re: getrichquick some facts for you
My mistake it was corby's defence (not prosecution) that did the poor job
getrichquick
It would appear your lack of reading abilty stems from the fact you are an idiot.
Prima facie case for the prosecution WAS ESTABLISHED.
and as I HAVE NOW PROVEN the onus then fell on the defence to counter the prosecutions case - JUST AS THEY WOULD NEED TO DO IN MOST AUSTRALIAN COURTS.
In corby's case the DEFENCE did a poor job in this area.
Just as in most Australian courts if the DEFENCE performs a poor job in disproving the prosecutiuon's case - THE VERDICT WILL BE GUILTY Success is a result of planning not hoping
