Ok, so on your bank robbery, first and foremost. let me see the camera footage, did they present a note to the teller , Yes, where is the note, the suspect was searched and no note was found, I don't know where the note is officer, ok, f*ck that, no evidence for the alleged note. did they have or present a firearm , yes they pointed a gun at me office, we were unable to locate a gun through search of the suspect or their vehicle, well officer, they pointed a gun at me, f*ck that, no gun found, did you voluntarily give the suspect a bag of money, I did officer, but in the note they told me they were robbing me and pointed a gun at me and said hand over the money, well, everything has been searched for a note and gun and nothing was found, oh yeah officer, we have full camera footage with video and audio, hell yes, lemme check it out. OOOooo, there is the note being presented to you, there is the gun, the suspect said give me the money. Ok , i will need to take this tape as evidence for a conviction as it clearly shows the events you described as well as full video speech of the robbery. so bank teller, even though we do not physically have either the note or the gun as you testified, we have the full video with audio substantiating your accusations.
Seems pretty logical that without that video camera, and the accusations of evidence being unfounded that we have a very circumstantial case between a teller and a accused robber you think eh?? and in this case the teller knew the robber , neither could stand each other, so with no evidence other than the "Teller testified to" a grand jury will not indict the accused robber because of lack of evidence and the fact the two blatantly hated each other , their is a great possibility that both the accuser and alleged robber would lie on each other, there is no case..... sound familiar??? I thought so.
f*ck is my most central part of my vocabulary, f*ck-f*ck-f*ck , it is also my US citizen constitutional right.
How am i out of control??