Author Topic: ITT PPA is not a furry (Read 39919 times)

P.P.A. · « **on:** May 06, 2008, 01:38:13 pm »

My client, P.P.A., has been accused of being a member of the furry fandom multiple times. These accusations are false and are to be withdrawn unless the prosecution delivers indisputable proof for P.P.A. being a furry.

Thorn · « **Reply #1 on:** May 06, 2008, 01:45:10 pm »

You're obviously going about this the wrong way.

Your logic says that we should take the 6.x billion people around the world and re-train them all to think that you are not a furry. My logic, which I believe we'd all agree with even without a Phoenix Wright picture, says that we should train you to think of yourself as furry.

There's quite a few audio hypnosis sites out there, and if you can weed through the gook, you might find something that can take you under, trance you out, and make you believe. I myself have always been curious about hypnosis in genereal, and recently stumbled on a forum partially dedicated to causing visual hallucinations of self-furriness via audio hypnosis. (It was damned awkward posting there; it always went along the lines of "oh hi I'm not furry but I like that trancy shiz you do"...)

PPA, for your own sake, stop denying your furriness. We're here to support you, okay? The sooner you come to terms with it, the better you'll feel.

P.P.A. · « **Reply #2 on:** May 06, 2008, 01:52:07 pm »

Quote from: Thorn on May 06, 2008, 01:45:10 pm

You're obviously going about this the wrong way.

Your logic says that we should take the 6.x billion people around the world and re-train them all to think that you are not a furry. My logic, which I believe we'd all agree with even without a Phoenix Wright picture, says that we should train you to think of yourself as furry.

There's quite a few audio hypnosis sites out there, and if you can weed through the gook, you might find something that can take you under, trance you out, and make you believe. I myself have always been curious about hypnosis in genereal, and recently stumbled on a forum partially dedicated to causing visual hallucinations of self-furriness via audio hypnosis. (It was damned awkward posting there; it always went along the lines of "oh hi I'm not furry but I like that trancy shiz you do"...)

PPA, for your own sake, stop denying your furriness. We're here to support you, okay? The sooner you come to terms with it, the better you'll feel.

And yet again the prosecution fails to give actual proof of P.P.A.'s furriness. As long as it's all rumours, the client (who still vehemently denies these claims) is to be believed.

Thorn EDIT:
<Thorn> PPA I thought the whole idea of Phoenix Wright in a nutshell is that more of the duty lies on the defense than the prosecution >_>
<Thorn> how dare you spin that back at me

Groudon · « **Reply #3 on:** May 06, 2008, 03:26:17 pm »

It appears I have a case to judge.

To start with, the defense claims numerous people have accused his client of being a member of the furry fandom. If anybody has any hard evidence proving this, please present it to the court.

One more thing. ~~The prosecution will refrain from making any statements by editing the defense's posts. If the prosecution wishes to state something, they will do so in their own post.~~ ~~DISREGARD THAT, I SUCK COCKS~~

THAT DOES IT! Due to the actions of the prosecution, I will dismiss this case immediately. I try to maintain order and the prosecution tampers with the request.

Court is adjourned.

P.P.A. · « **Reply #4 on:** May 06, 2008, 03:58:36 pm »

Quote from: Judge Groudon on May 06, 2008, 03:26:17 pm

To start with, the defense claims numerous people have accused his client of being a member of the furry fandom. If anybody has any hard evidence proving this, please present it to the court.

Of course your Honour.

I searched my records of the conversations of the IRC channel named "#soniccenter" and found numerous such happenings:

Quote from: Sun Apr 22 2007

[11:11] PPA: I like Gamma, am i a furry? D=
[11:11] Upth: PPA: YES! YOU ARE A ROBOFURRY!
[11:12] PPA: ONOS!!1

Quote from: Fri Jul 20 2007

[22:36] Rick: PPA = furry
[22:36] PPA: D:
[22:36] Rick: It has been confirmed.
[22:36] * PPA no furry!

