Creative Commons license icon

Reply to comment

From the context, Hambley's attorney is trying to make the girl look mentally unstable in order to cast doubts on her testimony. Hambley has the right to a defense, so I would guess this is just an unfortunate but unsurprising part of the trial procedure, in this case. If this is true then the girl should have plead the fifth when the subject of furry came up - because you're right, it's not ACTUALLY relevant.

I'd like to see a transcript of the questioning, if something like that would be available. I want to know if the Holland Sentinel is embellishing the story with the trite "Furries are insane" bullshit, or if they're pulling that statement indirectly from something stated by the lawyer... or the witness.

Reply

  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <a> <img> <b> <i> <s> <blockquote> <ul> <ol> <li> <table> <tr> <td> <th> <sub> <sup> <object> <embed> <h1> <h2> <h3> <h4> <h5> <h6> <dl> <dt> <dd> <param> <center> <strong> <q> <cite> <code> <em>
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.

More information about formatting options

CAPTCHA
This test is to prevent automated spam submissions.
Leave empty.