Soxbadger

Lendale was such a steal. Vince Young and Lendale in the same draft, absolutely incredible.

Well I just walked from Wabash to Jefferson down Adams, and basically Downtown is a ghost town outside of Jackson. The whole city is out of sorts, Jackson is closed, almost every North and South street is barricaded at Adams. The noise though is insane. When the crowd starts cheering you can feel it. The biggest impact will just be the sheer magnitude. When so many people, and its not just Mexican's, there are plenty of flags I saw atleast 2 Polish flags, get together for a common cause, there voices eventually are heard.

Ive never been that in love with Bush and did not understand why the Texans would want him when they have Davis and Morency. I think New Orleans is going to trade down to the highest bidder. With Brees and Deuce, it would be smarter if they did not select a Bush or Leinart, but instead got D'Brick. The only question they would have is how far could they move down? NO probably could feel safe trading with the Jets and knowing that Bush and Leinart or Young are going to be the next 2 picks. I doubt Tenn drafts Ferguson, the only problem could be Tenn deciding to trade down if they are happy with either Young or Leinart. No gm will sleep tonight.

Protests are very American. The Bill of Rights, which is the single greatest American idea has protesting included in the First Amendment, the most sacred of all Amendments. Creating a spanish version of the National Anthem? So what, it would be like getting in a hissy fit that a Sox game was also being shown with SAP. OMG a Sox game being announced in spanish?! Its a song, and if Mexican's want to sing our song in Spanish, then let them. They are still singing the American National Anthem, they are still showing reverence to our country. Are they willing to die for our country? I dont know, I would expect that if they were let into our country as citizens, and felt that this was their country that they would fight for it just as any other American would. As for they are coming over for only "$" that was the case of many immigrants. Well also because they were starving, being persecuted, etc. They all came to America, for something better. I wish the American govt would just allow more immigration, which would solve the problem. Most immigrants would prefer to come over legally.

ND's undergraduate and graduate program are very prestigious. Under this ranking, ND is 18 over all. It is a very prestigious undergrad, and has a top of the line graduate program. Not to mention it has the best potential football program of any of the candidates (the most important sport in Big 10 athletics) and a good basketball program. ND would be the favorite giving the Big Ten another school academically on par with the top programs. I think their preference would be 1) Notre Dame, 2) Syracuse (yes not geographically similar, but in previous years there have been talks about Syracuse moving to the Big 10), 3) Pitt.

Jackie, I responded to you with legal precedent and the fact that this rule is almost never applied to prosecutors and has been severely attacked by almost all legal commentators. There is a balancing with a prosecutors first amendment right and with the accused right to a fair trial. So far you have not given me any appellate level or higher case law that supports your reading of the ABA rule. With out case law to further support your stance, I just am not going to waste my time arguing opinions. You believe one thing, from what my research has revealed the case law of the United States stands for another. If you would like to get in a legal debate, then please bring precedent. We all have our opinions, but in the legal community it is not my opinion that matters, it is the opinion of the higher courts that is binding precedent. While you can always argue in good faith for the over turning of a case or law, it is a very hard mountain to climb, especially when you do not even have persuasive authority. Persuasive as opposed to binding, is when a court sits in a different jurisdiction than the court you are in. IE We are in the 7th circuit, and I cite a 2nd circuit case in my appellate brief. Anyways, if you do not have access to a law library, westlaw, or lexisnexis, I would suggest using one of the free sites on the web, findlaw, or any other of the free sites that are readily available to non-lawyers. Im going to end with, from my understanding of the rule, the prosecutor did nothing wrong. You mention the OJ case, and that case had much more publicity than this case and no one even mentioned ARDC complaints. If what the prosecutor was doing was really that bad, the actual Defense lawyers would be filing an ARDC complaint (they can not threaten an ARDC complaint as that is against the rules). Since they will not file one, I think it is safe to say that what the prosecutor is doing does not violate rule 3.8 because of the exceptions outlined in 3.6, and the subsequent case law. If you find a case youd like me to look at please provide the cite and Ill do it, otherwise Ill leave it at we have different opinions.

I work down town and I like the rallies. In front of the Jackson post office there are rallies all the time, people have so much to yell about.

