🚀 go-pugleaf

On Aug 6, 2:14�am, "Steve O" <nospamh...@thanks.com> wrote:
> "DanielSan" <daniel...@speakeasy.net> wrote in message
>
> news:E8adnZh0I57JjATVnZ2dnUVZ_gKdnZ2d@speakeasy.net...
>
>
>
>
>
> > rbwinn wrote:
> >> On Aug 5, 1:38 pm, "Steve O" <nospamh...@thanks.com> wrote:
> >>> "rbwinn" <rbwi...@juno.com> wrote in message
>
> >>>news:b869657a-8ad3-4d4d-9f10-5440569a3345@34g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
>
> >>>> On Aug 4, 10:01 pm, DanielSan <daniel...@speakeasy.net> wrote:
> >>>>> rbwinn wrote:
> >>>>>> On Aug 4, 3:54 pm, "Steve O" <nospamh...@thanks.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>> "rbwinn" <rbwi...@juno.com> wrote in message
> >>>>>>>news:147d2d46-ff33-4aac-b29a-7e24af243840@k37g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
> >>>>>>>> On Aug 3, 8:56 pm, DanielSan <daniel...@speakeasy.net> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>> rbwinn wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>> On Aug 3, 4:29 pm, Free Lunch <lu...@nofreelunch.us> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>> On Sun, 3 Aug 2008 15:24:56 -0700 (PDT), rbwinn
> >>>>>>>>>>> <rbwi...@juno.com>
> >>>>>>>>>>> wrote
> >>>>>>>>>>> in alt.atheism:
> >>>>>>>>>>>> On Aug 3, 8:12?am, DanielSan <daniel...@speakeasy.net> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> rbwinn wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Aug 2, 8:53 pm, Free Lunch <lu...@nofreelunch.us> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, 2 Aug 2008 00:08:55 -0700 (PDT), rbwinn
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <rbwi...@juno.com>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in alt.atheism:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Aug 1, 2:30?pm, DanielSan <daniel...@speakeasy.net>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> rbwinn wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ...
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Discuss it with John after the resurrection.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> No proof of this alleged "resurrection", is there?
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Well, actually there is. The apostles were witnesses of the
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> resurrected Christ on two separate occasions.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> No evidence backs up your claim.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Well, I could send you a copy of the Bible if you want one.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> I have a Bible. ?There's no evidence in there to back up your
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> claim.
> >>>>>>>>>>>> John 20:19 Then the same day at evening, being the first day of
> >>>>>>>>>>>> the
> >>>>>>>>>>>> week, when the doors were shut where the disciples were
> >>>>>>>>>>>> assembled
> >>>>>>>>>>>> for
> >>>>>>>>>>>> fear of the Jews, came Jesus and stood in the midst, and saith
> >>>>>>>>>>>> unto
> >>>>>>>>>>>> them, Peace be unto you.
> >>>>>>>>>>>> John 21:9 As soon then as they were come to land, they saw a
> >>>>>>>>>>>> fire
> >>>>>>>>>>>> of
> >>>>>>>>>>>> coals there, and fish laid thereon, and bread.
> >>>>>>>>>>>> 10 Jesus saith unto them, Bring of the fish which ye have now
> >>>>>>>>>>>> caught.
> >>>>>>>>>>>> 11 Simon Peter went up, and drew the net to land full of great
> >>>>>>>>>>>> fishes, an hundred and fifty and three: and for all there were
> >>>>>>>>>>>> so
> >>>>>>>>>>>> many, yet was not the net broken.
> >>>>>>>>>>>> 12Jesus saith unto them Come and dine, And none of the
> >>>>>>>>>>>> disciples
> >>>>>>>>>>>> durst
> >>>>>>>>>>>> ask him , Who art thou? knowing that it was the Lord.
> >>>>>>>>>>>> 13 Jesus then cometh , and taketh bread, and giveth them, and
> >>>>>>>>>>>> fish
> >>>>>>>>>>>> likewise.
> >>>>>>>>>>>> 14 This is now the third time that Jesus shewed himself to his
> >>>>>>>>>>>> disciples, after that he was risen from the dead.
> >>>>>>>>>>> The Bible still is not evidence. I asked for evidence.- Hide
> >>>>>>>>>>> quoted
> >>>>>>>>>>> text -
> >>>>>>>>>> The Bible is accepted as evidence in court.
> >>>>>>>>> For what kinds of cases?
> >>>>>>>> For all kinds of cases. Clarence Darrow had the Bible entered as
> >>>>>>>> evidence in the monkey trial.
> >>>>>>>> Robert B. Winn
> >>>>>>> All kinds if cases?
> >>>>>>> You mean, "one type of case"?
> >>>>>> No, a lawyer can attempt to introduce any physical object as evidence
> >>>>>> in a court case.
> >>>>> But, will it be ACCEPTED as evidence?
> >>>>> You keep trying these clever games with your debating tactics. Clever,
> >>>>> to you. Lame and flimsy to everyone else.
> >>>> Not today. A judge today in the United States will not even allow the
> >>>> Constitution of the United States to be entered as evidence.
> >>>> Robert B. Winn
> >>> It depends on what you are trying to prove.
> >>> Why were you trying to introduce the Constitution as evidence, and how
> >>> could
> >>> it prove or disprove anything in relation to your particular
> >>> circumstabces?
>
> >>> --
> >> The sixth amendment to the Constitution says that the defendant has
> >> the right to trial by jury in "all criminal prosecutions". � The judge
> >> in my case had just denied my right to trial by jury.
>
> > Then you can appeal.
>
> Not on those grounds he can't.
> ;-)
>
> The only grounds for appeal he has would be to provide evidence that the
> judgment of the three doctors who declared him insane was mistaken and
> incorrect.
> Not much chance of that, is there?
>
Well, you are only showing your ignorance, Steve.  All it takes to
appeal the case on the grounds that you were denied trial by jury is
to take a blank piece of paper, Designate the case and case number,
state that you are appealing the case on the grounds that you were
denied trial by jury, give the date, and sign it.  Then you give it to
the clerk of court.
     Believe me, the case will go to the next court.
      If you are saying that a lawyer cannot do this, you are probably
right.  A lawyer would brobably be disbarred for admitting that a
United States citizen has the right to trial by jury if no lawyer is
representing him.
Robert B. Winn