Hillary Laughs about defending Rapist

Originally posted by no1marauder
Generally judges will accommodate indigent defendants on trivial matters like this. If he wasn't happy with his PD and if there were assigned counsel available, what is the BFD with naming one? The guy was facing a charge that could get him 30 years to life; why not get him a lawyer he's comfortable with?

Somehow I doubt this is true in Arkansas during the 70s.

More likely this guy had a connection and the judge was just as corrupt as Hillary.

Originally posted by Eladar
This is just one of many instances where Hillary demonstrates that she is not pro woman.

Hillary is just another liar running for President. I am just pointing it out.

Since so many libtards around here have such strong feelings about rape I wanted to see them once again show themselves to be hypocrites.

Rape is ok as long as Hillary is involved.

You've obviously failed to show any of that; defending an accused charged with a crime hardly endorses the crime they are accused of.

Originally posted by Eladar
Somehow I doubt this is true in Arkansas during the 70s.

More likely this guy had a connection and the judge was just as corrupt as Hillary.

LMAO! If he had a connection, he wouldn't have assigned counsel in the first place.

The guy was 41 years old and worked part time in a bag factory.

Originally posted by no1marauder
LMAO! If he had a connection, he wouldn't have assigned counsel in the first place.

The guy was 41 years old and worked part time in a bag factory.

You never know who he is related to or who is a friend of the family.

Originally posted by no1marauder
You've obviously failed to show any of that; defending an accused charged with a crime hardly endorses the crime they are accused of.

Helping a rapist go free is the problem. But of course he wasn't a rapist because Hillary defended him.

Originally posted by Eladar
Helping a rapist go free is the problem. But of course he wasn't a rapist because Hillary defended him.

It's up to the legal system to determine if someone is a rapist or not. In this case, he pled to a lesser felony of Unlawful Fondling of a Child and got five years, with all but one year of the sentence suspended.

So he isn't a rapist according to the law. Whether he was, in fact, one neither you or I or anybody who wasn't there on the night of May 10, 1975 really knows.

Originally posted by Eladar
You never know who he is related to or who is a friend of the family.

Yes, you never know who might have soooooooooooooooooooooo much influence as to get a judge to assign someone a couple of years out of law school with little experience in criminal law as their attorney in a case that could get them 30 years to life.

Originally posted by no1marauder
It's up to the legal system to determine if someone is a rapist or not. In this case, he pled to a lesser felony of Unlawful Fondling of a Child and got five years, with all but one year of the sentence suspended.

So he isn't a rapist according to the law. Whether he was, in fact, one neither you or I or anybody who wasn't there on the night of May 10, 1975 really knows.

If a person is found guilty he did it.

If a person is found innocent he didn't do it.

Got it.

Originally posted by no1marauder
Yes, you never know who might have soooooooooooooooooooooo much influence as to get a judge to assign someone a couple of years out of law school with little experience in criminal law as their attorney in a case that could get them 30 years to life.

Never question actions of your betters. Got it.

Originally posted by Eladar
If a person is found guilty he did it.

If a person is found innocent he didn't do it.

Got it.

It's funny you criticizing schooling in another thread when your own reading comprehension is obviously terrible.

Originally posted by Eladar
Never question actions of your betters. Got it.

🙄🙄🙄

Originally posted by Eladar
I guess the psycho you were responding to doesn't have a problem with 41 year olds who rape 12 year old girls.

You will find that those who claim to champion the rights of women and minorities most are those secretly fighting against them. Take a look at Hillary.

Originally posted by joe beyser
You will find that those who claim to champion the rights of women and minorities most are those secretly fighting against them. Take a look at Hillary.

I don't understand why you would feel the need to just randomly make up stuff about a flawed candidate like Clinton. Why don't you look at her actual proposals and criticize them? It's not hard.

Originally posted by Eladar
I disagree with the donald on that one.

What was sad was letting our enemies into the country in the first place.

Do you think that the guy who shot those two cops in Arizona recently should not have been let into the country?

As a non-American I have been reading this thread with much amusement. Thanks, guys - especially Eladar. So this is what election time in America is like.

"Clinton shouldn't be president because she did her job as a lawyer back in '75."

😵