My concurrence is with Spanky on this issue... Until we change the charge from "spamming" to "conspiracy to spam", I don't believe any of the evidence brought forth, especially that from FF Moncton, as any implication towards my client. Judge, if I may, what you must decide is this: if the thread titled "This thread is NOT spam", was indeed spam. Not if Adam started it with the intention of spamming. That would be a conspiracy charge, and not what we are in court over. But was the thread itself, and ONLY THAT THREAD, spam. I do not believe it was. For if that thread was indeed spam, then everyone who posted in it was spamming from the beginning. It was given a valid topic during its first post, and that topic was carried throughout until my client, who tried to live up to his job as a "smartass", tried to make a joke out of it. A joke that was taken the wrong way. He tried to make light of his past, and handle it in a humorous way. We have denied him that by trying to use his past against him. There is no justice in that. Honorable Judge, I ask that you look at the evidence pertaining only to the thread in question, and make your judgement upon that. My client has been trying to change. I don't think anyone here would argue with that. A guilty sentence would only set him back, and negate any progress he has made. I know your verdict, be it guilty or not guilty, will be a fair one, because I know you as a fair judge. On that assurance, I rest my case.