Well since you were so kind to provide us rule 3.8, lets look at rule 3.6 which governs trial publicity in general. If you look at most of the exceptions, those are the exact facts the prosecutor is giving out. He is allowed to state all facts that are public record, then it says he may make any statement that is necessary to " protect a client from the substantial undue prejudicial effect of recent publicity not initiated by the lawyer or the lawyer's client." Since the defense team has opened the door on the victim, the prosecutor is given even more room to respond. It also says he may say any step in the litigation process, which means he can give as many interviews as he wants. Its not the quantity, it is what they have said. And also here is the comment about timing of the case, which is important because this case is not near trial. Note the 9 month time period between trial and publicity was sufficient "cooling" off time. This case is not near to trial so it is possible that even if he does say something really bad, that a court could find that the time between the statement and trial was far enough apart that it no longer would have a bearing on the case. Present case law seems to suggest that it is very hard for a prosecutor to charged with either a violation of rule 3.6 or 3.8.

I do not want to sound like I am raining on your parade, but let me be the devils advocate for a second. One disclaimer is I have not dealt with the BBB personally. From my understanding and looking at the BBB website, it seems that a BBB complaint about purely "unsatisfactory service" will not really matter to them. It looks like they are more concerned with scam artists, "unfair" labor practices, and defective products, warranties. Although as I write this, if you tailor your repsonse not as "upset about being late" but "feeling unsafe using this public transportation", it may get them to take interest. This is entirely speculation though, but my gut feeling is that they are not there to make service better, but instead or to make customers aware of dangerous or misleading products. As for bad service, talking to whoever runs the bus service may work. Its hard to tell, Im not sure if this is a public or private bus service, so potentially could be different laws and requirements. If they are a "common carrier" the rules are stricter. Im really just some what burnt out of working so I dont want to start really researching. So in the end, this is all just advice and not based on any information that I have actually taken the time to make sure is correct.

Jackie, First, I dont think he violated the model rule. The pertinent part: Means that a prosecutor can not make statements that will make the public pre-judge the case. An example of this would be the DA saying "We have so much evidence of Finnerty's guilt that the defense team wont even know what hit them." etc. From what I have seen about the DA's remarks, he has been very careful to tailor his answers only about why he is moving forward with the case and what he is doing. The key phrase is "substantial liklihood" nothing that he has said will over come that burden, because he really has not said anything that would cause the public to condemn the 3 players more than they should be. The only thing that may result in the ARDC opening up a case is perhaps the leak of the email. Im not exactly sure how that got into the public, but an email that said they wanted to "skin a stripper" is something that will cause the public to condemn and really there is no necessity to inform the public of it. Second, You keep relying on what she supposedly said in the line up. I already addressed how this is hearsay and probably will not be able to get into court. I also do not have the transcript so I can not see in what context or what she exactly said. The media is not very trustworthy, especially when it comes to the legal field. Most journalists are not lawyers, and do not have a sophisticated understanding of evidentiary procedures. What you hear in the media is just not very reliable evidence, and I would not take that she said "100%" as fact.

The rumors Ive read say Walker is either going to Denver or Philly. The supposed Denver deal inolves a WR, (most likely Lelie), the Philly deal is just picks. Supposedly the Eagle deal has been on the table for a while. These are just rumors from other people, so I do not vouch for their accuracy.

Well for one thing, the Big 10 will probably never change its name regardless of how many teams join. The name at this point is symbolic as there are 11 teams, so I dont see why they would change it if it went to 12. I really believe that there is a better chance of going back to 10, then going to 12, unless Notre Dame is the school, or if they can get a Syracuse, etc. They are not just going to add for the sake of adding, because the Big 10 is already one of the richest conferences, and the increased revenue from 1 championship game may not be enough incentive for a team like Wisconsin, who could potentially lose OSU and Michigan on its schedule every year.

Well it all depends on how long it takes him to learn how to throw with his left hand.

He's awesome in DPBL. Outside of that never had heard of him before.

