Cracker...front and center!!!

[HairOfTheDog]

No I don't, I can take up my semantics issues right here.

Your conclusions are nothing more than your prejudices in reflection.

Duchess doesn't get it,Cracker doesn't get it,and you don't get it.

Has there been a crime committed? do we know that as a fact?

We have a suspected crime, we have a suspected criminal and we have a suspected victim.

we don't have anything that makes any of those fact yet other than preconceived "even if those preconceived notions are retarded" conclusions.

Is the Victim dead? we know that a young person is dead but has it been proven that he was the victim, We have a man in jail that was arrested on a suspected crime but has it been proven that He committed a crime?

Okay Dick. I do, in fact, get it. I think everyone posting or reading here is aware that this case hasn't gone to trial. Therefore, it's a suspected crime, a suspected victim, etc... I haven't made up my mind on anything, as I've clearly stated. You stating that my not putting "suspected" before the terms "crime" and "victim" makes you more aware of my true opinion than I is a silly assertion.

So, because you are right that at this time and until/unless a jury determines otherwise, this case is about a "suspected" crime: I will use "suspected" in front of "crime" and "victim" in future posts. Your point is valid about the language.