I say leave the poor bastard alone. Guy did his time.
Not enough. He got away with all the murders. If I had killed somebody, I would have gotten life, because I don't have the right connections and criminal capabilities, so why should he be left alone? Just because he is smart and knows how to behave himself in public? Nearly everybody else is doing life or some decades, so why make an exception for him? The only reason to defend him I can understand is that with Merlino gone, somebody worse than him might take his place.
I respect your opinion but disagree. Jury says not guilty it's not guilty. I'm saying leave him alone by stop talking about him. I'm sure he loves the attention. Let him be. All the talk about him makes it worse. I'm saying lets stop glorifying this two bit dime store hustler as some one special.
Respect
Not that I disagree about leaving the man alone, but when a jury says "not guilty" they mean the prosecutor didn't provide evidence beyond a reasonable doubt. They don't mean that metaphysically the defendant didn't commit the crime. Beyond a reasonable doubt is a extremely high burden of proof (as compared to civil trials where the evidence is preponderance of evidence, 50% and a feather)- that generally reflects on the prosecution's work in a mob case rather than whether they are really guilty or not. God isn't going to put the writing on the wall.
Last edited by LittleNicky; 04/14/1302:09 PM.
Should probably ask Mr. Kierney. I guess if you're Italian, you should be in prison. I've read the RICO Act, and I can tell you it's more appropriate... for some of those guys over in Washington than it is for me or any of my fellas here
