Young Boy Found at a New Mexico Compound Died in a Ritual Ceremony, Prosecutors Say

Thank you for finishing this debate. "That's a remark stated because you cannot insert yourself into the thickened plot. " If you read either of my arguments, I was simply pointing out a misinterpretation of the facts on your part by pointing out evidence I provided in my previous argument. I was not and have not inserted myself. "The hell it isn't. " Legally, It isn't, And once again, I must remind you, The murder of the three-year-old is not a charge in this case. "Repeating from RD2. . . " I'm not sure what you're even aiming to prove with this point. All you've done is prove my points that you were talking about religion and that there wasn't sufficient evidence. Thanks? "Then that's child abuse. " Never have I denied there was child abuse, As I've maintained in all of my arguments. The point is that Judge Backus asked the prosecution for additional concrete evidence that would warrant a denial of bail, Because, As I cited in my first argument, Child abuse alone is not enough to warrant denial of bail. Judges can't jump to conclusions when making decisions like this, As I mentioned in my previous argument, So only concrete evidence can be used when determining bail; not unsubstantiated claims. "How do you know what was and what was not presented in court for this case? . . . The verdict made national news. " I'm struggling to see how these two points you've made are connected by any logical base, Other than the fact that, Chronologically speaking, Common sense dictates that a video made by a news agency released after the case would not be presented in court. "So forgive me if I went overboard in which case I did. " Thank you. "However your christ and savior did play a major key role. . . 'New Mexico compound: Muslim woman believed dead boy would be reincarnated as Jesus, FBI says. ' " Though this is not pertinent to the main argument, I would like to take the time to explain the misinterpretation. The actual quote from the FBI agent referred to the child being reincarnated as the messiah. Although this word is often associated with Jesus, It is also used to refer to similar figures in any religion, Which is what likely led to the mistake in the article's headline. Though it doesn't really make a difference, Christianity was not involved. I just wanted to clarify this because you've spent a substantial amount of time talking about it. "There's no such a thing as christianity. " First of all, Again, This isn't related to the argument, So I'm not sure why you keep focusing on it. Look, I have no issues with you not believing in it. I have no issues with people not following the literal text of the Bible in full. I don't. But that doesn't mean that it isn't a religion. That's inherently incorrect. "She---let---them---go. " No, She didn't. Do you not understand how bail works? They still have to face trial for their actions, They just don't stay in jail in the meantime. Yes, They were charged with eleven accounts of child abuse. The trial's going to determine whether they're guilty or not. "Religion played a HUGE part in this case and proved that the defendants were quite insane. " I haven't denied the part religion took in leading the defendants to take such actions. I'm saying that religion alone doesn't change how guilty they are. The actions themselves speak for that. The only way religion could be included in determining guilt in these circumstances is perhaps the death of the three-year-old, In which religion would provide a certain intent, Which determines the degree of murder, But again, That is not the subject of this case. Additionally, They haven't made an insanity plea, As you've stated. They're only in the first phase of the trial. Judge Backus made the best decision she could with the limited concrete evidence the prosecution provided. Denial of bail in child abuse cases in New Mexico is only legitimate with substantial amounts of evidence. The amount and type of evidence were unsubstantial in the court of law, No matter what your opinion of the defendants' guilt is. If anyone's to blame for the defendants getting bail (which there very well may not be), It's the prosecution for not doing a good enough job. The defendants are not free to go, And will be held accountable for their actions when the trial is over. Judge Backus did the right thing. She did her duty and followed the law. She should be commended for standing her ground in such an emotional case.