Quote from: Sat Jul 21 20:02:39 2007

[21:50] Rick: PPA = Pervert and a furry
[21:51] PPA: I'M NOT A FURRY

Quote from: Fri Aug 03 2007

[21:02] <Rick> PPA is a furry :O
[21:02] <PPAChao> NOOO
[21:02] <PPAChao> I AM NIT

Quote from: Tue Sep 04 2007

[14:40] <RPG|BlueDragon> PPA furry confirmed <_______<
[14:40] <PPAChao> ...
[14:41] <PPAChao> no u
[14:41] * PPAChao runs away crying

Quote from: Thu Sep 13 2007

[20:09] <PPAChao> I'M USUALLY NOT THAT PERVERTED
[20:09] <SkyL> SO YOU ADMIT YOURE A FURRY
[20:09] <PPAChao> I think.
[20:09] <PPAChao> NO
[20:09] <PPAChao> I'M NOT A FURRY D:
[20:09] <PPAChao> JUST A PERVERT
[20:10] <Tikal> Then why did you shove a tube up my ass?
[20:10] <PPAChao> Because you kept asking for tubes. >:O
[20:10] <Tikal> I beg of you, take this tube out. :(
[20:10] <PPAChao> :(

Quote from: Sun Sep 16 2007

[16:21] <The_T> PPA = creepy
[16:22] <yse> no, just furry
[16:22] <China> I AM NOT A FURRY
[16:22] <RPG> HES RIGHT
[16:22] <RPG> HE IS NOT A FURRY
[16:22] <RPG> He is a furfag
[16:22] <China> YOU CAN BROWSE MY FOLDERS AND WOULDN'T FIND ONE REAL FURRY
[16:22] <RPG> >_______________________>
[16:22] <China> sftu rpg
[16:22] <The_T> bwaha pwned
[16:22] <China> <________________________________________<

Quote from: Sun Jan 06 2008

[21:30] <PPAChao> Foxes are furry!
[21:30] <DsT> ur furry
[21:30] <PPAChao> no u
[21:30] <DsT> no, you
[21:30] <PPAChao> no Da1
[21:30] <DsS> yes u
[21:31] <DsS> :D
[21:31] <PPAChao> I'M NOT A FURRY

Quote from: Mon Mar 10 2008

[19:49] <Zephyr> [13:26] * Rolken pat ppa lovingly
[19:49] <Zephyr> [13:26] <PPAChao> :3
[19:49] <PPAChao> Meow. :(
[19:49] <Zephyr> FURRY >:O
[19:50] <PPAChao> I'M NOT A FURRY :³

Due to time and space constrains I am unfortunately unable to list all the accusations against my client, but I hope these few examples are enough for the beginning.

EDIT:

What the hell, how can the count be dismissed before I even finished my post?!

Groudon · « **Reply #5 on:** May 06, 2008, 04:04:28 pm »

Even though I had initially adjourned, I will return to the case immediately due to the defense presenting hard evidence. In addition, any future unnecessary edits by the prosecution will result in penalization.

I can see that many people have accused you of being a "furry".

However, there's another question I have to ask. Is there any evidence that shows when these accusations first surfaced?

Bilan · « **Reply #6 on:** May 06, 2008, 04:29:38 pm »

PPA DO YOUR REQUIRE MY SERVICES!?

P.P.A. · « **Reply #7 on:** May 06, 2008, 04:32:36 pm »

(I post too slow.) Perhaps. Thanks a lot for your offer, I might need some help later on. But for the moment I would like to try to handle this myself.

Quote from: Judge Groudon on May 06, 2008, 04:04:28 pm

However, there's another question I have to ask. Is there any evidence that shows when these accusations first surfaced?

