrote:
>
> http://www.washtimes.com/national/20030114-73728234.htm
Some cops need refresher courses in a lot of things. The Constitution,
for one. Human decency, for another. Well, that's another story, which
I might have a URL for
The Fool wrote:
>
> http://www.washtimes.com/national/20030114-73728234.htm
Some cops need refresher courses in a lot of things. The Constitution,
for one. Human decency, for another. Well, that's another story, which
I might have a URL for
Julia
__
From: "The Fool" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: "Brin-L" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: guilty until proven innocent in Louisiana
Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2003 18:11:55 -0600
http://www.washtimes.co
http://www.washtimes.com/national/20030114-73728234.htm
___
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
