On Dec 3, 5:58*am, T. Keating wrote:
On Fri, 2 Dec 2011 15:00:27 -0800 (PST), Mike Vandeman





wrote:
On Dec 2, 7:46 am, T. Keating wrote:
On Mon, 28 Nov 2011 10:21:41 -0800 (PST), Mike Vandeman

wrote:
http://www.portsmouth.co.uk/news/loc...lothes_sale_ra....

Clothes sale raises more than 2,000 for paralysed Alex

114190-146_ALEX_SR_26/11/11 Friends of Alex Jones who was paralysed
from the chest down in a mountain biking accident, come together in
Napier Hall to raise money for a trust fund for him. Left to right.
Zoe Palmer, Amy Conway, Gemma Jones, Tammy Shakespeare and Linda
Rowledge. PictuSteve Reid 114190-146

Published on Monday 28 November 2011 07:12

Snip article about UK professional mountain biker unfortunate
accident while training for an upcoming competitive event.

http://peterfrickwright.com/2011/03/...ry-unique-defe....
More about Mike Vanderman's trial & guilty verdicts on three counts.

From a witness in the court room.

You mean that oncorrigible LIAR, Peter Frick-Wright?

Are you claiming the court witness lied about the guilty verdicts?http://peterfrickwright.com/2011/03/...ry-unique-defe...







For exhibiting a deadly weapon: guilty.

Ian Richards admitted in court that I wasn't brandishing.

For exhibiting a deadly weapon at Emanuel Alcala: guilty.

Immanuel (Julian) Alcala simply lied under oath.

For battering Justin Bruss: guilty.

Justin ran into ME, so he is the one guilty of battery, not me.

That's the nature of our jury system: they convict the innocent all
the time. NOT ONE of them was present during any of these events. It
is well known that jurors THINK they can tell who is lying, but they
really can't.

Obviously, the jurors thought you we're guilty of those counts.

*It's the intent to commit a crime that turns any particular physical
act into a crime. *A jury evaluates guilt or innocence based on fact.
It's fairly obvious that your persistent usenet activitiy,
demostrating an intense dislike of humans on certain types of
vehicles, tipped the balance of evidence against your claims of
innocence.

Irrelevant. All I do is tell the truth -- something mountain bikers
can't stand!

Add to that: the presiding judge has the power to vacate an improper
guilty verdict, but he did not do so, thus the judge was also
convinced beyond the required legal standards that you were guilty.

It wasn't legally "improper", it was just wrong. The judge doesn't
decide guilt; the jury does, even if they are crazy. That's the system
we are stuck with, even if it doesn't work.

So now you need to blame the judge as well.

He in a sense vacated it, by sentencing me to something I already do:
pick up trash! He knew what he was doing.