I think the first time this affair was brought up was in Juny of 2007, in this thread:

http://www.soniccenter.org/forum/index.php?topic=2460.0

Bilan · « **Reply #8 on:** May 06, 2008, 04:40:25 pm »

I will take this time to be the assistant and watch from the sidelines.

Groudon · « **Reply #9 on:** May 06, 2008, 05:01:37 pm »

Hmm...

I see. The whole "furry" incidents started when you posted an image of this "catgirl".

Very well. Does anyone have anything to add?

ChaoRC · « **Reply #10 on:** May 06, 2008, 05:26:08 pm »

Quote from: P.P.A. on June 17, 2007, 07:07:36 am

I've recently gotten Breath of fire II and I love it. However, it has Katt in it, who I think is kinda hawt.

>_>

Zeupar · « **Reply #11 on:** May 06, 2008, 05:27:39 pm »

P.P.A. = Plushes Plus Animals.

Groudon · « **Reply #12 on:** May 06, 2008, 05:29:47 pm »

Anybody have anything RELEVANT to add?

DsSaster · « **Reply #13 on:** May 06, 2008, 05:42:36 pm »

Quote from: P.P.A. on May 06, 2008, 04:32:36 pm

I think the first time this affair was brought up was in Juny of 2007, in this thread:
http://www.soniccenter.org/forum/index.php?topic=2460.0

...furry. >_>

Groudon · « **Reply #14 on:** May 06, 2008, 05:44:54 pm »

Quote from: Judge Groudon on May 06, 2008, 05:29:47 pm

Anybody have anything RELEVANT to add?

Zeupar · « **Reply #15 on:** May 06, 2008, 05:46:02 pm »

Zomg 1111th post!!1!!111!1one

Groudon · « **Reply #16 on:** May 06, 2008, 05:50:19 pm »

THAT'S IT! The next person who makes a random outburst will be held in contempt of court!

PsyMar · « **Reply #17 on:** May 06, 2008, 05:58:33 pm »

IF I SEE THAT FUCKING VIXEN ONE MORE TIME...

Groudon · « **Reply #18 on:** May 06, 2008, 06:04:17 pm »

OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOORRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEERRRRRRRRRRRR!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
PSYMAR! YOU ARE NOW IN CONTEMPT OF COURT! NEXT OUTBURST AND YOU WILL BE ESCORTED OUT OF THE COURTROOM!

This is clearly a mockery of the judicial system. I refuse to be the judge of this case any longer. It's clear my authority is not being taken seriously. Well, I will leave it to some other judge to handle this case.

Judge Groudon out D:<

PsyMar · « **Reply #19 on:** May 06, 2008, 06:05:50 pm »

I admit I do have contempt for the court.

Rick_242 · « **Reply #20 on:** May 06, 2008, 07:55:37 pm »

The Prosecution wishes to submit some evidence Your Honor.

Also the prosecution can edit posts? Why did I not know I could do that?

:sad face:

P.P.A. · « **Reply #21 on:** May 07, 2008, 09:38:51 am »

Quote from: Rick_242 on May 06, 2008, 07:55:37 pm

The Prosecution wishes to submit some evidence Your Honor.

Since the judge is currently away I guess you should just present your evidence and he'll review it when he returns.

Rick_242 · « **Reply #22 on:** May 11, 2008, 12:22:12 am »

Edgeworth
The Judge left!?

Press Fuck You Court Records

FUCK YOU!

P.P.A. · « **Reply #23 on:** May 11, 2008, 05:34:36 am »

Quote from: Rick_242 on May 11, 2008, 12:22:12 am

FUCK YOU!

Quote

http://www.soniccenter.org/forum/index.php?topic=2460.msg25356#msg25356

According to /d/ rules, the face determines if something is furry or not. In the case of Ms. Katt, we can clearly see that she has a human face (with a few features of a cat, classifying her as a catgirl) and a human upper body. Only the lower body is covered in fur. She'd if at all classify as either a catgirl or monstergirl, but not as a furry!

