New Orleans Saints Forums - blackandgold.com - Steelers trade Holmes to Jets for fifth-round draft pick

Page 3 of 4

Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page

New Orleans Saints Forums - blackandgold.com (https://blackandgold.com/community/)

- NFL (https://blackandgold.com/nfl/)

- - Steelers trade Holmes to Jets for fifth-round draft pick (https://blackandgold.com/nfl/25983-steelers-trade-holmes-jets-fifth-round-draft-pick.html)

saintfan

04-14-2010 02:44 PM

Re: Steelers trade Holmes to Jets for fifth-round draft pick

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tobias-Reiper (Post 218348)

I am going to stop, but before I do, I will just tell you this: language is everything in law. Semantics in law are a ***** :) . Presumption of innocence and not enough evidence to charge do not equate to being "innocent"..

In the eyes of the law, not enough evidence does equate to just that. What other brand can you put on a person? There is no 'purgatory' status. There is no "well, we all know he did it" status in law. I am presumed innocent, BY LAW, until proven otherwise, at which point I am guilty - or perhaps 'responsible' in the case of a civil trial.

So anyone that says Ben 'did this' or 'did that' or that the DA didn't 'do this' or 'do that' because of 'this' or 'that' is working without any real evidence, and as the accused, Ben has the right, BY LAW, to be presumed innocent, and the burden of proof lies with those that make those assumptions.

And yes, the language is paramount, which is more or less my whole point. :-)

SAINT_MICHAEL

04-14-2010 05:03 PM

Re: Steelers trade Holmes to Jets for fifth-round draft pick

Quote:

Originally Posted by CantonLegend (Post 218218)

i said, i believe ben did something......but i dont believe it was rape......he may have made unwanted advances and he may have forced himself on her but obviously there wasnt enough evidence....not blood....not DNA....not video.....not anything that says ben did anything significantly wrong to deserve the guilty sentence of rape

Ok, if Ben did something, as you admit, how can he be innocent? Again, I never said he raped anyone. I merely said to assume he did nothing wrong simply because no charges were filed is a mistake. You accuse me of bias, and you assume he is innocent and you assume I am saying he raped her. But I never did, so who is showing more bias?

Quote:

Originally Posted by saintfan (Post 218359)

So anyone that says Ben 'did this' or 'did that' or that the DA didn't 'do this' or 'do that' because of 'this' or 'that' is working without any real evidence, and as the accused, Ben has the right, BY LAW, to be presumed innocent, and the burden of proof lies with those that make those assumptions.

Yet you are assuming that Ben didn’t do this or he didn’t do that because not enough criminal evidence exists. Fine, I agree if there is not enough evidence to bring to trial that there is reasonable doubt as to weather or not he sexually assaulted her. That is the definition of proving guilt or not in a court. No where is the term innocent used. Weather or not you want to admit it, if you ask any trial lawyer, they will say the fact that he was not charged with assault could mean anything from Ben did nothing wrong at all to he did a lot wrong and was so good at covering up his tracks that they could not prove he did wrong. That is the point I’m making. To assume he did nothing wrong and is innocent of any wrongdoing has no more basis in fact than saying he defenitely did rape her. You fall back on the point that he wasn’t charged and therfore you say he is innocent (again I ask of what since he was not charged). Yet to validate this point you ignore the fact that it has been shown before (once, a dozen or a hundred times, it really doesn’t matter) that the judicial system makes mistakes and that guilty people can go free and innocent people can go to prison.

You actually make the point for me Saintfan when you say:

Quote:

Originally Posted by saintfan (Post 218310)

Have you ever committed a crime? Probably. Are you in jail? Me neither.

Well there you go. If you committed a crime you are not innocent. And yet you are not in jail. So if you have committed a crime and not gone to jail, why are you so set against the possibility that Ben committed a crime and avoided jail as well? Instead, you just keep shouting he is innocent. I'll agree he should not go to jail based upon what the police have to go on. But that is a long way away from being able to claim he is an innocent man.

Quote:

Originally Posted by saintfan (Post 218359)

And yes, the language is paramount, which is more or less my whole point. :-)

And if that is your point, you should realize that the term innocent is not part of the legal equation. In a court setting, the terms Guilty, Not Guilty, and reasonable doubts are the key ones. Innocent is for court movies.

saintfan

04-14-2010 05:42 PM

Re: Steelers trade Holmes to Jets for fifth-round draft pick

Quote:

Originally Posted by SAINT_MICHAEL (Post 218425)

Saintfan and Canton, I appreciate the dialogue. It is good when a hefty subject can be discussed without it degrading into name calling.

