Originally <a href='/showthread.php?p=20979482'>posted</a> on 01/24/2014:
See I don't get this point of view
The guy at the very least has a history of violence with several women that we know of, but probably fits more into the serial rapist category. At least some of the women were treated at the hospital for injuries from him. Witnesses changed their stories in court from the statement they gave to police when it happened (I wonder how or why that happened
)
Yet throughout the article the author is sure to bring up accounts of friends, family, and his son that paint a better picture. At the end of the article he proposes a couple of unscientific, unsubstantiated crazy theories to explain and somewhat excuse his behavior.
And you think the author was out to paint him in the worst light possible? I think this article is a great litmus test. If anyone reads it and then determines the author is unfair to Meggett then they are a sick liberal
See I don't get this point of view
The guy at the very least has a history of violence with several women that we know of, but probably fits more into the serial rapist category. At least some of the women were treated at the hospital for injuries from him. Witnesses changed their stories in court from the statement they gave to police when it happened (I wonder how or why that happened
)Yet throughout the article the author is sure to bring up accounts of friends, family, and his son that paint a better picture. At the end of the article he proposes a couple of unscientific, unsubstantiated crazy theories to explain and somewhat excuse his behavior.
And you think the author was out to paint him in the worst light possible? I think this article is a great litmus test. If anyone reads it and then determines the author is unfair to Meggett then they are a sick liberal