Quote

http://www.soniccenter.org/forum/index.php?topic=2576.msg26699#msg26699

This admittedly rather questionable picture was taken without any sexual emotions involved and merely posted to point out a, in the eyes of P.P.A., rather amusing but not arousing fact.
Furthermore, my client also took such photos of other characters, neither of which are furry. As evident here:
http://www.soniccenter.org/forum/index.php?topic=2590.0

Quote

http://www.soniccenter.org/forum/index.php?topic=3317.msg33637#msg33637

This NPC does not refer to the main player character of Grandia 3, but instead is talking to a character that later joins the party, named Ulf (>Picture<). In addition, the NPC dialogue is not affected by any of the player's actions, nor can any of the player characters be named to represent my client. (These facts were left out of P.P.A.'s original post for comedic value.)

Quote

http://www.soniccenter.org/forum/index.php?topic=3295.msg33801#msg33801

I don't see the relevance of this "evidence" for this trial, the picture P.P.A. posted was from one of the official Archie comics, didn't show anything related to furryness and was used primarily to show the ridiculous faces of the two characters.

Quote

http://www.soniccenter.org/forum/index.php?topic=3310.msg33506#msg33506

And yet again something entirely irrelevant is presented. This post in absolutely no way hints for a membership of the furry fandom. When my client was referring to that theoretical "girl" of Fang, he primarily thought of a human girl (or didn't think about it at all). Not to mention the whole thread wasn't really serious anyway.

Quote

http://www.soniccenter.org/forum/index.php?topic=2547.msg26419#msg26419

Here he was merely pointing out what he assumed to be a fact (but was proven wrong later anyway).

Quote

http://www.soniccenter.org/forum/index.php?topic=2547.msg26413#msg26413

Ah well, let's analyse this post, shall we?

Quote

And Sally ftl indeed. But after all, she's naked. :o

Again, he's just pointing out a fact. And, in the first sentence he even explicitly say that he dislikes Ms. Sally, which a real furry would definitely not at the sight of her being entirely naked.

Quote

Like she having hot sex amirite~
Burning her lovers. XD

Here P.P.A. made a pun and a non-serious hypothesis, neither of which involved any sexual feelings towards the character in question.

Quote

http://www.soniccenter.org/forum/index.php?topic=2547.msg26385#msg26385

I can't remember the context of this. Either way this statement is redundant in itself anyway, as it only points out a logical fact. ...I think. I don't really get this post either.

Quote

http://www.soniccenter.org/forum/index.php?topic=2657.msg28067#msg28067

With this evidence you're only supporting the defence, as P.P.A. proved to find the concept of an animal (Sonic) being in love with a human (Elise) quite disgusting, adding that a (merely romantic, he didn't even think of a sexual) relationship between two members of the same race would be much more acceptable.

And isn't it a furry's (referring to human members of the fandom) desire to mate with an animal or somehting resembling an animal? Why would P.P.A. call exactly this urge morally questionable if he himself was a furry?

Quote

WHAT? I, Serene am certainly not a furry. The wings on my back are the only inhumane features on my body, and bat wings would only classify me as an Arc of which I am the last surviving individual, but it wouldn't rank me as anything in a fetish losz. And the things on my head aren't body features but simply a rather unusual sort of hat that can be taken off.

What now, Mr. 242?!

Rick_242 · « **Reply #24 on:** May 11, 2008, 01:29:11 pm »

What now indeeed.

...