I believe you two have circled the argument back to the point I was making all along. First of all SF, Canton was the first to mention our perfect judicial system on post #67 with ” our judicial system is set up so perfectly”. I was playing off that because it obviously is not perfect.

But my point is basically the same one you are making; that one should not assume anything. In none of my posts have I said that he is guilty of anything. Really, go back and read. I never mentioning him raping, forcing himself, assaulting, or even insulting anyone. My whole point is to point out the mistake you two are saying. And that point is you two are assuming he is “innocent”. You have both used that term multiple times. So, since he was not charged with anything. And I did not say he did anything specific, what exactly are you two saying he is innocent of?

Ok, if Ben did something, as you admit, how can he be innocent? Again, I never said he raped anyone. I merely said to assume he did nothing wrong simply because no charges were filed is a mistake. You accuse me of bias, and you assume he is innocent and you assume I am saying he raped her. But I never did, so who is showing more bias?

Yet you are assuming that Ben didn’t do this or he didn’t do that because not enough criminal evidence exists. Fine, I agree if there is not enough evidence to bring to trial that there is reasonable doubt as to weather or not he sexually assaulted her. That is the definition of proving guilt or not in a court. No where is the term innocent used. Weather or not you want to admit it, if you ask any trial lawyer, they will say the fact that he was not charged with assault could mean anything from Ben did nothing wrong at all to he did a lot wrong and was so good at covering up his tracks that they could not prove he did wrong. That is the point I’m making. To assume he did nothing wrong and is innocent of any wrongdoing has no more basis in fact than saying he defenitely did rape her. You fall back on the point that he wasn’t charged and therfore you say he is innocent (again I ask of what since he was not charged). Yet to validate this point you ignore the fact that it has been shown before (once, a dozen or a hundred times, it really doesn’t matter) that the judicial system makes mistakes and that guilty people can go free and innocent people can go to prison.

You actually make the point for me Saintfan when you say:

Well there you go. If you committed a crime you are not innocent. And yet you are not in jail. So if you have committed a crime and not gone to jail, why are you so set against the possibility that Ben committed a crime and avoided jail as well? Instead, you just keep shouting he is innocent. I'll agree he should not go to jail based upon what the police have to go on. But that is a long way away from being able to claim he is an innocent man.

And if that is your point, you should realize that the term innocent is not part of the legal equation. In a court setting, the terms Guilty, Not Guilty, and reasonable doubts are the key ones. Innocent is for court movies.

I too appreciate the dialog. It's pretty easy for things to go south in these kinds of discussions.

Here's what I mean by innocent: Not convicted of the crime. Morally speaking I cannot know. I'm speaking in terms of the law (this is one reason why legislating morality scares the pee out of me). I don't know and neither does anyone else besides the two people involved what really happened. I'm not making assumptions to Ben's "guilt" or "innocence" either way.

All I can say for certain is there was, according to the DA, not enough evidence to press charges. Therefore, Ben is Innocent. How a person feels about whether or not he did anything inappropriate is rendered irrelevant because, in the eyes of the law, the man is Innocent.

I disagree with you about the term 'innocent'. It is most certainly a part of the legal equation. We are, by right, innocent until we are proven guilty. It is the right of the accused to be presumed innocent, placing the burden of proof on the accuser. It is, in my humble opinion, a fundamental part of the equation, because without it our legal system could not possibly even resemble what you are I are familiar with.

Tobias-Reiper

04-14-2010 09:58 PM

Re: Steelers trade Holmes to Jets for fifth-round draft pick

Quote:

Originally Posted by saintfan (Post 218359)

I love you, man! :cheers:

saintfan

04-15-2010 01:56 PM

Re: Steelers trade Holmes to Jets for fifth-round draft pick

:peace:

falconhater

04-15-2010 02:08 PM

Re: Steelers trade Holmes to Jets for fifth-round draft pick

I find solace in the fact that the league and or the Steelers agree with me Rapelenberger will be suspended and possibly traded away from the steelers to fight for a job elsewhere disgraced as he should be. Talk "Language" al you want he WILL PAY

saintfan

04-15-2010 02:45 PM

Re: Steelers trade Holmes to Jets for fifth-round draft pick

Quote:

Originally Posted by falconhater (Post 218651)

Man, you're so off base it's difficult to express it. What the league does has precisely nothing to do with what the legal system does. Get yourself educated dude. You're embarrassing yourself.

