Pacman Jones suspended for season, Henry for 8 games

[Michigan Dave]

Well let me see. You say no one knows more than being reported, well I do. The police don't tell the media everything they have..I say I have inside info and you say you have inside info direct from close friends of "pac". Fine I call you on that. If "pac" gives a version to his friends what version do you think it is? My friends talked to everyone involved..oh except for the unknown shooter who NO ONE knows it seems. Watched video of the original altercation and have ALL the facts available. I'm sorry does that seem equal? I have been in court many times on high profile murder cases, drug cases ect. I defintely will take the percentages that my friends are way more than 50% truthful and that is just common sense. They aren't going on thier opinion they are dealing with the facts of the case. I will tell you the porsecutors office is scared of the money "pac" can throw at this case as they have a budget that this case will blow, plus please they simpley are not of the caliber of 'pac's" lawyers they are pblic servants not high priced Defense attorney's.

I'm sorry. I will not believe this. Just like I'm not 10% on board with what I've heard from league peeps re: Jones' statements, I'm not buying "inside information" from a poster arguing with me on a message board. I am not saying that your friends are not truthful. I am saying that I will wait until the case is presented until I believe it myself. You have talked to these people, you know their credibility, therefore it makes sense for you to believe that. I know none of this, so I'd think you would understand my hesitancy. I respect your opinion. Also, it's odd to me they would be afraid of Pac's attorneys. Just argue the merits of your case, and you're OK.

Also not sure how I am suppossed to take this comment.."So my friends are liars, but yours aren't because they are conducting an investigation? I have great respect for law enforcement, but to insinuate that those investigating are 100% truthful, or that law enforcement/prosecutors sometimes don't go out of their way to charge high profile cases, well, you may be buying that bridge back. I will take the statement I've heard from Jones through my friends as credibly as the statements from the LVPD. The truth is probably somewhere in between.

Not real sure how I take "but to insinuate that those investigators are 100% truthful"...? How do I take that? Really pretty much called my friends liars I think.

Again, it's happened before. You are asking me to take what I do know, and throw it out based on an argument that you can't give me (other than "he is guilty, my friends told me.") I won't do that. Who is/isn't a liar is irrelevant to me. That is a semantic, and isn't central to the argument I am making about the suspension.

 

[Ring 6]

Amen. Careful of your spelling or typos Andy.

I cannot type integrity. I can spell it just fine, but when I go to type it there are extra letters every time.

But, the integrity issue was the one I was struggling to voice.
I think that is where this issue goes off track. Jones has no integrity or credibility, at least in the court of public opinion.

I think any of us would agree that he has every right to have his case heard, and shouldn't be convicted on what we think he is.
But I also think we should all agree that using Adam Jones as a comparison is setting the bar very low.
I would have no problem if I were the victim, or the police, or the DA having someone tell me I must prove my case before they are totally convinced. I would have a tremendous problem if they told me the odds were even money that Adam Jones was telling the truth and that I was lying. And I would not have a problem with them telling me that if it were a guy who did not have questionable integrity.
I think the offensive part is being compared equally to Pacman Jones, which in my book is being insulted.

 

[Michigan Dave]

Again, you missed my point.
By giving Jones and law enforcement a equal footing on who may or may not be telling the truth (I am not talking about waiting for facts, but saying they are equally likely to be right) you are taking a guy who is generally perceived as entirely lacking integrity and claiming you feel the integrity of law enforcement is equal to his.

No, I get your point. They are not on equal footing. Law enforcement has yet to present their case. What I am arguing is pats-blue's post that says Jones is guilty because of what his friends say. This I don't know, so I'm waiting on the case to be made public. Then, I'll be able to determine who is right. I know what I've heard through people in the league, and it makes sense to me. Therefore, I'll not condemn Jones and say that it's a lie until I hear the other side. When the charges are filed, that's when Vegas will be arguing against Jones.

Let me give you an example.

