The truth is always somewhere in between whatever two people say. In the end, everyone’s opinion on what that truth is and who has more of the tug-o-war rope on their side will differ. Ok…no more! I’m tired of talking about this!
Pete, I don’t know or care about her motives. I have my ideas on her motives, but won’t get into it. It doesn’t really matter. I stated above why I think she’s lying. As far as her having to be unbalanced, etc., that’s *your* perception. I have my own perception. There is no right or wrong here. It’s perception and mine differs plain and simple.
I dunno snaps- it just seems odd to me that you would condemn her out of hand, and believe him. At least she had several other people who did back up what she said. She gained nothing from her testimony except a lot of aggravation and hate mail.
snappy — credibility findings are factual and get deference. Mine’s different from yours but the truth is we will never truly know. You get no fight from me.
By InsertSnappyNameHere on October 20, 2010 12:06 PM
::deep exhale::
taking the unpopular opinion is hard work on this board!
Yes, it is Snappy, but we were all acting on impressions then and maybe you saw something there that looked fishy to you. In a sense, it was a kind of Rorschak blob onto which we projected a lot, so you may have picked up something from her that looked dishonest. I respect that.
was just explaining why I gave more credence to her than him. since you asked.
How bout for the next topic, you all discuss the moon landing of 1969.
Argh…one last statement then I’m really done!
Bxgirl, I didn’t condemn her out of hand. I listened to the evidence, watched them both testify, and formed my final opinion.
ok…cats anyone?
The truth is always somewhere in between whatever two people say. In the end, everyone’s opinion on what that truth is and who has more of the tug-o-war rope on their side will differ. Ok…no more! I’m tired of talking about this!
Gah! Submission error!
Ok…the short version of my lost post is,
Pete, I don’t know or care about her motives. I have my ideas on her motives, but won’t get into it. It doesn’t really matter. I stated above why I think she’s lying. As far as her having to be unbalanced, etc., that’s *your* perception. I have my own perception. There is no right or wrong here. It’s perception and mine differs plain and simple.
I dunno snaps- it just seems odd to me that you would condemn her out of hand, and believe him. At least she had several other people who did back up what she said. She gained nothing from her testimony except a lot of aggravation and hate mail.
snappy — credibility findings are factual and get deference. Mine’s different from yours but the truth is we will never truly know. You get no fight from me.
I agree- dave is just not a worthy opponent 🙂
By InsertSnappyNameHere on October 20, 2010 12:06 PM
::deep exhale::
taking the unpopular opinion is hard work on this board!
Yes, it is Snappy, but we were all acting on impressions then and maybe you saw something there that looked fishy to you. In a sense, it was a kind of Rorschak blob onto which we projected a lot, so you may have picked up something from her that looked dishonest. I respect that.