Science > Psychopaths at Home, at work, and in the Garden

A&E Documentary on Roger Keith Coleman

<< < (4/4)

Nienna:

--- Quote from: aron01 on January 05, 2012, 01:59:38 PM ---I didn't come into this forum with an agenda. I simply read what was posted and gave a valid opinion as to what very well could be a different scenario as to what could have happened. The original poster railed against a man I highly doubt they knew and I simply asked those reading to consider a different point of view. If it was your dads friend, wouldn't you want a chance to defend him? I know everyone is entitled to their own opinions and thoughts, and I have a great respect for that. I only ask you to consider the evidence in a different light. The only thing even remotely close to an "agenda", as you put it, is letting one misinformed person rant and rave at will and then fuss when someone with obvious inside knowledge of the subject at hand comes along and presents a different point of view.

Is the original post wrong? I feel it is. Perhaps grossly inaccurate is a better word, but that's their view and opinion. Just as my post was.

Thank you for your time. Sincerely

               Jesse A. Corbett

--- End quote ---

Have you studied much about psychopathy?  Do you understand the influence psychopaths can have on people?  That they can seem caring, charming, ready to help anyone, etc.  And that it is all part of their "mask"?

Many psychopaths are expert at getting others to "believe" in them.  That's part of their plan.  Then these same people will defend them even in the face of facts that prove beyond a doubt to his/her real identity.

People are very easily deceived.  The fact that this man was a friend of your father is irrelevant. 

If my dad's friend was not a very nice man, no, I wouldn't want a chance to defend him.

If you can come up with some facts, rather than opinions, that prove otherwise to what has been posted, we would be more than glad to see them.

aron01:
i wasnt using my fathers friendship to define rogers character so much as i was to shw that i had better insight into this than most. please keep in mind that the so called "facts" in this case were poorly presented and skewed to put an innocent man behind bars, and ultimately, to death. if you read what i wrote, youll see my information comes from far better sources than anyone else's ive seen thus far. you may believe the man to be a psychopath, but you yourself have admitted to never knowing the man..... now, who would be a better judge of a man? someone reading only what they've seen and read, or a man that grew up with the accused? im not here to point fingers or say who is right or wrong. im merely offering insight into a man's life you admit you were never a part of.... you mentioned facts proving beyond a shadow of a doubt a persons guilt. where are these in rogers case? again, wanda had defensive wounds, yet roger bore no marks of a struggle. she had a "dark substance" on her body. have you ever been near a coal mine? i have. its incredibly easy to pick up coal dust. ive personally seen the snow in grubdy come down grey from the dust in the air. what about a murder weapon? what about the several people that provided an alibi for roger? what about the bloody pile of sheets found at the edge of the yard that never got entered into evidence? you can argue about the prior conviction for sexual assault, but if you read all the facts inthat case and know that the principal of grundy high, and his daughter, went to bat for him.


i know from personal experience that the news will sensationalize anything for the sake of a dramatic story, regardless of the persons innocence or guilt. you will always hear of what a person is charged with, regardless of whether or not the charges are completely bogus. all im asking of you is to look at this from a different view, to consider all the facts. not just what you read or were told was the truth....

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[*] Previous page