View Single Post
Old 06-02-2005, 01:34 PM  
ronaldo
Confirmed User
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: ICQ#: 272000271
Posts: 5,475
While I normally can't stand listening to defense attorneys, during the Lacey Peterson trial and early on in the Michael Jackson trial I saw her debate with a younger defense attorney.

She is the most obnoxious person I've ever listened to for more than two minutes. The other guy gave rational points of view and she spewed her opinion on pure speculation. He could hardly keep a straight face when she started talking because she was so obnoxious and unreasonable.

Conversation example-

"Let's just wait and hear the evidence Nancy."

"What more evidence do you need? They've been indicted by a grand jury and noone else would have any motive in either case."

Both Scott Peterson and Michael Jackson were guilty in her eyes before ANY evidence was even made public. Her reasoning was simply that they were indicted by grand juries and they're rarely, if ever wrong.

Now, I'm the last person to say that either of those two people are innocent, but people like her shouldn't be allowed to spew nothing more than unsubstantiated opinion on national TV. CNN fell below Foxnews standards in my eyes when they gave her her own show.

edit-Note-That being said, I still wouldn't hit her. I just won't watch her show or anything with her on it. The wonders of choice-and a remote control.

Last edited by ronaldo; 06-02-2005 at 01:36 PM..
ronaldo is offline   Share thread on Digg Share thread on Twitter Share thread on Reddit Share thread on Facebook Reply With Quote