The "Fuck You" action does not lie Ms. Serene. You are clearly delusional and desperate. Allow me to show you why.

http://www.soniccenter.org/forum/index.php?topic=2460.msg26238#msg26238

This post was made by your client PPA. Note at 50% it states that the person/animal in question is a furry. Katt clearly is at least 50% animal. Thus she is a furry. Your client even made a poll asking if she was a furry and if he was too for liking her to which more than half of the votes claimed yes.

http://www.soniccenter.org/forum/index.php?topic=2576.msg26699#msg26699

It is clear about one thing. PPA is a pervert as he has admitted that much. That does not excuse the fact that he did in fact take a picture of Tikal's panties. If he did in fact wanted to point that it was amusing he would've made a post like SkyL did or at the very least just take a normal pic of Tikal because she wears a skirt and not pants (the post in question claimed Tikal did not wear pants, it would have been equally effective just to take a pic of Tikal's regular outfit).

http://www.soniccenter.org/forum/index.php?topic=3317.msg33637#msg33637

I admit you do have a point there but, it does not change the fact that he is a furry. Everyone seems to think so and even the NPCs of an RPG think so.

http://www.soniccenter.org/forum/index.php?topic=3295.msg33801#msg33801

That is not how this is going to go down. The picture in question shows Knuckles riding on top of Sonic which is understandable (somewhat) but, the problem in this is how Knuckles's hand is positioned. It is positioned in a way that makes him spanking Sonic's rear end!

http://www.soniccenter.org/forum/index.php?topic=3310.msg33506#msg33506

Regardless this implies that he is a furry because Fang + woman = furry. Simple math. unless you meant Fang + human girl = bestiality. The choice is yours but either it leads to the defendant being a furry.

http://www.soniccenter.org/forum/index.php?topic=2547.msg26419#msg26419

Tell me why did he point out the fact and how did he notice this fact. Most people don't give this a glance until pointed out.

http://www.soniccenter.org/forum/index.php?topic=2547.msg26413#msg26413

http://mobianwarrior.tripod.com/sonic_sally_copy.jpg

Sally in this picture is clearly not naked. Why would PPA claim she is naked? The only logical reason would be if he had seen her naked a some point. The sexual pun is question raises this point: there are many other puns to make but he chose a pun involving sex with an animal. Why? The answer is because he is a furry. Don't even think about furthering the point of a hypothesis. The scientific method requires one to make a hypothesis then collect data through experimentation. I don't think I need to point out what this means to you.

http://www.soniccenter.org/forum/index.php?topic=2547.msg26385#msg26385

Yeah I don't really understand this one either. He seems to be talking about Blaze taking her clothes off. The next bit is the most interesting part.

Quote from: PPA

BECAUSE UNLIKE THE MALE CHARACTERS, THEY ACTUALLY HAVE ANY.

Yeah he seems to be fond about pointing out female body parts. Especially animal body parts. See:

http://www.soniccenter.org/forum/index.php?topic=2547.msg26413#msg26413
http://www.soniccenter.org/forum/index.php?topic=2547.msg26419#msg26419
http://www.soniccenter.org/forum/index.php?topic=2576.msg26699#msg26699

http://www.soniccenter.org/forum/index.php?topic=2657.msg28067#msg28067

It seems you don't understand. Furry isn't limited to sex but can cover romance between animals as well. He admits that he would see Sonic x Amy (old school) above everything else. Also:

Quote from: Serene

And isn't it a furry's (referring to human members of the fandom) desire to mate with an animal or somehting resembling an animal? Why would P.P.A. call exactly this urge morally questionable if he himself was a furry?

That was a response to this: http://www.soniccenter.org/forum/index.php?topic=2657.msg28067#msg28067

Nowhere in there did he ever state that he morally questioned it and he did not do so anywhere else. The only thing that even comes remotely close is him saying he is not a furry.

For the last part I'm sorry, here is a clearer picture:

http://img383.imageshack.us/img383/6025/ppaisfurryevidence2zk0.png

The wings on your back aren't the only inhuman part of your body, your ears are too. Do you know any humans with pointy ears? At most you classify as furry but, I'd have to classify you as semi-furry. Not sure about the "hat" never seen it being taken off in Riviera. I assumed they were part of your body. May you show us clip that disproves this?