If a known rapist commits a rape of a 90 year old lady, and claims it was consensual, and you say I refuse to take a side on who is telling the truth and I refuse to say either is lying or say which is more likely to be lying, that is lowering the integrity of the 90 year old lady to that of the rapist. It is not going to be perceived as I have no reason to not believe her, but I'd like proof he is not lying. It is saying flip a coin, either one may be telling the truth. I think that would be offensive to 90 year old ladies everywhere.

Here you would be playing off of a stereotype that 90 year old ladies are not going to lie. But the accuser would make her statement first, of course, reporting the incident. We would believe it to be true. Then, when interviewing the accused, we would interrogate, and attempt to poke holes in his story. Does he have an alibi? Is it a credible alibi? How can I place him at the scene of the crime? To me, a crime has to make sense on every level, not just it's face. You said yourself that you'd like the proof that he's not lying. I agree with you, and right now they are working on proof that Jones is/isn't lying.

 

[Michigan Dave]

I cannot type integrity. I can spell it just fine, but when I go to type it there are extra letters every time.

But, the integrity issue was the one I was struggling to voice.
I think that is where this issue goes off track. Jones has no integrity or credibility, at least in the court of public opinion.

I think any of us would agree that he has every right to have his case heard, and shouldn't be convicted on what we think he is.
But I also think we should all agree that using Adam Jones as a comparison is setting the bar very low.
I would have no problem if I were the victim, or the police, or the DA having someone tell me I must prove my case before they are totally convinced. I would have a tremendous problem if they told me the odds were even money that Adam Jones was telling the truth and that I was lying. And I would not have a problem with them telling me that if it were a guy who did not have questionable integrity.
I think the offensive part is being compared equally to Pacman Jones, which in my book is being insulted.

It's the evidence and facts of the case that set you apart from being compared equally to Jones.

 

[Ring 6]

I'm sorry. I will not believe this. Just like I'm not 10% on board with what I've heard from league peeps re: Jones' statements, I'm not buying "inside information" from a poster arguing with me on a message board. I am not saying that your friends are not truthful. I am saying that I will wait until the case is presented until I believe it myself. You have talked to these people, you know their credibility, therefore it makes sense for you to believe that. I know none of this, so I'd think you would understand my hesitancy. I respect your opinion. Also, it's odd to me they would be afraid of Pac's attorneys. Just argue the merits of your case, and you're OK.



Again, it's happened before. You are asking me to take what I do know, and throw it out based on an argument that you can't give me (other than "he is guilty, my friends told me.") I won't do that. Who is/isn't a liar is irrelevant to me. That is a semantic, and isn't central to the argument I am making about the suspension.

I am actually with you on this one MD.
While I believe Patsblue is being completely forthright, I certainly agree that you cannot win an argument by saying you have to trust that the info I say I was told is accurate.
Not that I think you are anywhere near winning this one , but you do have a point here.

Carry on guys, I am signing off. This was very interesting.

 

[Michigan Dave]

Amen. Careful of your spelling or typos Andy.

Go back and read your posts, some are difficult to get through. A typo is one thing. Sentence structure, punctuation and flow are common courtesy to those reading if you want to be sarcastic and keep this schtick up after I apologized.

 

[Michigan Dave]

I am actually with you on this one MD.
While I believe Patsblue is being completely forthright, I certainly agree that you cannot win an argument by saying you have to trust that the info I say I was told is accurate.
Not that I think you are anywhere near winning this one , but you do have a point here.

Carry on guys, I am signing off. This was very interesting.

Thanks, it was indeed. I need to get myself to bed now. I'm exhausted.

Andy, Pats-blue, thanks for an entertaining day in the least! I think we can all agree that it will be interesting how this thing plays out, and we're all grateful that Jones is NOT a Pat!

 

[Ring 6]

It's the evidence and facts of the case that set you apart from being compared equally to Jones.