SAINT_MICHAEL

04-15-2010 03:25 PM

Re: Steelers trade Holmes to Jets for fifth-round draft pick

Quote:

Originally Posted by saintfan (Post 218658)

Man, you're so off base it's difficult to express it. What the league does has precisely nothing to do with what the legal system does. Get yourself educated dude. You're embarrassing yourself.

Why are you so hung up on your interpretation of our legal system? At this point the league and team are looking at and talking to him very closely. He could...stress could be suspended or traded because of his repeated actions. I'm watching news now and more is coming out about the investigation right now. Hater has a right to feel like he does and you inferring he is dumb is kinda silly, because at this point he still may face discipline.

saintfan

04-15-2010 03:44 PM

Re: Steelers trade Holmes to Jets for fifth-round draft pick

Quote:

Originally Posted by SAINT_MICHAEL (Post 218665)

I will infer the same about you if you agree with him. What he's saying makes no sense. The league can very well 'legislate morality' among the players. Your employer can require you to shave, for example. It's two different things, completely, and entirely. Too bad for you two if you can't see that.

It's not MY interpretation it is the interpretation of the SUPREME COURT, which I'll be happy to quote for you - or you can just Google it for yourself if you'd like to understand completely the point I'm making.

Being suspended or traded has what, exactly, to do with this conversation about our legal system? Oh yeah...nothing.

And there is nothing right at all about feeling the way he feels, other that the fact that he has a right to feel that way, misguided as he may be, unless of course you'd like to be convicted of a crime and have your life ruined while the person accusing/convicting you can't prove the allegations against you.

Good GOD people.

SAINT_MICHAEL

04-15-2010 05:18 PM

Re: Steelers trade Holmes to Jets for fifth-round draft pick

Dude, that is my exact point. Try reading what other people say with your mind and eyes open instead of guessing at what people don't understand and trying to come up with a clever response. Hater's most recent comment did not mention the legal system at all. You brought it up in response and mentioned how off base he was. Now you come back and say they have nothing to do with each other. I agree...too bad you can't see that! That's why i asked why the heck you brought it up. It has nothing to do with his comment! Quit trying to make others look dumb by shaking your head at what you think they don't undersrtand and stay on point if you can. I ask again, why do you go back to the legal thing (and then go off on how it is seperate than the league regulating morals) when Hater's point was about the league (not the courts) going after him in the first place. You are the one all over the place with your arguments.

And as for the supreme court backing you up, well all court systems back me up, because in a trial, the verdicts are guilty or not guilty.....never is the verdict innocent. Look it up.

SAINT_MICHAEL

04-15-2010 05:28 PM

Re: Steelers trade Holmes to Jets for fifth-round draft pick

Quote:

Originally Posted by saintfan (Post 218666)

It's not MY interpretation it is the interpretation of the SUPREME COURT, which I'll be happy to quote for you - or you can just Google it for yourself if you'd like to understand completely the point I'm making.

I looked this up Saintsfan:

"Although the Constitution of the United States does not cite it explicitly, presumption of innocence is widely held to follow from the 5th, 6th, and 14th amendments. See also Coffin v. United States and In re Winship.
"

So your raging on about semantics neglects to mention the word you keep using isn't even in the constitution.

saintfan

04-15-2010 06:16 PM

Re: Steelers trade Holmes to Jets for fifth-round draft pick

Quote:

Originally Posted by SAINT_MICHAEL (Post 218682)

LMAO. If you're going to cite from Wikipedia, be sure and read the whole thing (and with Wikipedia, make sure you check the citations cause sometimes Wikipedia is woefully inaccurate):

The presumption of innocence is in fact a legal instrument created by the law to favor the accused based on the legal inference that most people are not criminals.[4] It is literally considered favorable evidence for the accused that automatically attaches at trial.[5] It requires that the

trier of fact
trier of fact

, be it a juror or judge, begin with the presumption that the state is unable to support its assertion.[4] To ensure this legal protection is maintained a set of three related rules govern the procedure of criminal trials. The presumption means:[1]

With respect to the critical facts of the case - whether the crime charged was committed and whether the defendant was the person who committed the crime - the state has the entire burden of proof.
With respect to the critical facts of the case, the defendant does not have any burden of proof whatsoever. The defendant does not have to testify, call witnesses or present any other evidence, and if the defendant elects not to testify or present evidence, this decision cannot be used against them.
The jury or judge is not to draw any negative inferences from the fact the defendant has been charged with a crime and is present in court and represented by an attorney. They must decide the case solely on evidence presented during the trial.

