<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0">
<channel>
<title>LAist: Weird Los Angeles:  The Police And The Poltergeist</title>
<link>http://laist.com/2008/12/21/weird_los_angeles_8.php</link>
<description>All comments for Weird Los Angeles:  The Police And The Poltergeist</description>
<language>en-us</language>
<copyright>2008 Matty V</copyright>
<lastBuildDate>Tue, 23 Dec 2008 18:00:00 -0800</lastBuildDate>
<docs>http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/tech/rss</docs>
<managingEditor>matt_vannucci@yahoo.com</managingEditor>
<webMaster>matt_vannucci@yahoo.com</webMaster>
<ttl>60</ttl>
<item>
<title>fainelichfield</title>
<link>http://laist.com/2008/12/21/weird_los_angeles_8.php#comment-1550401</link>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://laist.com/2008/12/21/weird_los_angeles_8.php#comment-1550401</guid>
<category>Comments</category>
<pubDate>Tue, 23 Dec 2008 21:06:16 -0800</pubDate>
<description>&lt;p&gt;Without more details, there could be any number of reasons for the vandalism.  Going by this article alone, it seems more likely the judge wanted the case over and done with, or else was just very gullible.  It&apos;s one thing to say &quot;We don&apos;t know what happened, but this gentleman cannot be proven guilty&quot;.  It&apos;s another to say &quot;We don&apos;t know what happened, so it must be supernatural&quot;.  &lt;/p&gt;</description>
</item>
</channel>
</rss>