Triplett guilty of murder

Adam H. Kerman

unread,

May 20, 2013, 6:01:57 PM5/20/13

to

I meant to post this last week.

Anthony Triplett, a Comcast contract technician, raped and murdered two
women while on service calls. He was convicted of murder of the second
woman on May 13. He hasn't gone to trial on the first murder.

There is a lawsuit pending against Comcast that they did nothing about
Triplett despite being informed that he was prime suspect in the first
murder.

The jury deliberated for just six hours.

diy savant

unread,

May 21, 2013, 5:19:04 AM5/21/13

to

On 5/20/2013 6:01 PM, Adam H. Kerman wrote:
> There is a lawsuit pending against Comcast that they did nothing about
> Triplett despite being informed that he was prime suspect in the first
> murder.

So now we're guilty until proven innocent?

Adam H. Kerman

unread,

May 21, 2013, 9:23:37 AM5/21/13

to

I didn't say Triplett had been found guilty of the first murder, because
that hasn't come to trial yet. I said that Comcast had been informed by
the police that he was the prime suspect in the first murder. "Suspect"
is not a finding of guilty. It does suggest that he should have been prevent
from doing future work on service calls unless he was no longer a suspect.

Get that reading comprehension problem fixed soonest, sockpuppet, or just
discard this one as the holes have become too large.

diy savant

unread,

May 21, 2013, 4:35:18 PM5/21/13

to

On 5/21/2013 9:23 AM, Adam H. Kerman wrote:
> diy savant <d...@savant.nul> wrote:
>> On 5/20/2013 6:01 PM, Adam H. Kerman wrote:
>
>>> There is a lawsuit pending against Comcast that they did nothing about
>>> Triplett despite being informed that he was prime suspect in the first
>>> murder.
>
>> So now we're guilty until proven innocent?
>
> I didn't say Triplett had been found guilty of the first murder, because
> that hasn't come to trial yet. I said that Comcast had been informed by
> the police that he was the prime suspect in the first murder. "Suspect"
> is not a finding of guilty. It does suggest that he should have been prevent
> from doing future work on service calls unless he was no longer a suspect.

Just because some cop says he looks guilty?
You'd seriously have Comcast remove him from his job?

Barry Margolin

unread,

May 21, 2013, 5:15:27 PM5/21/13

to

In article <knglq...@news4.newsguy.com>, diy savant <d...@savant.nul>

Employers don't have to protect your 4th and 5th amendment rights. They
need to comfort their customers.

--
Barry Margolin
Arlington, MA

Adam H. Kerman

unread,

May 21, 2013, 5:38:22 PM5/21/13

to

A prime suspect in a murder at the home of one of your subscribers? Yes. I
have a feeling Comcast will settle for a ton of money.

diy savant

unread,

May 21, 2013, 6:16:00 PM5/21/13

to

Was Ted Kennedy removed from office while he was a murder suspect?

name

unread,

May 22, 2013, 6:05:44 AM5/22/13

to

"diy savant" wrote:

<snip>

> Was Ted Kennedy removed from office while he was a murder
suspect?

Missed that. Please recount the specifics.

Adam H. Kerman

unread,

May 22, 2013, 8:51:49 AM5/22/13

to

Hah. I found a news story directly linking Ted Kennedy's deadly car
crash with Comcast. It's a conspiracy, I tell you!

http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2012-06-14/hey-comcast-the-rich-arent-that-different

Barry Margolin

unread,

May 22, 2013, 1:11:21 PM5/22/13

to

In article <kngrn...@news4.newsguy.com>, diy savant <d...@savant.nul>

His employer was the federal government, which IS bound by the Bill of
Rights.

Adam H. Kerman

unread,

May 22, 2013, 3:44:03 PM5/22/13

to

Huh? Each House of Congress may expell its own Member.

diy savant

unread,

May 22, 2013, 4:46:15 PM5/22/13

to

"We the little people" are not protected by the Bill of Rights?

Barry Margolin

unread,

May 23, 2013, 10:31:13 AM5/23/13

to

In article <knjar...@news6.newsguy.com>, diy savant <d...@savant.nul>

Sure you are. But you're only protected against the government, not
private employers.

diy savant

unread,

May 23, 2013, 4:57:37 PM5/23/13

to

Well thank God there are loopholes in the Constitution for corporations!

Adam H. Kerman

unread,

May 23, 2013, 5:25:22 PM5/23/13

to

The loophole you seem to be promoting is that the two murder victims
had no rights, and that Comcast had no duty to the second one, having
been told about the first one.

I know you think your troll was terribly clever, and that you expected to
keep Barry going for several more rounds of this, but it's just Barry,
who feeds a lot of trolls, so no cleverness is involved.

I'm very bored of you, and you're going to starve from now on.

diy savant

unread,

May 24, 2013, 12:22:23 AM5/24/13

to

Barry and I were having a polite exchange.

Are you menstruating?

someone

unread,

May 25, 2013, 12:39:50 PM5/25/13

to

"diy savant" <d...@savant.nul> wrote in
message
news:knmpu...@news1.newsguy.com...

On more than one occasion, I've noticed
that when Addam disagrees with someone,
he calls them a troll. (shrugs)