At 3/17/09 08:50 AM, Zerok wrote:
At 3/17/09 08:37 AM, Podburrys wrote:
Yeah, well, I figure it's important for whoever ends up evaluating this guy to know that he was looking into replica guns.
Key word being replica. I look at replica swords, own some, but I'm not going to stab anyone. Those things are likly unrelated and really shouldn't be mentioned.
I don't think any competent legal counsel would consider the wild theories of a stranger on the internet to be something serious. Part of whoever it is' job to monitor this thread is to filter out the relevant shit. We don't need to do it for them.
Key word being competent. Procescutors will look at any evidence that proves thier theories so long as the source has any credibility what so ever. Some do turn to fairly questionable tactics. If it pans out, it will be stated he was here, and legal council will examine this thread. The fact someone has made the assumption is enough for procecutors to plant it in a jury - or judge's - mind. If someone else thought that was connected or the reason, maybe it could have been...
Persuassion is a cold woman who works herself well in anyones mind. She can make a thought appear to be your own drawn conclusion. Everything here can be used as evidence, and we have to be careful with what we say, because people can spin it. We know it's baseless, but in the right hands, an assumption like some of those made here can easily be spun to make OP seem mentally unstable or make connections between unrelated things. I just think we really need to be careful with this, as this could be someone's future we're inadvertedly toiling with. If you're going to comment, be smart about it and don't assume anything. That's all I'm trying to say. OP deserves to be treated without bias despite apparent idiocy.