Doug Holland@lemmy.worldM to AMUSING, INTERESTING, OUTRAGEOUS, or PROFOUND@lemmy.worldEnglish · 2 days agoAmerican justicelemmy.worldimagemessage-square58fedilinkarrow-up11.16Karrow-down17cross-posted to: [email protected]
arrow-up11.16Karrow-down1imageAmerican justicelemmy.worldDoug Holland@lemmy.worldM to AMUSING, INTERESTING, OUTRAGEOUS, or PROFOUND@lemmy.worldEnglish · 2 days agomessage-square58fedilinkcross-posted to: [email protected]
minus-squarefinitebanjo@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up2arrow-down1·2 days agoThe burden of proof of your own statements does not fall upon others.
minus-squareSpaceNoodle@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up2arrow-down1·2 days agoNo, I’m asking a question.
minus-squarefinitebanjo@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up2arrow-down2·edit-22 days agoYour question hangs upon, it requires, a condition which has not been proven true therefor you’re claiming the condition is true by asserting the question is valid. Suggested changes in how you present the statement: “Was Luigi offered a plea deal? If not, why?”
minus-squareSpaceNoodle@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up2arrow-down3·2 days agoThe default is that a plea deal is not offered. Please feel free to prove your assertion that he was given the option for a plea deal.
The burden of proof of your own statements does not fall upon others.
No, I’m asking a question.
Your question hangs upon, it requires, a condition which has not been proven true therefor you’re claiming the condition is true by asserting the question is valid.
Suggested changes in how you present the statement:
“Was Luigi offered a plea deal? If not, why?”
The default is that a plea deal is not offered.
Please feel free to prove your assertion that he was given the option for a plea deal.