Oh, I disagree with that. Because the evidence and facts are not available. At this point we are talking about liklihood, and conjecture. I think the track record of Pacman Jones and the track record of law enforcement in general in this country set them apart. Sure you can find the examples of bad apples.
I just want to make sure you understand that you are coming off as saying that you feel that the public image of Adam Jones being what it is, you put law enforcement in general on an equal footing of integrity with him.
If thats what you believe, so be it, but if you were a law enforcement official wouldn't you be offended by being told your integrity is equal to Adam Jones?

 

[jczxohn1]

Federal cocaine distribution cases take a little longer to prosecute. This is probably not going to drag out that long. But if the situation were reversed, and this were you with so much to lose, wouldn't you want the benefit of the doubt from your employer? Heck, this way he would end up with 2 harsh punishments.

Whether or not he makes 10 weeks is irrelevant in punishing him now. If he screws up again, I believe he'll lose his privilege of playing in the NFL. And yes, it's the ultimate waste of talent.

If this were me with so much to lose, I'd pick my employer over my thug friends. I certainly wouldn't make public statements otherwise and expect sanctuary from my employer. If, as has been so far, everyone keeps their mouth shut regarding the identity of the shooter, just how likely is this case brought to a quick conclusion? If you were his lawyer, how long could you get a decision about his involvement continued?

 

[PatsSteve1]

Re: pacman jones suspended!!!

Again, legally, they are able to do so because of the CBA language, but ethically, I don't see it as the right move. I want to clean up the NFL, but I want it done with the right intentions, not by making a public statement to set an example out of a kid. That's all.[/QUOTE]

* I'm wondering about changing the penalties after the offenses happened. In criminal court, the sentences in effect when the crime(s) were committed would apply, not the sentences if the legislature raised them while you were waiting to go to court. I don't know what punishments were allowed, or precedence there are when he last got arrested.

 

[JoeSixPat]

Pacman has a disorder of some sort, no doubt about it.

They should force him to eat multiple white pills to help him control himself.

 

[pats-blue]

Go back and read your posts, some are difficult to get through. A typo is one thing. Sentence structure, punctuation and flow are common courtesy to those reading if you want to be sarcastic and keep this schtick up after I apologized.

Oh you mean after the apology or the post AFTER the apology to Andy which was the following..."Quote:
Originally Posted by AndyJohnson
I really havent read the entire thread, but I have a hard time being silent when I see something offensive. I was using 'grammar' to cover the entire 'write like a 4th grader' slam.

Michigan Dave: Just curious, you didn't see anything offensive in these responses:


Quote:
Wow I just read this again. So you have great respect for law enforcment but you find Jones just as trustworthy as the police. WOW. Take the blinders off man. I will tell you my friends would be welcome in my house any day of the week, you want to invite "pac" over to your house by all means go ahead. Maybe he can bounce a female friend of yours head off a table since it doesn't seem to be such a big deal to you and he isn't responsible for his actions it seems. Wow "pacman" is as trustworthy as the police...HAHAHAHAHAHAHA....

Oh and my friends don't get into trouble like "pac" does....seems he can't always blame someone else for the crime....didn't his MOM take the fall for some marijuana of his a while back??? This is hilrious, maybe he should apply for the police department since he is as trustworthy as the police. Don't worry I will never by that bridge back...

Quote:
well I guess my friends aren't trustworthy and the interviews and video that they watched isn't enough but thanks I will believe them rather than third or fourth hand accounts of a version from "pac" the thug you can stay in your world it will serve you well in court.

__________________

Now you slam my sentence structure AGAIN.." Sentence structure, punctuation and flow are common courtesy to those reading if you want to be sarcastic and keep this schtick up after I apologized. Pardon me if I don't "feel" your apology. Since after your "apology" you post a very disengenious post to Andy where you take my comments, yet leave what YOU posted that I was responding to out. Now you slam my sentence structure ect. AGAIN! Yeah I believe your apology.

Lastly I never said "pac" IS already guilty. I stated with what is known the punishment is more than fair that he is receiving from the NFL, thats what I was posting.