P.P.A. · « **Reply #25 on:** May 11, 2008, 03:12:53 pm »

-----

Quote

http://www.soniccenter.org/forum/index.php?topic=2460.msg26238#msg26238

This post was made by your client PPA. Note at 50% it states that the person/animal in question is a furry. Katt clearly is at least 50% animal. Thus she is a furry. Your client even made a poll asking if she was a furry and if he was too for liking her to which more than half of the votes claimed yes.

I would suggest you to get glasses then, because if you compare this picture http://img267.imageshack.us/img267/4499/117821436061gn9.jpg to the image of Katt http://img291.imageshack.us/img291/7594/bof2kattyx3.jpg it quickly can be seen that she's in the first group of 10%. Her face is not in any way covered in fur, nor does she have a nose, mouth or anything else resembling a cat. All feline features of her head are the cat ears, which do not indicate a furry when worn alone.
The poll should not be taken into consideration as the intent of most voters was most likely to annoy my client instead of giving their honest opinion.

Quote

http://www.soniccenter.org/forum/index.php?topic=2576.msg26699#msg26699

It is clear about one thing. PPA is a pervert as he has admitted that much. That does not excuse the fact that he did in fact take a picture of Tikal's panties. If he did in fact wanted to point that it was amusing he would've made a post like SkyL did or at the very least just take a normal pic of Tikal because she wears a skirt and not pants (the post in question claimed Tikal did not wear pants, it would have been equally effective just to take a pic of Tikal's regular outfit).

He made a grammatical error there and actually meant "panties" and not "pants". However given the general light-heartedness of the thread and the fact he excessively used upper-case indicates that the intention of his post was again not serious.

Quote

http://www.soniccenter.org/forum/index.php?topic=3317.msg33637#msg33637

I admit you do have a point there but, it does not change the fact that he is a furry. Everyone seems to think so and even the NPCs of an RPG think so.

Repeating myself, the NPC was referring to a party member of his and not to the character P.P.A. primarily controlled.

Quote

http://www.soniccenter.org/forum/index.php?topic=3295.msg33801#msg33801

That is not how this is going to go down. The picture in question shows Knuckles riding on top of Sonic which is understandable (somewhat) but, the problem in this is how Knuckles's hand is positioned. It is positioned in a way that makes him spanking Sonic's rear end!

P.P.A. did not notice that when he found this panel. Furthermore, this is hardly hinted at all and to see such a thing already requires a corrupted mind. Maybe you are the furry here, Mr. 242?

Quote

http://www.soniccenter.org/forum/index.php?topic=3310.msg33506#msg33506

Regardless this implies that he is a furry because Fang + woman = furry. Simple math. unless you meant Fang + human girl = bestiality. The choice is yours but either it leads to the defendant being a furry.

Well... As I stated before, my client didn't really pay much attention to that point when he posted this. He thought of the "girl" as a not specified female being and love interest of Fang, without actually considering her race.

Quote

http://www.soniccenter.org/forum/index.php?topic=2547.msg26419#msg26419

Tell me why did he point out the fact and how did he notice this fact. Most people don't give this a glance until pointed out.

Mere observation. He didn't excessively examine pictures of Blaze, but barely noticed it at first or second glance. Then he pointed it out simply because he asumed few other people have noticed it, with no other intentions than to share what he saw.

Quote

http://www.soniccenter.org/forum/index.php?topic=2547.msg26413#msg26413

http://mobianwarrior.tripod.com/sonic_sally_copy.jpg

Sally in this picture is clearly not naked. Why would PPA claim she is naked? The only logical reason would be if he had seen her naked a some point. The sexual pun is question raises this point: there are many other puns to make but he chose a pun involving sex with an animal. Why? The answer is because he is a furry. Don't even think about furthering the point of a hypothesis. The scientific method requires one to make a hypothesis then collect data through experimentation. I don't think I need to point out what this means to you.

