Lik

仆街，

話你唔撚識野就即係唔撚識野。

First, regardless of what the guy said or whether he was regretful for his behaviours or not, the judge can only convict according to the type of crime the guy committed and consequences caused by his action, but not by what he said!  

早就話咗條友係應該用條重嘅罪來告佢，但你就響度借啲易想擾亂視聽，將矛頭指響刑罰係 depend on 被告果條罪。正一死仆街！

Second, if you want to make a statement – these two cases are the same type and they all committed the same degree of crime and should serve the same level of punishment. Then you need to prove these two cases are both – 故意殺人和殺人滅口！

唔撚睇野就唔該你快撚啲去收嗲～ 我都廢撚事徙我時間駁啲我已經講過嘅野。

Third, can you quote from any trust worthy source by your standards that can give you any support for your claim of these two cases are the same type of crime and deserve the same level of punishment?
rockypath 發表於 2011-6-9 00:46

同上。

最後一句：去仆街死啦你，因為你真係唔死都無撚用。

-力

rockypath

仆街，

話你唔撚識野就即係唔撚識野。

早就話咗條友係應該用條重嘅罪來告佢，但你就響度借啲易想擾亂視聽 ...
Lik 發表於 2011-6-10 00:16

仆街，

Just get your gut out to answer my question directly – what did you base on to determine 李啟銘’s action is a murder according to the Canadian criminal code - murder is a culpable homicide with SPECIFIC INTENTIONS? Don’t tell us you based on – “我爸是李剛”!   

Just remind you the moron again – it was you who told us these two cases are 同類案件. Will you admit that or not?   

If you don’t STFU, so we will continue watching you – a pitiful clown tried to entertained people but failed. Sorry for you.   


P.S.   BTW, just a little education to you the stupid moron, 量刑 and 定罪 are two different concepts. Even if the 量刑 of these cases are the same, but the 定罪 will absolutely not be the same (there is no way these two cases can be 同類案件). Get that straight first before embarrassing yourself again publically in front of LYKs.   

Be a man instead of a dog. Just answer my question directly instead of continuing to BS.

P.S. #2   I left a little tail above and let's see whether the stupid moron Lik will bite the bait or not.