You know what? There are lots of things we have in place, BY LAW, that were not part of the original constitution or even the various amendments.

So yeah brother, I'm 'raging on', but not about 'semantics' as you state, but rather about the attitude of people like you that are eager to make assumptions and convict and label minus any evidence - or at least minus ENOUGH evidence.

I think that where you and falconhater are concerned, one of two things (or both) are relatively clear: You either don't know what you're talking about and you are unwilling to get learned OR you are comfortable enough in your self-righteousness that you don't feel the need to get yourself up to snuff. In either case there's not much a rational person can do other than recognize that it certainly does take all kinds to make a world. ;)

This from the supreme court circa 1895 bro:

The principle that there is a presumption of innocence in favor of the accused is the undoubted law, axiomatic and elementary, and its enforcement lies at the foundation of the administration of our criminal law. … Concluding, then, that the presumption of innocence is evidence in favor of the accused, introduced by the law in his behalf, let us consider what is 'reasonable doubt.' It is, of necessity, the condition of mind produced by the proof resulting from the evidence in the cause. It is the result of the proof, not the proof itself, whereas the presumption of innocence is one of the instruments of proof, going to bring about the proof from which reasonable doubt arises; thus one is a cause, the other an effect. To say that the one is the equivalent of the other is therefore to say that legal evidence can be excluded from the jury, and that such exclusion may be cured by instructing them correctly in regard to the method by which they are required to reach their conclusion upon the proof actually before them; in other words, that the exclusion of an important element of proof can be justified by correctly instructing as to the proof admitted. The evolution of the principle of the presumption of innocence, and its resultant, the doctrine of reasonable doubt, make more apparent the correctness of these views, and indicate the necessity of enforcing the one in order that the other may continue to exist.

So you and falconhater keep on keeping on, and I suppose you can continue to wonder why people like me just can't figure out why people like you just don't get it. The information is available now more than ever, so there is no excuse not to know.

saintfan

04-15-2010 06:27 PM

Re: Steelers trade Holmes to Jets for fifth-round draft pick

Quote:

Originally Posted by SAINT_MICHAEL (Post 218680)

Because 'the legal thing' is the topic of discussion. Have you read the entire thread? The issue is that there are some (you and falconhater for sure it would appear) that are ready to drop the hammer on Ben and wish some pretty horrible things on him based on nothing more than your own assessment of the situation and the word of 2 or 3 admittedly far-past-drunk college girls who made statements to the police, some of which can't be deciphered because they were beyond wasted when the wrote it! My point, as if you didn't know, is that those kinds of things went out with witch hunts, but you boys have at it - and pray you're never falsely accused right? LOL

Ben is stupid. On that I think we all agree, but the 'hang 'em high' attitude went out with witch hunts in the 1600's. You two guys should get hip with the program.

saintfan

04-15-2010 08:58 PM

Re: Steelers trade Holmes to Jets for fifth-round draft pick

YouTube- She's a witch!

HintOfLogic

04-16-2010 05:21 AM

Re: Steelers trade Holmes to Jets for fifth-round draft pick

I don't know if I should be more fascinated by the dismantling of the Steelers or potential of the potent team the Jets are putting together. After we deflated the Jets in the Dome, they went on and handled their business pretty well last year. They might be a serious threat (again) this year around.

neugey

04-16-2010 09:07 AM

Re: Steelers trade Holmes to Jets for fifth-round draft pick

Quote:

Originally Posted by HintOfLogic (Post 218801)

New York Jets aspirations to buy themselves division titles and championships may not turn out so well. Just ask the New York Mets.

