Originally posted by ELINVESTI8
I have one last suggestion on how to resolve the dilemma on who is telling the truth with respect to the date of the incident with James Russell Hicks
at the restaurant. It’s called a polygraph. Yeah, yeah I know it’s not admissible in a court of law here in the USA unless both sides (defense and
prosecution) agree to make it admissible on the record. Both James Russell Hicks and Mark Jerome Burbey need to come to San Diego on their own dime
and on their own dime pay for an independent polygraph examiner to ask them the relevant questions pertaining to the incident on the evening of the
alleged event. I think that this will be the only way to honestly determine who the untruthful person is. Of course this polygraph would have to be
administered, videotaped and monitored by an independent and unbiased person.
Suggested questions for James Russell Hicks:
1. Did you have a knife in your possession in the restaurant on the date of the incident?
2. Did you take out a knife from your pocket in the restaurant on the date of the incident?
3. Did you threaten anyone with a knife in the restaurant on the date of the incident?
4. Did you verbally threaten anyone in the restaurant without a knife on the date of the incident?
Suggested questions for Mark Jerome Burbey:
1. Did you cut James Russell Hicks with a large knife, sword or Machete on the date of the incident?
2. Did you attempt to severely injure James Russell Hicks with a large knife, sword or Machete on the date of the incident?
3. Did you attempt to kill James Russell Hicks with a large knife, sword or Machete on the date of the incident?
4. Did anyone known to you attempt to kill James Russell Hicks with a large knife, sword or Machete on the date of the incident?
5. Did anyone known to you attempt to injure James Russell Hicks with a large knife, sword or Machete on the date of the incident?
Those questions can be modified of course. |