Well Fred seems to not understand that chocolate has nothing to with concepts of a health spa, from what I gather.
hasn't been told that cake is healthy? Well he was not told that at any times accept by the nutritionalists he says he has talked to.
Well as I understand it, either if what the nutritionalist told Fred is true, then either the nutritionalist is lying or is in correct, and the fact that the nutritionlist told him that, does not make it so. I get that people are saying that I am failing to understand the police and lawyers are telling me, but hardly any specific distinctions have been pointed out in the direct quote I posted, and I think that if we actually talked about the how and why, rather than the who and the what only, it would help, if I am not being too out of line by saying that.
Hmm. It's great fun starting to read a thread at the end, rather than the beginning ...and then following the trail backwards from Fred and Jane eating chocolate cake in a spa to preventing readers from getting fixated on minor characters. I now need to take a pill. A strong one.
I suggest a pill consisting of kale and chocolate in a ratio of 1:99 respectively. That way you can be sure to maximize the health benefits.
Okay so you are saying that I am misunderstanding what the police and lawyers from this analogy then?
Will the chocolate make me fat(ter?) We have kale in the garden, so this should be a skoosh. NOW ...where did I put my pill roller...?
By nature, kale is healthy. So, no, chocolate will not increase weight. ETA: A veterinarian friend of mine said that some animals require medication to treat depression. With that information, you should be able to maintain one sprig of kale to every pound of chocolate and lose upwards of ten pounds per week.
This is an excellent business endeavor. Chocolate to lose weight? Worldwide phenomenon. We'll just employ a certain person to circularly evade all questions regarding the legitimacy. Quoted emails, from graphic designers, carpenters, painters, landscapers. All of which (I'm told by a humanities teacher) hold high regard in dietary matters.
The key point is not that what the cops and lawyers (if they exist, as its a bit strange that they've covered the exact points we raise before we raised them - unless the cops and lawyers are sat with you as we speak) are telling you is wrong but that its irrelevant to the scenario you are writing e.g yes they are correct that if the cops witnessed a crime and if they were on the premises of the victim they rescued then fruit of the poisonous tree would not apply. (Hell even if the premises belonged to the perpetrator there wouldnt be a problem if they had good reason to enter) However that is irrelevant to a scenario where the blood in is an act and the "victim" is actually a gang member. because in that case a) a crime hasn't been committed , and b) they are on the premises owned by someone hostile to the police without a good reason... classic FoPT Likewise the lawyer who told you that a crime can be indicted (and indeed prosecuted) based on the testimony of police officers and evidence without testimony from the victim was indeed correct (as he said that is how homicide investigation works, the victim being dead) was entirely correct - but this is irrelevant to a scenario in which no crime has been committed I'd suggest going back to your police sources and asking them how often people are prosecuted for pretending to commit a crime - i'm confident that when they've stopped laughing at such a silly question they'll point out that prosecutions only happen when the law is broken.
As to fred and his cake the facts are incontrovertible Chocolate comes from beans , beans are a vegetable eggs are healthy Flour comes from wheat - also a vegetable sugar comes from beat or cane - vegetables again Butter is from Milk and we all know that milk helps you grow strong. Ergo chocolate cake is fantastically good for you and we should all eat as much as possible