falconhater

04-16-2010 10:01 AM

Re: Steelers trade Holmes to Jets for fifth-round draft pick

Seems to me that this thread is EVIDENCE of a wrong in our society and the basis for why some women avoid trials and others run to get a lawyer and handle thing is a civil suit. Ben has been in TWO situations in 18 months where he has been named as Sexually assualting a female. This builds a pattern of behavior or lack of judgement. In the present case some on this board have hidden, slightly in talk of legal jargon, attacks to the character of the victim She was drunk so she cant have been raped or assualted right. and her friends were drunk so theyu cant be telling the truth about bodygaurds preventing them from helping their friend. but we MUST AT ALL COST defend the HONOR of BEN innocent until proven guilty. Once maybe he is a target but twice... And are these "Bodygaurds" or goons securing victims. Seems that been thinks he is a lord in a Feudal system of government I.E. 1600's and should gwet 1600's justice.

Accuser says Roethlisberger's 'bodyguards' complicit in alleged rape

After reading this I can't see why charges of some kind were not filed there is enough there in the eyse of multiple witnesses to charge. I understand that eye witness testimony is suspect but this woman didnt try to sue she went to the cops the night it happened WHy. Now when she does sue she will be labeled as a gold digger looking to get paid. Truth is the system failed her. ANd I still dont understand how the Video got Erased cops with ben Cops in Georgia... cover up???

strato

04-16-2010 10:03 AM

Re: Steelers trade Holmes to Jets for fifth-round draft pick

Quote:

Originally Posted by falconhater (Post 218827)

Dude just give it up...what comes around goes around..If Ben is guilty he will answer for it ..and Karma is a *****...

saintfan

04-16-2010 12:15 PM

Re: Steelers trade Holmes to Jets for fifth-round draft pick

Quote:

Originally Posted by strato (Post 218828)

Dude just give it up...what comes around goes around..If Ben is guilty he will answer for it ..and Karma is a *****...

...and that's about the best way to approach it - in fact, minus any usable evidence that's really all that can be done. If Ben has a problem it will surface and eventually he will pay. As it stands now he is "Innocent".

saintfan

04-16-2010 12:27 PM

Re: Steelers trade Holmes to Jets for fifth-round draft pick

Quote:

Originally Posted by falconhater (Post 218827)

Quickest way out of a hole is to stop digging, and you my friend should put the shovel down. NOBODY here is defending Ben. Not me. Not Canton. Nobody. Not in the way you'd like to thing. You're wasting your time with all the rhetoric. Those of us that differ with you in opinion differ with you because you are guilty of forgetting a fundamental part of our justice system. And you are absolutely guilty, and this thread is surely evidence of that.

Is it possible these women made it up? Yes. It is possible they got drunk and woke up the next morning pretty upset with their behavior? Yes. Is it possible Ben was a target? Yes. Is it possible that women have falsely accused men of similar crimes? Yes (see the most recent allegations against Warren Sapp and Michael Irvin). All these things are possible. Unless you've figured out the Vulcan mind meld there's no way in hell you can know definitively one way or the other. So you can rail on and on, but you should really just stop digging.

Is it possible Ben is a predator? Yes. It is possible he slipped that girl a few extra drinks and took advantage of her? Yes. Is it possible his body guards helped to facilitate the situation? Yes. Is there any way for you to know this as fact, considering you don't even have all the evidence the DA has - the same DA that says there's not enough to charge? Not one iota of a chance in hell is that possible, saving the Vulcan mind meld method.

The point here is that you want to circumvent the system and convict the man based on solely on your own perception of the events - the same events nobody including you can know completely. That's not going to happen in this country. You may very well be forced to get over it.

The reason you can't see why no charges have been filed is because you can't see past your own bias, which is key. This particular situation seems to hit you pretty close to home, and I'm confess I wonder why...

falconhater

04-16-2010 12:46 PM

Re: Steelers trade Holmes to Jets for fifth-round draft pick

ALL I CAN SAY TO THAT IS I HOPE BEN DOESN'T GO GET ZOEY NEXT... LOL

strato

04-16-2010 01:08 PM

Re: Steelers trade Holmes to Jets for fifth-round draft pick

Quote:

Originally Posted by falconhater (Post 218850)

ALL I CAN SAY TO THAT IS I HOPE BEN DOESN'T GO GET ZOEY NEXT... LOL

UH oh...them theres fightin words..to Saintfan...lol

CantonLegend

04-16-2010 01:21 PM

Re: Steelers trade Holmes to Jets for fifth-round draft pick

Quote:

