Defender,
First, I take it you are an angry person. Next, you are most likely a close friend or relative of TS. If you were on the stand defending TS I would love to ask you several questions. The first one is are you related to the defendant. If you answer yes then I can impeach your testimony as being bias toward the defendant which could lower your credibility to the jury. Next, I would ask did you know that TS had a problem with the molestation of children. If you answer yes then you are toast on any further testimony being credibile and then the fun begins to discredit you. If you answer no then you do not really know the defendant.
Then you do not have personal knowledge that TS did or did not comitt the crimes alleged because you were not there. Next you state that you have talked to the parties=most likely an objection from the prosecutor as Hearsay and not admissilbe evidence.
Conclusion=you are not a credible witness.
Which all just goes to show you don't know what you are talking about.
I did not express anger to you as I was not angry when I posted, yet you wrongly conclude that I am an angry person and post that to all here.
I am not related to TS and have no knowledge of TS having a "problem with child molestation" nor am I a witness to any events which would qualify me as a witness for either the defense or the prosecution, and have not claimed that or even posted anything as far as that goes.
I have read what is alleged like the rest of you, and it is my point of view that there is enough to investigate but there is not enough to conclude that he is guilty, or that he is not guilty. That is for the courts to decide after hearing all from both parties and weighing all the evidence in the case. But none of this has anything to do with what I was replying to and posted.
Which was the following from you:
"Is TS going to agree to a plea to protect his family and 3ABN from public scrutiny? =Most likely."
"Did he get bailed out? and if he did who paid for that?
"
And this from COTK:
"Who is Tommy's lawyer? Anybody know? And who is paying for him?"
I posted what I was told by the family in answer to those things. Which is that Tommy paid his own bail and is paying for his own lawyer and his plea will be based on his knowledge of the events in question and the allegations against him and the two who are accusing him. That has nothing to do with a plea for his family or a plea for 3abn, despite the attempts here on this forum to make it so. Neither 3abn nor Tommy's family are charged in the case. Nor does 3ABN have any reason to be involved financially in the case.
You call my answer "hearsay" but you are wrong. That is what I was told and I am a first person witness to that and can say that, and I don't need to supply canceled checks nor anything else to testify to what I was told.
You are right when you say hearsay is inadmissible in court, you are just incorrect in your definition of what hearsay is. If someone else repeats what I posted it would be hearsay. When Pickle and Joy keep claiming an unnamed or protected source says... to make their accusations and allegations? That is hearsay.
:waving: