Tina Anderson, Chuck Phelps Take Stand in Willis Trial

What do I think about his conduct is too vague. I may answer something you do not have in mind. If you have some very specific questions, Leah, I will be glad to address them as thoroughly as possible. But again, instead of answering something you do not have in mind, specifically, tell me specifically what conduct you have in mind and I will respond.

Alex

[Alex Guggenheim] What do I think about his conduct is too vague. I may answer something you do not have in mind. If you have some very specific questions, Leah, I will be glad to address them as thoroughly as possible. But again, instead of answering something you do not have in mind, specifically, tell me specifically what conduct you have in mind and I will respond.

Alex

Ok specific question. We will take these one at a time.

Do you agree or disagree with jury verdict that Ernest Willis is guilty of rape by force of Tina Anderson? Yes or No—please don’t try to wiggle out of a direct answer.

A simple yes or no will do and we can then move on to the next question.

Mat 5:37 ESV Let what you say be simply ‘Yes’ or ‘No’; anything more than this comes from evil.

2Co 1:17 ESV Was I vacillating when I wanted to do this? Do I make my plans according to the flesh, ready to say “Yes, yes” and “No, no” at the same time?
2Co 1:18 As surely as God is faithful, our word to you has not been Yes and No.

James 5:12 ESV But above all, my brothers, do not swear, either by heaven or by earth or by any other oath, but let your “yes” be yes and your “no” be no, so that you may not fall under condemnation.

Pro 8:6 ESV Hear, for I will speak noble things, and from my lips will come what is right,
Pro 8:7 for my mouth will utter truth; wickedness is an abomination to my lips.
Pro 8:8 All the words of my mouth are righteous; there is nothing twisted or crooked in them.
Pro 8:9 They are all straight to him who understands, and right to those who find knowledge.

Pro 12:17 ESV Whoever speaks the truth gives honest evidence, but a false witness utters deceit.
Pro 12:18 There is one whose rash words are like sword thrusts, but the tongue of the wise brings healing.
Pro 12:19 Truthful lips endure forever, but a lying tongue is but for a moment.
Pro 12:20 Deceit is in the heart of those who devise evil, but those who plan peace have joy.

Leah,

I wish you would not encourage Alex. While you may want to spend 12 hours on an International-Multi-Continential Flight, I prefer the Concord Jet version.

Alex, you could spare all of us your lengthy response by realizing that not many of us care about your splitting of hairs, much less how you view someone who asserts that the questions of the truthfullness of what happened is now the wrong question to ask in light of the jury’s verdict.

Quite frankly, I have read few posts that come across as more prideful and more full of “self” than your posts, Alex. In the posts of yours that I have read over the past year, you seem to be quick to correct, usually in a tone that comes across as condescending. My exhortation to you, brother, is to examine the tone and content of your posts, and work to be “clothed with humility”.

By the way, I’m sure there are posts of mine that could have been better worded…if you notice areas that I can improve in the future, I hope that you will help to “sharpen” my iron as well. :o)

Leah,

When people begin attempting to dictate to me how I will answer a question and what I will say, they are no longer interested in hearing what I have to say. I will answer questions the way I determine I need to. If that is something you cannot tolerate then we cannot have a dialogue.

Okay now that the folly of that has been exposed the last question you can answer is whether or not you are ready to receive my answer in my own words or not. Do you wish to hear what I have to say in my own words? (A simple yes or no will do). :)

Mat 5:37 ESV Let what you say be simply ‘Yes’ or ‘No’; anything more than this comes from evil.

2Co 1:17 ESV Was I vacillating when I wanted to do this? Do I make my plans according to the flesh, ready to say “Yes, yes” and “No, no” at the same time?
2Co 1:18 As surely as God is faithful, our word to you has not been Yes and No.

James 5:12 ESV But above all, my brothers, do not swear, either by heaven or by earth or by any other oath, but let your “yes” be yes and your “no” be no, so that you may not fall under condemnation.

[Alex Guggenheim] Leah,

When people begin attempting to dictate to me how I will answer a question and what I will say, they are no longer interested in hearing what I have to say. I will answer questions the way I determine I need to. If that is something you cannot tolerate then we cannot have a dialogue.

Okay now that the folly of that has been exposed the last question you can answer is whether or not you are ready to receive my answer in my own words or not. Do you wish to hear what I have to say in my own words? (A simple yes or no will do). :)

Yes

Leah is talking about a particular case, and Alex is talking legal words and phrases and meanings in general. This is not going to be productive unless folks are addressing what the other is actually saying.

[pastorwesh] Leah,

I wish you would not encourage Alex. While you may want to spend 12 hours on an International-Multi-Continential Flight, I prefer the Concord Jet version.

Alex, you could spare all of us your lengthy response by realizing that not many of us care about your splitting of hairs, much less how you view someone who asserts that the questions of the truthfullness of what happened is now the wrong question to ask in light of the jury’s verdict.

Quite frankly, I have read few posts that come across as more prideful and more full of “self” than your posts, Alex. In the posts of yours that I have read over the past year, you seem to be quick to correct, usually in a tone that comes across as condescending. My exhortation to you, brother, is to examine the tone and content of your posts, and work to be “clothed with humility”.

By the way, I’m sure there are posts of mine that could have been better worded…if you notice areas that I can improve in the future, I hope that you will help to “sharpen” my iron as well. :o)

Tone? I did not know there was an audible version of my posts available (I am indebted to Bob T for this rhetorical instrument).

Hmmm, let me see, Wes is concerned that I am quick to correct, full of self and needing to be clothed in humility while correcting me himself. “Now see here, brother, let me correct you in your correcting of others!” LOL. Okay

By the way, who is the “us” in the spare “us your lengthy response”. Were you voted, hired or asked to represent a group of which I am not aware or is this a self-appointed role? Because if I respond to this post it is incumbent I know to whom I am speaking. So is it just you or are there others reading your monitor for whom you are speaking?

As to noticing areas in which you can improve, well yea Wes, right here with this personal post, stop it. It is inappropriate, out of bounds, unwarranted, arrogant, disruptive and irrelevant to the topic. If you do not have anything to add to the topic but only have personal comments then you are out of bounds with regard to SI and need to get back on topic. And the only reason I am responding is because you solicited my opinion.

At this point, I will not communicate with you in this thread unless it has to do with the topic or an actual rebuttal to content.

Alex

OK let me rewind. My statement was specifically related to the Willis rape trial and the verdict. The thread is about the Willis rape trial. Specifically about the guilty verdict in the Willis rape trial and only the Willis rape trial—not case law in general. This is a specific case with a specific outcome. And each of us have specific thoughts related to the specific case of the Ernest Willis rape trial.

So I asked Alex and will ask again do you agree or disagree with the guilty verdict in the case? You asked me to ask you a specific question so that you could answer that and not some other question. I am being as specific as I know how to be and asking you to comment on the specific case of the Ernest Willis rape trail.

Do you agree or disagree with jury verdict that Ernest Willis is guilty of rape by force of Tina Anderson?

I was not at the trial therefore I do not have the facts before me in order to compare and render a personal opinion as to whether or not I believe the jury was right or wrong in their determination. That would be required.

However, I am confident that the jury’s determination of guilt on the four counts was not based on hearsay but on testimony presented as truthful, on facts and on all other evidence. Hence I do not question its legality in the least.

However and again, not having been at the trial I cannot make a personal comparison of my own opinion with that of the jury’s.

[pastorwesh] Leah,

I wish you would not encourage Alex. While you may want to spend 12 hours on an International-Multi-Continential Flight, I prefer the Concord Jet version.

Alex, you could spare all of us your lengthy response by realizing that not many of us care about your splitting of hairs, much less how you view someone who asserts that the questions of the truthfullness of what happened is now the wrong question to ask in light of the jury’s verdict.

Quite frankly, I have read few posts that come across as more prideful and more full of “self” than your posts, Alex. In the posts of yours that I have read over the past year, you seem to be quick to correct, usually in a tone that comes across as condescending. My exhortation to you, brother, is to examine the tone and content of your posts, and work to be “clothed with humility”.

By the way, I’m sure there are posts of mine that could have been better worded…if you notice areas that I can improve in the future, I hope that you will help to “sharpen” my iron as well. :o)

Pastor Wesh, I completely agree.

[Susan R] Leah is talking about a particular case, and Alex is talking legal words and phrases and meanings in general. This is not going to be productive unless folks are addressing what the other is actually saying.

I agree. I think if any are interested in debating that interesting facet of the legal system there are plenty of legal forums where that would be better suited. This thread is devoted to this SPECIFIC case and verdict and as Jay C. intimated in post #92 right after the verdict was handed down we should let the jury’s decision to stand as truth here.

So if you don’t know, Alex, then there really was no need for you to post, now was there?

[Greg Long] So if you don’t know, Alex, then there really was no need for you to post, now was there?

But there must be a need for your snideness, right? LOL.

I realize reading through a thread is hard but if you read through the thread your question will be answered. However, since I am in a giving mood the answer is yes, there is a need. I was asked a question and being the thoughtful person I endeavor to be I answered it.
I must say your suggestion to engage in rudeness and not answer is surprising.

Now, children, if we are all through with personal and snide comments toward Alex, let’s get back on topic with a smile. :)

[Jmeyering]

[Susan R] Leah is talking about a particular case, and Alex is talking legal words and phrases and meanings in general. This is not going to be productive unless folks are addressing what the other is actually saying.

I agree. I think if any are interested in debating that interesting facet of the legal system there are plenty of legal forums where that would be better suited. This thread is devoted to this SPECIFIC case and verdict and as Jay C. intimated in post #92 right after the verdict was handed down we should let the jury’s decision to stand as truth here.

So a legal rendering is being discussed but we shouldn’t discuss legal language? Am I reading this right? Am I in the Twilight Zone?

I guess you have the answer to your question…at current count the “us” is: 1) Myself, 2) Susan, 3) Jeff. Can I take your comments as a “motion from the floor” to nominate me as the President of the UWWRNHFAOTI (Us who would rather not hear from Alex on this issue) Club? If you make the motion, maybe Susan or Jeff could 2nd it, then all we need is a quorum!

As far as adding to the discussion…if you would read all the comments made thus far (before assuming I’ve not made any), you would realize that I have added to the topic, and am therefore not in violation or “out of bounds” in regard to any SI policies.

My post was not a “personal” post. It was a public post in response to your “public” posts, which are often extremely long, conceited, overbearing, condescending, and redundant.

I have yet to see you take correction well, nor have a seen any correcting rebukes help temper your prideful tone (yes, I said tone-some of us hear better than others). As far as your opinion goes, you are entitled to it…even if it is the wrong one.

You can view this as a rebuttal to “content” if you so choose (wouldn’t want to dictate anything to you).