Originally Posted by saintfan (Post 218848)

Quickest way out of a hole is to stop digging, and you my friend should put the shovel down. NOBODY here is defending Ben. Not me. Not Canton. Nobody. Not in the way you'd like to thing. You're wasting your time with all the rhetoric. Those of us that differ with you in opinion differ with you because you are guilty of forgetting a fundamental part of our justice system. And you are absolutely guilty, and this thread is surely evidence of that.

i quit 4 pages ago

i'll just sit in the background and laugh

strato

04-16-2010 01:23 PM

Re: Steelers trade Holmes to Jets for fifth-round draft pick

Quote:

Originally Posted by CantonLegend (Post 218859)

i quit 4 pages ago

i'll just sit in the background and laugh

Quitter...lol

falconhater

04-16-2010 01:26 PM

Re: Steelers trade Holmes to Jets for fifth-round draft pick

Quote:

Originally Posted by strato (Post 218860)

Quitter...lol

If Ben woulda Quit we wouldnt be in this mess... I might sue him myself...LOL

saintfan

04-16-2010 02:01 PM

Re: Steelers trade Holmes to Jets for fifth-round draft pick

Quote:

Originally Posted by falconhater (Post 218861)

If Ben woulda Quit we wouldnt be in this mess... I might sue him myself...LOL

Zooey would have to be drunk, bar hopping with a man accused of sexual misconduct for that to happen. I don't think that's likely to happen, but you may as well go ahead and convict her of something since, well, that appears to be the way you operate ;)

saintfan

04-16-2010 02:04 PM

Re: Steelers trade Holmes to Jets for fifth-round draft pick

Quote:

Originally Posted by falconhater (Post 218861)

If Ben woulda Quit we wouldnt be in this mess... I might sue him myself...LOL

And what shall you sue him for. Seems you don't really have a reason to sue Ben...oh, wait, you don't think you need a reason. My bad. I totally forgot that. LMAO

falconhater

04-16-2010 02:05 PM

Re: Steelers trade Holmes to Jets for fifth-round draft pick

Come on you know Zooey is a freak..lookin for a pay day... Tagreting an elite athlete thats what women do right!!

LOL

falconhater

04-16-2010 02:09 PM

Re: Steelers trade Holmes to Jets for fifth-round draft pick

Quote:

Originally Posted by saintfan (Post 218872)

And what shall you sue him for. Seems you don't really have a reason to sue Ben...oh, wait, you don't think you need a reason. My bad. I totally forgot that. LMAO

he caused me to get caught up in a discussion with you!!! for which I feel less inteligent and emotionally stressed!!! LOL

( Just joking dude dont be so serious)

saintfan

04-16-2010 02:22 PM

Re: Steelers trade Holmes to Jets for fifth-round draft pick

Quote:

Originally Posted by falconhater (Post 218873)

Come on you know Zooey is a freak..lookin for a pay day... Tagreting an elite athlete thats what women do right!!

LOL

I suppose she could be, but neither you nor I will ever know.

Oh, wait, falconhater, I'd like you to meet MY POINT.

:doh:

falconhater

04-16-2010 02:30 PM

Re: Steelers trade Holmes to Jets for fifth-round draft pick

ok Im done having fun time to agree on the Saints and let the Stealers of A$$ fall to the way side!!!

strato

04-16-2010 02:30 PM

Re: Steelers trade Holmes to Jets for fifth-round draft pick

Quote:

Originally Posted by saintfan (Post 218877)

I suppose she could be, but neither you nor I will ever know.

Oh, wait, falconhater, I'd like you to meet MY POINT.

:doh:

YouTube- Dream a Little Dream of MeIf she is a singer she is probably a liitle freaky..like me..

saintfan

04-16-2010 03:07 PM

Re: Steelers trade Holmes to Jets for fifth-round draft pick

Quote:

Originally Posted by strato (Post 218880)

YouTube- Dream a Little Dream of Me
If she is a singer she is probably a liitle freaky..like me..

