You are not logged in. Login Now
 0-4   4-8         
 
Author Message
5 new of 8 responses total.
sabre
response 4 of 8: Mark Unseen   Jul 11 19:51 UTC 2003

like you never play with yourself....NIGGA PLEZ!!!
jmsaul
response 5 of 8: Mark Unseen   Jul 11 22:42 UTC 2003

Re #1:  It might have been a state-operated home that provided the subjects.
pvn
response 6 of 8: Mark Unseen   Jul 12 04:10 UTC 2003

re#5re#1:  Yes but did they know or have reason to believe that such a
six month experiment would cause lifelong damage?
jaklumen
response 7 of 8: Mark Unseen   Jul 12 04:29 UTC 2003

resp:3 Not only that, but from a confessed korn pone pussy lover.
jmsaul
response 8 of 8: Mark Unseen   Jul 12 06:40 UTC 2003

Re #6:  Well, they knew it was *supposed* to induce stuttering.  And they
        knew (or should have known) that the methodology was to inflict
        serious psychological abuse.  So I'd say they should be liable on
        moral grounds.  That's not the basis on which they're seeking
        dismissal, anyway -- it's because states were immune to suit at the
        time.
 0-4   4-8         
Response Not Possible: You are Not Logged In
 

- Backtalk version 1.3.30 - Copyright 1996-2006, Jan Wolter and Steve Weiss