Re: Danni Goldhabers Visit: Danni won't answer this
- From: salmoneous@xxxxxxx
- Date: 1 Jun 2006 18:15:47 -0700
I think nothing of the kind. The case has not come to its final conclusion.
Therefore, it would be inappropriate to comment in depth.
You do understant there is a difference between "commenting in depth"
and "freeing David from a vow of silence that makes him look kinda
silly" don't you?
What's wrong with letting the man say what he saw in a public document?
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Danni Goldhabers Visit: Danni won't answer this
- From: tom ronson
- Re: Danni Goldhabers Visit: Danni won't answer this
- From: Danni
- Re: Danni Goldhabers Visit: Danni won't answer this
- References:
- Re: Goldhabers Visit
- From: Little Mikey
- Re: Danni Goldhabers Visit: Danni won't answer this
- From: D H
- Re: Danni Goldhabers Visit: Danni won't answer this
- From: Danni
- Re: Danni Goldhabers Visit: Danni won't answer this
- From: normzauchin
- Re: Danni Goldhabers Visit: Danni won't answer this
- From: Danni
- Re: Goldhabers Visit
- Prev by Date: NJ Law (was) Re: Danni Goldhabers Visit: Danni won't answer this
- Next by Date: Re: Danni Goldhabers Visit: Danni won't answer this
- Previous by thread: Re: Danni Goldhabers Visit: Danni won't answer this
- Next by thread: Re: Danni Goldhabers Visit: Danni won't answer this
- Index(es):