Baby raped!

[James]

APhi and others.

ITs a dangerous attitude to assume that just because someone is picked up for something
they are actually guilty of it.

They actually executed the alleged kidnapper of the Lindbergh Baby and yet it came out
later that he very likely wasn't the one to kidnap and kill the child.

There was police misconduct, prosecutorial misconduct, and more.


The books on the subject seem to agree that it was understood within the upper echelons
of people involved with the case that boy executed wasn't the one that did it . . . they
knew this at the time of the trial!

But there was a lot of politcal pressure at the time to end the case, so everyone stayed
silent.

Also when you, APhi, choose to use emotion or hysteria as an argument:

"Sooooo... You're defending a baby rapist. Okaaaayyy!

Example: Recent episode of South Park. "So what do you see as the advantages of toddler
murder?" Tweak "Well, it's easy." Newscaster "Yes, it is easy." ".

You make it very difficult to argue a case on its objective merits . . . emotive arguments
are virtually to argue.

Originally posted by APhi


Okay, and what I'm saying is that this is the sleaziest of all mentality's to look at this case
in terms of loopholes, money and personal glory rather than seeking appropriate
punishment for the guilty.

I don't think we're jumping to conclusions here. If the police located the boy and believe
there was strong enough evidence to arrest and charge him, he probably did it. I don't
think we're dealing with a criminal mastermind.