you really are a silly man. Iq or not. I use your words but it seems that now you want me to ignore them. My guess is that you just can’t back down from being wrong. If you do know the facts and how the law works you would have read the judgement rather then dive into your version of what was done wrong.
I think it’s reasonable to assume though I admit it is an assumption, that your knowledge or your understanding (different things) is flawed given what YOU write
check the law and why and when judge only cases are used vs juries and the role of each.
do I know what this type of debating style means - well since I have no idea what you think is going on I’ll tell you what I think. When one debates (depending on whether it is a formal process) it typically involves what I’d describe as a parry and riposte.
if you can’t get basic facts right you deserve to have the flaws in your argument pointed out. That’s how it works. It doesn’t work that you can tell me how I respond.
why don’t you just try being a grown up rather than trying to argue with me
