marlene wrote:Intro wrote:Actually, I do not expect anything to change, it will all be exactly the same just as I have stated that 'nothing has changed, IMO. I understand how the Appeals Process works. In the meantime, noone--not even in blogs and forums--has come up with anything/anyone, but SLP.
Really, I guess WAH has never told you about the articles on the PWC blog -- which point definitively away from Scott.
but, I agree with you, nothing's going to change. the State had no evidence to begin with, and it's not going to be able to find any because Scott is factually innocent.
BTW, tell WAH I'm still waiting for him to produce that info from NOAA and SFPORTS that confirms Cheng's testimony. He said it's there, but he has yet to produce it. Tell him he's delusional if he thinks I take his word for it, especially when I have the data from NOAA and SFPORTS on SII and it DOES NOT agree with Cheng.
ROFLMAO! Marlene, there is no reason to bring up WAH anymore--just respond to me. Your investigative skills are just not skillful--LOL! I have the NOAA and SFPORTS data as well and they do agree with Dr. Ralph Cheng. You, obviosly, have misunderstood and misinterpreted his testimony and you have stated a specious argument to mislead--I suggest you read the testimony again and again until you finally get it.