Is that how I make is sound? Interesting.
Same here
I assume you mean someone other than me, as I am not even remotely close to being a liberal. I'm not a wacko, tho, so maybe that's it.FUNNY..................2 of the main Liberal RAGS here are the only 2 Doofuses questioning whether it was a Gang Initiation Attempted Killing or not...............
Keep going you two...............LOVE it when ya'll choose LOSING Battles!!!
I didn't jump to conclusions filled in with facts. What part of the "What if" part of my first post do you not understand? The comments from my first post were based on one of many possible alternate explanations, conjured up with pure hypothetical speculation, except I didn't present any of them as factual.
Under these circumstances - no he doesn't.
It doesn't matter "what one of the alleged punks might have said" unless there is corroboration from eyewitnesses or video. You just said whatever Wagoner claimed is hearsay - you can't have it both ways. Has Jamal or any of the other gangstas come forward to press charges against Mr. Wagoner?
Nope. Nothing. I know exactly as much about the bus driver as Leo does, which is nothing. Therefore, I get to speculate just as ridiculously as anyone else.
I promise you, if he wants to have his statements to be corroborated in some way, he'll have to have something that corroborates them.
If you sayso. But it does, as Aristotle adroitly pointed out. Whatever was said, or in lieu of corroboration of what was said, what is claimed was said is what gets presented to a grand jury.
I absolutely did not say that, or say anything even remotely similar to that. I said he made a claim as to what they said to him and as to what happened, in which we only have his word as to the validity of what he claims. That's not hearsay. That's not even in the same ballpark as hearsay. Hearsay is third party information. Since he was a participant, hearsay doesn't even come into the picture.
I have no idea. If he and they were involved in a drug deal, or the distribution of illicit black market daily devotionals, it's highly unlikely that they would. I mean, have you ever heard of a drug deal going bad, and whomever was wronged filing charges with the police?
Which is precisely my point.
I don't know what the police and FBI agree on.The police and FBI seem to agree that this was an attack and attempted murder, and will likely proceed accordingly unless/until Jamal steps forward to claim self defense - with Travon and his brother as eyewitnesses.
You need to learn the inherent difference between an opinion (which is a statement), which espouses a position ... and a question, which takes none ...
You could have been beat silly, within an inch of your life ... and you would still think you are "winning" ... and "victory" was at hand ...FUNNY..................2 of the main Liberal RAGS here are the only 2 Doofuses questioning whether it was a Gang Initiation Attempted Killing or not...............
Keep going you two...............LOVE it when ya'll choose LOSING Battles!!!
I think you just picked the wrong road to go down.Uh Ohhh.............
That in itself would sure be one HELL of a Discussion!!!!
Let's NOT go down that road...................YLent is difficult to deal with on a regular / daily Jewish Hating basis as it is!
I'm pretty tolerant and accepting when it comes to various faiths ...
You should probably look up the legal definition of defamation ...YLent is difficult to deal with on a regular / daily Jewish Hating basis as it is!
He probably started with his wounds, and that seems to have established his credibility.
The implication is crystal clear - that Wagoner made an uncorroborated statement about what one of the gang members said. "an item of idle or unverified information..." (see #2 in the link)
FYI:
Making an issue that the book wasn't really a Bible, but a biblical book is kind of nitpicking. But I'm in total agreement that the press implying that Wagoner's life was saved by a modern day miracle is completely over the top. It seems they would have us believe that the slugs from this .25 caliber popgun would have penetrated any other type of publication. The papers must have decided to put this religious spin on the story to add some spice and attract more readers - they need all they can get, even Christians.
You still don't understand the definition of hearsay. His claim of what he was told by his attackers isn't idle, and it's definitely not "unverified information or gossip" as he is making a direct claim (he witnessed what was said). What they said may be unverified, but his claim that he heard it is a direct claim (what he personally witnessed). The fact that he said it is verified, because he's the one who said it, but what they actually said is not verified. But that's not hearsay (unless he uses what they told him as proof in court that they were taking part in a gang initiation). Hearsay would be if he is making a claim that someone else told him happened, something that he didn't actually hear. If you were to say, "Rickey told me that the attackers told him..." then your statement about what Rickey was told would be hearsay, because you didn't personally witness them telling Rickey anything. But Rickey saying, "I heard them say..." would be direct testimony of evidence of what Rickey heard, even if Rickey's testimony of what they said cannot be verified or corroborated.