(10-25-2015, 03:54 PM)BFritz21 Wrote: lol.

You're a huge joke.

People on a message board are supposed to DEBATE things, and back them up with facts and logic!

I'm trying to debate, you're the one who makes all these claims that they've already been discussed and that I can't comprehend them, but you're CLAIMING THAT I'M THE ONE CLAIMING SOME SORT OF VICTORY?!


Honestly, do you have any self-respect or even honor for you word?

By the way, saying that I have some sort of obsession with claiming victory is just another way of you trying to get away from the debate because you saw Pat post it because I posted that he didn't have an answer ONE time no the old board.  

Good effort, though 

(10-25-2015, 04:03 PM)Harmening Wrote: Debate?
What's left to debate?
You want answers to questions that nobody on this board has the answer to, including you. 

(10-25-2015, 04:45 PM)Harmening Wrote: He was not found guilty, and people have tried to explain the judicial system to you.
So you can capitalize and bold all the words you want. It doesn't change the fact that you just don't get it.
Sorry Sparky.

(10-25-2015, 05:40 PM)Harmening Wrote: Never said he was innocent.

This is the reading and comprehension issues that you have.
He was not found guilty, and nothing you post is going to prove otherwise.
Did he kill someone?  Maybe, but you nor I will ever know.

I would love to see what stance you would take had the guy played for Cincy his entire career.
There is enough facts to argue both sides, but certainly not enough for one side or the other to be right.

(10-25-2015, 05:57 PM)BFritz21 Wrote: FOR THE LOVE OF GOD, QUIT IGNORING THE FACTS AND THINGS I POST!!


He was NEVER, NEVER, NEVER found not guilty!  He plea-bargained, rolled over on his friends, and they still couldn't convict anyone!  It was a HUGE mistake by the prosecution because they were idiots!



How could he be found not guilty if he never even went to trial?!


Do some research about what happened!


You claim there's arguments for both sides, but what arguments are on the side of him being innocent?


What's hilarious is you claimed that I was the one who doesn't get it yet you continue to post false bullshit!

(10-25-2015, 05:58 PM)rfaulk34 Wrote: You need a drink.

Or to get laid.

Or something.

(10-25-2015, 05:57 PM)BFritz21 Wrote: FOR THE LOVE OF GOD, QUIT IGNORING THE FACTS AND THINGS I POST!!


He was NEVER, NEVER, NEVER found not guilty!  He plea-bargained, rolled over on his friends, and they still couldn't convict anyone!  It was a HUGE mistake by the prosecution because they were idiots!



How could he be found not guilty if he never even went to trial?!


Do some research about what happened!


You claim there's arguments for both sides, but what arguments are on the side of him being innocent?


What's hilarious is you claimed that I was the one who doesn't get it yet you continue to post false bullshit!

(10-25-2015, 06:03 PM)BFritz21 Wrote: Both happened last night.


Why do you say that, though?

Because I get frustrated when people post personal attacks while continuing to post complete garbage?

(10-25-2015, 06:10 PM)Harmening Wrote: Never said he was found not guilty. 

Reading and comprehension...it's important. 

Take your time to read and understand what you are reading, mmmkay Sparky?

(10-25-2015, 10:17 PM)BFritz21 Wrote: You said he wasn't found guilty, which, even if you argue that not guilty and not being found guilty aren't the same, he never went to trial because he rolled over on his friends, so, either way, you're trying to distort the truth and make it sound like he was innocent in everything because he was never charged with murder.

Learn to debate better and try and know what you're talking about because this is annoying having to explain it all to you.

Also, in the other thread, someone said he might have blood on him because blood can spray everywhere (which the show Dexter was offered as proof), but, if the people he was with were fighting with the victims and stabbed them, wouldn't they have been between the victims and Ray, making it impossible for blood to spray Ray?  Unless they're arguing that the blood shot-up over the murderers' heads and landed on Ray, or shot out to the side and curved around to hit Ray.

