Pythagoras Posted December 11, 2007 Share Posted December 11, 2007 "My wife said if I didn't get her another beer she would stab me in the face" LMAO! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SanJuanWorm Posted December 12, 2007 Share Posted December 12, 2007 Lawnmower man to Robert Pickton huh i never believed in 6 degrees of seperation until now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ladystrange Posted December 12, 2007 Share Posted December 12, 2007 I see the point being made but I think (and yes my opinion means nothing in the eyes of law) that once you kill 1 person in a fashion any murder committed subsequently in the same or similar fashion must in some way be premeditated as otherwise if you did not plan or want to commit another murder you would not do things to put yourself repeatedly in the same position to do so........ I dunno..... I think that the simple logistics of this case means that the case has to be pursued on a basis other then simply forensic evidence...... But the lifestyle of a person who appears likely to of had little close relationship with people 1 would deem as "reliable witness's" means you have to accept the witness's you have and give their testimony reasonable weight...... The little forensic evidence found should be given incredible weight, and circumstantial evidence all has to be considered (the womens belongings found, his movement, history, odd personal behavior ect) I think the lifestyle this animal lived put him under the radar of most upstanding citizens, and gave him one of the best means of destroying forensic evidence (the best being your own personal incinerator). I think the evidence against him is staggering when it is all considered...... unfortunately our opinions dont count. i understand and completely agree with what you are saying, but that isnt how the legal system works. i think that is one of the reasons why they split up the case, because now, if they go to trial with the other 20 murders they can now use his preivous convicted history for similar crimes. they would probably get a first degree conviction, which with the previous conviction would mean minimum 25 years before he can apply for parol. so even if he can apply at 10 years, parol would not be granted because he would then be serving an additional 25 years for separate crimes. of course then he would be the worst serial killer in canada's history and would then more than likely be considered a dangerous offender and never see the light of day again. but then again, the justice system could do something right and give him 6 consecutive life sentances rather than concurent. didnt they deem paul bernardo a dangerous offender? he killed 3 young women. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Weedy1 Posted December 12, 2007 Share Posted December 12, 2007 Too classic! http://www.biggeekdaddy.com/humorpages/Mis...wnmowerDUI.html As I was waiting at the intersection of 127st and Yellowhead this afternoon a guy gets out of his truck, pulls it out and does his business. This is a major intersection with at least 20 people that could see this jackass. Several people start honking at him but he just stood there oblivious to his observers. I guess you don't have to own a lawnmower. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.