With "naked" he was referring to the fact that here vest didn't cover her (apparently non-existent) genitals.
And he chose the pun involving sex with an animal because the topic of discussion at that point already was about Blaze and the flames below her clothes AND sexual themes.

Quote from: eggFL

Or maybe it could be like some really bizarre sexual theme to her power in which her power is invoked emotionally.

Quote

http://www.soniccenter.org/forum/index.php?topic=2547.msg26385#msg26385

Yeah I don't really understand this one either. He seems to be talking about Blaze taking her clothes off. The next bit is the most interesting part.

Quote from: PPA
BECAUSE UNLIKE THE MALE CHARACTERS, THEY ACTUALLY HAVE ANY.

Yeah he seems to be fond about pointing out female body parts. Especially animal body parts. See:

http://www.soniccenter.org/forum/index.php?topic=2547.msg26413#msg26413
http://www.soniccenter.org/forum/index.php?topic=2547.msg26419#msg26419
http://www.soniccenter.org/forum/index.php?topic=2576.msg26699#msg26699

http://www.soniccenter.org/forum/index.php?topic=2657.msg28067#msg28067

It seems you don't understand. Furry isn't limited to sex but can cover romance between animals as well. He admits that he would see Sonic x Amy (old school) above everything else. Also:

Love or intercourse between an animal and another animal is not furry, it's something entirely natural. It would be furry if a human was sexually aroused thinking about it, which is not the case here. And the fact he regards Sonic x Amy as the bets pairing only comes from the fact that Amy is the only female hedgehog in the games (and therefore of the same race as Sonic) and always had a love interest in him. And yet again, he doesn't not feel aroused or even personally interested in it.

Quote

Quote from: Serene
And isn't it a furry's (referring to human members of the fandom) desire to mate with an animal or somehting resembling an animal? Why would P.P.A. call exactly this urge morally questionable if he himself was a furry?

That was a response to this: http://www.soniccenter.org/forum/index.php?topic=2657.msg28067#msg28067

Nowhere in there did he ever state that he morally questioned it and he did not do so anywhere else. The only thing that even comes remotely close is him saying he is not a furry.

He didn't mention it often in this forum indeed, but on one occasion he explicitly criticised Ms. Elise's actions in a negative way, and I assume he also mentioned it a couple times in the channel of #soniccenter:
http://www.soniccenter.org/forum/index.php?topic=2657.msg28109#msg28109

Quote

Also Elise = bestiality & necrophilia

Quote from: Rick_242 on May 11, 2008, 01:29:11 pm

For the last part I'm sorry, here is a clearer picture:

http://img383.imageshack.us/img383/6025/ppaisfurryevidence2zk0.png

The wings on your back aren't the only inhuman part of your body, your ears are too. Do you know any humans with pointy ears? At most you classify as furry but, I'd have to classify you as semi-furry. Not sure about the "hat" never seen it being taken off in Riviera. I assumed they were part of your body. May you show us clip that disproves this?

As evident in Bath Scene no. 2, these ear-like objects on my head are not a part of my body.
Pointy ears however have never in history been a sign of furryness. Otherwise fairies, elves, Hylians and numerous other races who in no way resemble animals (which is still the core of the fetish) would count as furry.

Mr. 242, until you can definitely prove my client to be sexually attracted to animals or furries, your accusations are void.

Rick_242 · « **Reply #26 on:** May 11, 2008, 07:16:02 pm »

...

Ok I'm getting tired of this.

1: All you're doing is looking at the face. The graph uses a face merely as representation. 50% of object/person having animal parts = furry. Look at Katt again. Half of her body has animal parts meaning she is a furry.

2: Whatever the reason it does not excuse the fact that he did so. A murder is a murder whatever the cause would be analogous to this.

3: The last tid bit of my statement was more or less a joke. If the Judge agrees with the defense then this piece of evidence will be dropped.