The victims' blood was where Ray was sitting in the limo, along with many other incriminating facts pointing to him being guilty, yet because he was found innocent due to a bunch of idiots on the prosecuting team, you seem to think he's innocent.

(10-24-2015, 09:54 AM)Harmening Wrote: Don't even waste your time with Brad.  He hears only what he wants to hear, reads only what he wants to read, believes only what he wants to believe.  We've been down this path with him many times.  He's not capable of understanding certain things that everyone else on Earth understands.

(10-25-2015, 04:45 PM)Harmening Wrote: He was not found guilty, and people have tried to explain the judicial system to you.
So you can capitalize and bold all the words you want. It doesn't change the fact that you just don't get it.
Sorry Sparky.

(10-25-2015, 10:42 PM)Harmening Wrote: Get over your insistence that I am calling him innocent. That's why nobody will debate this with you. You only believe what you want to believe. You've made it clear. 

(10-25-2015, 10:59 PM)BFritz21 Wrote: I've explained the judicial system to you and other people who don't understand it.  He wasn't found not guilty, he rolled over on people and plea-bargained his way out but they still couldn't convict anyone.

I feel bad that you can't comprehend the judicial system or simple concepts, such as those pointed out in the facts pointing to Ray being guilty.  Maybe you're just ignoring them to avoid admitting that you're wrong.  

You're full of shit!

Look above and you said that I'm incapable of understanding what "everyone in the world understands," which was in reference to him being innocent!

Do you even know what you're debating anymore?!  Go back and read every post of the thread and see why you're a joke!

You're very first post in this thread was agreeing with someone saying he "probably didn't do it!"

So saying he's "probably innocent" is better than just saying "he's innocent"?

I BELIEVE BLACK AND WHITE FACTS AND PROBABILITIES!  I don't deal with imaginary scenarios where there can be blood the victims' where Ray was sitting in the limo, his suit being covered in blood, and all the other facts that could somehow point to him being innocent.

(10-25-2015, 11:00 PM)Bmoreblitz Wrote: Really??!?! This case is over 15 years old. It's been re hashed over and over but nothing will change anything or bring back any of the lost lives. The case is officially "unsolved," because no one was convicted of the murders, but everyone knows more or less what happened, and who is responsible for the killings.In the eyes of the court, no murder took place.

(10-25-2015, 11:10 PM)Harmening Wrote: P
You have a right to believe what you want to believe. 
Just don't tell anyone else they are wrong if they tell you that there wasn't enough there to be convinced that the guy killed someone.

And no, you haven't explained to anyone how the judicial system works. 
You've only said what you believe. Nothing more. So don't flatter yourself. 
Can you point me to the post that had me agreeing that he "probably didn't do it"?

(10-25-2015, 10:39 AM)Harmening Wrote: Reality is a matter of perception.

Your medical plant point is irrelevant.  It's illegal to have said plant in most states, therefore, people are in jail because they broke the law.
The law is just that.  The law.

(10-25-2015, 11:10 PM)Harmening Wrote: P
You have a right to believe what you want to believe. 
Just don't tell anyone else they are wrong if they tell you that there wasn't enough there to be convinced that the guy killed someone.

And no, you haven't explained to anyone how the judicial system works. 
You've only said what you believe. Nothing more. So don't flatter yourself. 
Can you point me to the post that had me agreeing that he "probably didn't do it"?

(10-26-2015, 03:32 AM)Se ky bengal Wrote: This^^^^^ I mean if there was evidence pointing at Lewis saying he actually killed him. Do you think they would have made him A deal? 

(10-26-2015, 04:34 PM)BFritz21 Wrote: I explained the judicial system in that he plea-bargained, so they couldn't even try to convict him, but 

Here's the post saying that Se doubts he did it, and here's you agreeing with him.  (Not calling you out Se, please don't think that!)

Pretty sure there's another one with you saying he probably didn't do it, but that example is enough and I'm rolling out the door soon, so I don't have time to look.

Was a huge mistake by the prosecution.  They were stupid and let him make a deal to get the other two, which they couldn't even do with Ray's help.