You're freaky? Better get a lawyer. Somebody might just 'assume' you to the death penalty there in Texas. ;)

strato

04-16-2010 03:21 PM

Re: Steelers trade Holmes to Jets for fifth-round draft pick

Brah im a blues player..i live in misery everyday ..lol

saintfan

04-16-2010 04:00 PM

Re: Steelers trade Holmes to Jets for fifth-round draft pick

Quote:

Originally Posted by strato (Post 218891)

Brah im a blues player..i live in misery everyday ..lol

How do you think I feel having to fend off all these shoot-now-ask-questions-later people in this here thread? I'm tired. I wanna go home. LOL

SAINT_MICHAEL

04-16-2010 08:18 PM

Re: Steelers trade Holmes to Jets for fifth-round draft pick

Quote:

Originally Posted by saintfan (Post 218693)

I'm glad you like to LOL. Because you laughing shows how crazy you are. Two basic questions for you. Since you asked if I read the whole thread I will ask you a question. Show me where I display a hang em high attitude and say Ben should be punished. Don't quote 4 paragraphs of text. Since you accuse me of it, I challenge you to quote in this thread where I say he should be punished. Go ahead, take your time.

Secondly, you just spouted off paragraphs about the SC. Does this make the statement I made about the presumption of innocence not being in the constitution incorrect? Both these questions are simple so you should be able to handle them. Well, we shall see.

SAINT_MICHAEL

04-16-2010 08:26 PM

Re: Steelers trade Holmes to Jets for fifth-round draft pick

And SF, if this were a scored debate like they do for school I'd be kicking your ass. You flip flop back to points I made three posts before you.

saintfan

04-16-2010 11:54 PM

Re: Steelers trade Holmes to Jets for fifth-round draft pick

Quote:

Originally Posted by SAINT_MICHAEL (Post 218922)

Quote:

Ben was not charged for the crime of sexual assault in the eyes of the law. That is not the same as innocent.

Dead wrong...IN THE EYES OF THE LAW. Not being charged = innocent IN THE EYES OF THE LAW. Until such time as a guilty verdict is read in court the accused is INNOCENT IN THE EYES OF THE LAW, and should you disagree, then tell me bright one, what it is, exactly, that he is: 'kinda innocent' - 'partially guilty' - IN THE EYES OF THE LAW?. Yes, I am laughing at your 'superior' debating abilities oh barrister of brilliance. L O L

Don't believe me. Pick a random lawyer and ask 'em, and then be man enough to come back to this thread and be humble, confess your ignorance, and apologize for wasting my time.

SAINT_MICHAEL

04-17-2010 12:33 AM

Re: Steelers trade Holmes to Jets for fifth-round draft pick

Quote:

Originally Posted by saintfan (Post 218958)

Dude, jumping in behind falconhater was your mistake. That you can possibly find a way to argue with - not my words - but the law of the land, which is what you're debating against since I've said nothing in this thread that wasn't purely based on perception in the eyes of the law, says everything that needs to be said. You have lost this 'debate', whether you know it or not. It's ok by me if you wanna tell yourself otherwise. Whatever helps you sleep big man.

The presumption of innocence not being in the constitution is irrelevant, and in fact is pointless to the discussion. You found that in Wikipedia and made the mistake of thinking it proved your misguided point, however the Supreme Court smacked that down for you. All I did was copy and paste big fella. ;)

Now, you wanna debate me do ya? Pick the topic, but pick something you know about ok, 'cause it's pretty clear all you know about this particular topic is what you can find on
Wikipedia. I'd like to say I welcome the challenge, but in all honesty I don't think 'challenge' is the right word.

Well how about you answer the questions I posed? I knew you wouldn't

Now, before we're done here, allow me to show you where you goofed, k?

Dead wrong...IN THE EYES OF THE LAW. Not being charged = innocent IN THE EYES OF THE LAW. Until such time as a guilty verdict is read in court the accused is INNOCENT IN THE EYES OF THE LAW, and should you disagree, then tell me bright one, what it is, exactly, that he is: 'kinda innocent' - 'partially guilty' - IN THE EYES OF THE LAW?. Yes, I am laughing at your 'superior' debating abilities oh barrister of brilliance. L O L

Don't believe me. Pick a random lawyer and ask 'em, and then be man enough to come back to this thread and be humble, confess your ignorance, and apologize for wasting my time.

you are like Nostraldamus. Spout enough BS and something may make sense.

SAINT_MICHAEL

04-17-2010 12:34 AM

Re: Steelers trade Holmes to Jets for fifth-round draft pick

And I knew you wouldn't answer my challenge

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:51 AM.

Page 3 of 4

Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page