>>282176859
Continuously misrepresenting my position over and over, either through ignorance or because you have nothing else, is just a form of concession.
>I think I might possibly be right
Completely backwards. I’ve demonstrated that your *only* canon evidence can be reasonably doubted (means, motive, past behavior), and is thus not proof, and therefore is not enough to find her guilty on that alone.
>so therefore I am
So therefore the presumption of innocence remains a standard that you have failed to meet, and will fail to meet indefinitely, unless the show provides us with more compelling evidence (it hasn’t all season).
Your next post will be another repetition, because you are either too stupid to rebut, or you have nothing else but to pretend to be stupid because you know you can’t rebut.
