Re: Y&R Kevin's Return
- From: Terry Pulliam Burd <ntpulliam@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 22 Mar 2007 20:09:00 -0700
On 22 Mar 2007 02:11:25 -0700, "FirstHit" <FirstHit@xxxxxxx> rummaged
among random neurons and opined:
<snip>
William's dropping of the charges came as a surprise.
<snip>
An overworked prosecutor's office will often decline to prosecute
maringal cases, but JT's head bashing of Kevin certainly wasn't
marginal. It was aggravated assault, and Bardwell's comments that it
was somehow mitigated by the fake video is ridiculous. At a minimum,
Michael ought to sue JT on Kevin's behalf in civil court. And I loved
the interplay between Michael and Bardwell, wherein Bardwell claimed
he'd never get a jury to convict and Michael said two words that were
music to my ears, "Bench trial." This is one of the things I love
about Y&R - they get the small stuff right. When a case is brought,
civil or criminal, the plaintiff is allowed to opt for a jury trial or
a bench trial. When you think the defendant is too sympathetic (or
whatever), you can opt for a bench trial where the judge decides the
case. The thinking is that a judge isn't going to be emotionally
swayed as might a jury. High five to the writers!
Terry Pulliam Burd
--
"Never argue with an idiot.....they bring you down to their level and
then beat you with experience."
To reply, replace "spaminator" with "cox"
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Y&R Kevin's Return
- From: record hunter
- Re: Y&R Kevin's Return
- From: FirstHit
- Re: Y&R Kevin's Return
- References:
- Y&R Kevin's Return
- From: FirstHit
- Y&R Kevin's Return
- Prev by Date: Re: Y&R SPOILER - WEEK MARCH 12
- Next by Date: Re: OT: Movies /was What Are You Watching?
- Previous by thread: Re: Y&R Kevin's Return
- Next by thread: Re: Y&R Kevin's Return
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|