Anyways, to the topic of Kent Hovind, I don't know any "facts" as I did not do the investigation, prosecution, defending, or deliberating, or was involved in any way
Then you are not qualified to make statements of fact about those who are aware of the facts presented in the Hovind case.
and I know none of you people have either unless you can prove it otherwise.
The facts of Hovind's case are public knowledge and anyone who wishes to can read the relavent facts of the case. The fact that you didn't bother to read them and chose to remain willfully ignorant doesn't mean that everybody else did, or that you are qualified to determine whether someone did or did not peruse those facts.
What makes you people have any right to say anything?
A little thing called freedom of speech. What makes you think you have the right to question someone ability to speak on on any subject they wish?
Well guess who knows for a fact what happend?
As I said before, trials are not closed or secret affairs. The evidence presented by the prosecution and the defense is availible, and the deliberations of the jury are inconsequential since the verdict that they rendered was unanimous.
It's not like Kent Hovind accidentily commited fraud and no one will believe him, Hovind and his wife engaged in well documented actions which show a clear and recognizible pattern of intent to commit fraud.
