This clear instance of reductio ad absurdum is wholly non-analogous. Factually inaccurate court proceeding depictions and legal misunderstandings aside, for one thing, the non-hypothetical defendant’s identity is well-known in this specific instance.
Interesting. I would have thought that someone with the ability to craft such a sesquipedalian response would also have been capable of understanding irony.
While I appreciate your nod to my writing (I have a mutual appreciation, I might add, for your Soliloquising), again, none of the data obtained was public.
