Michael Jackson 咁都打得甩!!! 回應啦~
Michael Jackson 咁都打得甩???$\A1uP:h f8S金錢可以買到公義 G @#x.Vb e eXI
我唔相信Michael Jackson 無狎童:mad: 疑點利益歸於被告﹐法律需要保障雙方面。 人地講左啦~
打得甩唔代表佢無做過,(打得甩係因為冇十足的證據),並唔代表佢無做過,o K2nN:od"J
係鬼都知佢有做啦,唔係邊有咁多人搵佢話佢狎童,M)z8r Xt
你去下<<空間靈幻異次元>>應該可以問到Michael Jackson死了後會有什麼審判
that"s all
nig`x
[[i] Last edited by happylion99 on 2005-6-15 at 04:44 AM [/i]] 寧縱勿枉 有無做過真係無人知﹐你唔會知道D人係咪勒索不成後所以出黎屈距。 有人影到佢ja 住個BB 係露台 fing 下fing 下~
zk ?"SDU%U*]uI
[url]http://www.killsometime.com/games/game.asp?Game=Michael-Jackson-Baby-Drop[/url]
[[i] Last edited by spector.R on 2005-6-15 at 04:56 AM [/i]] [quote]Originally posted by [i]spector.R[/i] at 2005-6-15 04:46 AM:
有人影到佢ja 住個BB 係露台 fing 下fing 下~ [/quote]
尼個的而且確係真﹐距真係癲癲地架。 我100%支持米高,但係有冇做過只有佢自己先知喇, ewN*dr K-o~T7|
但係證原告男童母親都唔係好可信,屈錢都未定
仲有個tom sneddon 好似同佢有仇咁,好似一定要釘死米高咁
X | V d y y8H t3n-I
事後mj前妻德比·羅維事後發表聲明稱，“我肯定不會與一個戀童癖結婚的，這次審判也證明了我的判斷。” [quote]Originally posted by [i]vivienna[/i] at 2005-6-15 04:42 AM:1s'j+t}:J.KGP0D
有無做過真係無人知﹐你唔會知道D人係咪勒索不成後所以出黎屈距。 [/quote]
除非個條友好有$,先咁得閑同佢打官司,咁得閑出黎屈佢,d律師費都唔少. gE4C:M#_ J)k
用d假証據博勝訴?同自己的錢(律師費)鬥氣?
N,V%\6fM ~ h-? ]
你地會唔會俾大筆律師費老屈一條友 博一件冇發生過的事的勝訴 [3^o4[:g { x `QP
,pL l5@L
[[i] Last edited by happylion99 on 2005-6-15 at 04:52 AM [/i]] [quote]Originally posted by [i]happylion99[/i] at 2005-6-15 04:49 AM:7i0[ D ALH$fF1z e
wUw%vW9S
除非個條友好有$,先咁得閑同佢打... [/quote]
先生﹐刑事罪係由政府出錢告架﹐如果你被人打﹐如果你有足夠證據既話﹐你靜係需要報警﹐然後律政處會起訴果位人兄。法例係保障市民﹐如果要市民出錢告人既話﹐甘D法例咪等如無法例。而果位人兄就要位辯護律師幫距打官司喇﹐尼個就要比錢。#Z.t$k8MiM
1^ L/S8y,w2V6B/X
Civil Law 既民事訴訟就係如果你想告人﹐甘你就要自己出錢喇。 [quote]Originally posted by [i]happylion99[/i] at 2005-6-15 04:49 AM:
I s O1n%l J/{0Y
UOX _v8fOBl5n
除非個條友好有$,先咁得閑同佢打... [/quote]
H*Uu1gDj L
This is a crimial case, the goverment/tax payer pay for everything.
Find out the fact before you speak lar.... hello vivi, you beat me to it [quote]Originally posted by [i]vivienna[/i] at 2005-6-15 05:00 AM:
先生﹐刑事罪係由政府出錢告架﹐如... [/quote]
照你咁講,咁樣告人個條友有咩錢要支付呢? ;) X+e8c/`&S
如果無錢要支付的話,咁個個都會走去博一博,告一告,屈一屈Ew cl3hs
ju+e u N"X6?;E
我讀得書少,唔好蝦我~'VYC?_7Y7J
[[i] Last edited by happylion99 on 2005-6-15 at 05:07 AM [/i]] [quote]Originally posted by [i]johnwu[/i] at 2005-6-15 05:02 AM:!o,A1`Y {L c
hello vivi, you beat me to it [/quote]
haha Mr Wu, beating you is a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity ar ma, i will grab hold of it for sure.:D:D:D 刑事罪:n [!z&m x.i [ E
告人個條友= your goverment (not you)E.V(KH g7HW
Y L9f0E_2@XG
民事訴訟:
告人個條友 =you [quote]Originally posted by [i]happylion99[/i] at 2005-6-15 05:06 AM:
,Rq {&W-c
照你咁講,咁樣告人個條友有咩錢要支付呢? ;)
如果無錢要支付的話,咁個個都會走去博一博,告一告,屈一屈 [/quote]IW X'\/x2kYe jGj
大錯特錯﹐你如果告人唔成功既話﹐將會被人反告毀謗(defamatory)﹐到時你就真係要出錢喇﹐或可以用法律緩助處既。B"g`I.Jy7xOR*j
fj-u(a I\a E
答番你個問題﹐[color=LimeGreen]告人個條友[/color]唔係一個人﹐而係成個律政處告﹐受害者靜係需要做證人。 thank you for your teaching 仲有再補充既就係律政處靜係會o係有足夠證據既情況下先會落CHARGE﹐唔係話告就告。 [quote]Originally posted by [i]vivienna[/i] at 2005-6-15 05:14 AM:-B%uSM-G
仲有再補充既就係律政處靜係會o係有足夠證據既情況下先會落CHARGE﹐唔係話告就告。 [/quote] ?h A#e ~+E$]&d y
Not always... like this case..
or SingTao newspaper case is 有足夠證據既情況下 but no charge 我想聽大家自己的觀點`e3p/QY#V'Tv
如果你喜歡4h.GOv6n$Slo q D
您可以加入討論
但如果某人認為那"人地講左啦~"]X$s4op%@o
已經代表自己的觀點
您沒有需要繼續吠)SsC%h m9p
THE END
頁:
[1]
2