4: Don't be stupid. Knuckles on Sonic is the main thing being displayed here. You'd have to be blind not to see this. Knuckles spanking Sonic does not require brain power or a "corrupted mind" to make such a connection. Such connection is displayed:
http://www.soniccenter.org/forum/index.php?topic=3295.msg33814#msg33814
Even if you say its not a connection being made tell me what the civilian is thinking. The only logical reason has been stated before. I also demand a penalty for personal accusation against the prosecution while providing no evidence whatsoever.

5: It may be true that PPA wasn't thinking of a race for the girl but that is irrelevant. Fang + girl = furry no matter what the race of the female is. It is also difficult to overlook such an obvious detail... twice.

6: Even more lies. I conducted a survey before you objected to what I said and this was the result:

Quote from: Survey

[12:45:25] <Rick> also RPG
[12:46:04] <Rick> did you notice that Blaze did not wear pants when you first saw her or did you not?
[12:46:09] <Starly> Nope
[12:46:11] <Starly> IN fact
[12:46:19] <Starly> It never occurred to me until you just said it lol
[12:47:18] <Rick> Groudon how about you?
[12:47:29] <Groudon> Same as RPG.
[12:47:51] <Rick> yeah me neither

It would have taken more than a glance or two to notice that she did not wear pants. Starly a.k.a. RPG has a reputation of having a very perverted mind. Even he was not able to make this connection. I doubt I need to spell out the rest for you.

7:

Quote from: Serene

And yet again, he doesn't not feel aroused or even personally interested in it.

The clear contradiction is this:

Quote from: PPA

Sonic x old-school Amy. Everything else fails hard.

If he isn't personally interested why is he insistent that Sonic x Amy be the only pairing while everything else is unacceptable?

8: That is completely irrelevant because he questions the moral issues of bestiality and necrophilia, not furry. My point still stands.

9: I'm afraid you misunderstand me, you have bat wings and pointy ears. The pointy ears alone don't make you a furry and in fact its is understandable to neglect such a thing. However, judging from the look of your bat wings one can assume you are part bat which means the pointy ears are due to bats also having pointy ears.

http://www.greenexpander.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/09/a-horseshoe-bat.jpeg

The Prosecution demands that the defense provide evidence for their claims. So far the defense's case has been a matter of objecting to my evidence and saying that the defendant meant "something else" when he made those remarks. The Prosecution grows weary of this tactic and requests that the defense present evidence to their claims to make a valid argument!

Bilan · « **Reply #27 on:** May 11, 2008, 07:32:22 pm »

The above piece of "evidence" is not suitable for use in Court.

Quote from: Rick_242 on May 11, 2008, 07:16:02 pm

Quote from: Survey
[12:45:25] <Rick> also RPG
[12:46:04] <Rick> did you notice that Blaze did not wear pants when you first saw her or did you not?
[12:46:09] <Starly> Nope
[12:46:11] <Starly> IN fact
[12:46:19] <Starly> It never occurred to me until you just said it lol
[12:47:18] <Rick> Groudon how about you?
[12:47:29] <Groudon> Same as RPG.
[12:47:51] <Rick> yeah me neither

For one, neither party were asked to express their consent to using their statements as evidence.

As such, these off the record statements do not qualify as evidence in this case.

Rick_242 · « **Reply #28 on:** May 12, 2008, 12:15:42 am »

Rule #2 from Law book states: Evidence submitted in court must be relevant to the case.

It is relevant so it may be used. Also, you are not the defence in this case nor has your service been asked. The Prosecution requests that the jury refrain from such outbursts.

Selphos · « **Reply #29 on:** May 12, 2008, 12:25:59 am »

Mr. Edgeworth, hasn't it been made quite clear that Serene is Phoenix's assistant and vice versa?

ITT PPA is not a furry

The Sonic Center > Forum > The Lounge > Wikkity! > ITT PPA is not a furry

Author Topic: ITT PPA is not a furry (Read 39919 times)