Second why would the LV prosecutors office be afraid of 'pac's" attorney's? Because they have a budget and he isn't the shooter. He is facing in the scheme of things minor felony charges and the paperwork his attorney's could bury them under will throw thier whole office into disarray. They already are swamped so someone that can throw millions at a case along with multiple lawyers, what happens to thier already burgeoning case load? That is why. I'm not sure you are a lawyer yet or not but I have seen the criminal legal system for 12+ years I think I know how it works and what prosecutors deal with.

Yeah I don't think I will apologize for my sentence structure, but feel free to diagram it out for me and correct my punctuation so I please you. Sorry if I don't accept your apology since after your post to Andy and this one it is obvious you did not mean it, you obviously want to feel superior...good for you but what I write on a message board is not high on my list on snetence structure or punctuation....(see you never should use something like this for a pause or puncutation but I really honestly don't care) My reports for criminal matters however are written with care. That I do care about...pleasing you on my writing style on a message board, not so much.

 

[pats-blue]

If this were me with so much to lose, I'd pick my employer over my thug friends. I certainly wouldn't make public statements otherwise and expect sanctuary from my employer. If, as has been so far, everyone keeps their mouth shut regarding the identity of the shooter, just how likely is this case brought to a quick conclusion? If you were his lawyer, how long could you get a decision about his involvement continued?

The DA already sent the case back to the investigators for further investigation on the Obstruction charge (and others). They know they will be buried in discovery, motions and continuences unless it is airtight. Well it can't be "airtight" simply because the "thug" element IS not talking. Oh they submit to interviews...what some inside scoop? Here is thier response, "I don't know", "I didn't see anything".

I will take a recent example..Vick. He wasn't charged why? Because the police had no case? Wrong. The inside of his stash bottle had marijuana residue in a normally non testable quantity. Could they test it and get a result? Yes but for a case like this they will not go through the expense and since Vick didn't admit to his intent to use it to carry marijuana in they did not have the culpable mental state to charge him for paraphernalia possession. Of course he then goes and stated the police stated they knew ther was nothing illegal going on and it was certainly just a jewelry holder. I was surprised that they actually responded and stated absolutely that was not true.

Just because charges are dropped does not neccesarily mean there was no crime and that they were innocent. It could be that the expense for certain charges are not in the prosecuting cities best interest due to budget constraints, that is reality.

 

[PatsSteve1]

Just because charges are dropped does not neccesarily mean there was no crime and that they were innocent. It could be that the expense for certain charges are not in the prosecuting cities best interest due to budget constraints, that is reality.[/QUOTE]

* Even when people are found guilty in court doesn't mean they committed the crime. People are getting released from prison, one guy just this week after serving 22 years in prison for rape, all the time now when DNA shows they couldn't have committed the crime.

 

[pats-blue]

Just because charges are dropped does not neccesarily mean there was no crime and that they were innocent. It could be that the expense for certain charges are not in the prosecuting cities best interest due to budget constraints, that is reality.

* Even when people are found guilty in court doesn't mean they committed the crime. People are getting released from prison, one guy just this week after serving 22 years in prison for rape, all the time now when DNA shows they couldn't have committed the crime.[/QUOTE]


Oh I agree with that also. The advances in forensics I think has cut down on these types of cases though. Rapes are easily the most common to have innocent people found guilty, because it is such a heinous crime. Unfortunately we find we end up poking holes in the "victims" story more than put people in jail for it. 22 years ago you have a she said, he said only many times. Now with DNA and other forensic tecniques I hope there will be less crap like that.

But I was talking aout idiots like Vick claiming how he was completely exonerated which was BS or when people proclaim how innocent someone was because charges were dropped. I'm just saying that is not always the case (sometimes it IS that they are innocent, after further evidence shows something other than the original story or facts) and true sometimes those found guilty are not actually guilty. Though since we are talking about professional athletes here with enough money to put on a "snow" defense (bury the prosecutors in paper) even the most trivial crime can be dismissed or dropped and does not mean they are innocent. You or I would go to jail or get found guilty. They get sweetheart deals. Do you think on many of the convictions you or I would get community service?