Jackie, I think I may not have been as clear as necessary on what I meant with Finnerty. Im saying the DA would offer 2 things, 1) the assault charges being dropped, and 2) either immunity in the rape case or a vastly reduced sentence. Its not just 180 days, its potentially 5-10 years that he could save himself if he is willing to play ball with the DA. Also im of the opinion that Finnerty would not even want to spend 180 days in jail, because if he goes into the pen as "the white guy who raped the black stripper" his life will be hell for those 6 months.

Hayes, The defense has a right to see the information. But the DA does not have to turn over the information "as soon as he receives it". So long as the defense gets the information with enough time to prepare for trial, it is okay. Often times a DA will show up the morning of a trial and have "new evidence". The defense will then ask for continuation so that they can look at the evidence. Right now they are not even close to that stage. There have been no depositions, which is where the stripper would have to tell her story. As you can see the defense is trying to take the case to the public, so they are going to jade whatever they can when they give it over to the media. This case is some what of an aberration because generally defense attorneys will not want to show their cards this early. As for the ID, it is unlikely that evidence will ever get into trial. Its hearsay through anyone else but the stripper and when she testifies she can easily explain what happened in a different way then it is on the police report. Im not exactly sure what the rules in NC jurisdiction are to police reports, but some jurisdictions do not allow them because they are based entirely on hearsay which is not allowed at trial. Another problem is because she was not under oath, they can not use the statement as a "prior inconsistent" statement for impeachment purposes, as you can not perfect the impeachment. YASNY, Its going to get worse. Because the defense came out and tried to humiliate the DA, the DA is going to f*** with all those lacrosse players. I heard last night that there are more lacrosse players who are going to be charged with crimes that they got diversion for, and none of them are even being connected to the rape. I swear I heard a number around 25 more being re-charged with older crimes, but that seems pretty high. Anyway you slice it, the DA is going to start a war of attrition until he gets what he wants. Wrong place wrong time for alot of these kids, and I feel bad for the collateral damage that is going to happen. The only thing that may stop this is if a Duke player comes forward and helps with a conviction. This is the game the govt plays, its standard procedure in mob and gang cases. If you cant get the "big" guy, you go after everyone else and hope that one of them is willing to cut a deal.

After his favorite tv show hero, Jack Bauer.

Do you really consider the Big 10 that much of an upgrade over the Big 12 that you would lose all your old rivalries?

If the Big 10 decided it wanted to go to 12 teams, it would be a pretty big deal. The natural selection is of course Notre Dame, who is both in sports and scholastically on par with what the Big 10 is looking for. Had ND had a few more down years, I think this scenario could of become a reality, but if ND is doing good they make so much money on their own, there is no need to share it with a conference. After ND I think the pool of schools would be, from the Big East Pitt, Louisville, and Syracuse and from the Big 12 Missouri and ISU. When you actually look at the list of schools ISU is not that far fetched. I am not sure if the Big 10 will go to 12 schools, I almost wonder if they would be more likely to go back to 10 schools and then have a 5-5 split, and a cross over game or something like that. At one point they wanted NU out, who knows what will happen.

That is why you do not release the evidence. If you start with one story and then evidence comes that disputes that story, you look silly. Its much better to let all the evidence come out, and then see what transpires. All we know is that she ID'd 3 people, we do not know in what context or what she has said about the 3. And DA's cut deals all the time for the person who is willing to turn in his friends first. If letting one of them get off easy, means the other 2 are convicted a DA has to weigh that against potentially not convicting any of them. It all depends on the evidence and how good they feel about whether or not they can get a conviction. If they are waivering and Finnerty testifying will ensure conviction, I think they would offer a plea. Maybe not completely off, but substantially reduced sentence.

That is why eventhough it is not an "official" record, beating Ruth's personal record is so important to baseball players. Ruth is the standard that everyone is compared to, therefore to be able to say you beat Ruth in any category is an accomplishment in itself. The same would occur if anyone started to approach Gehrig's games played streak. Eventhough Ripken broke it, Gehrig will always be the man symbolized as the iron man, Some people/players are so great that they will always be what people compare themselves to, no matter what else may occur.

Can they fix my broken baseball stars cartridge? That game ruled until you burnt out a chip in it.

1) Bonds never refused to play for Boston. He said that he would not play in Boston, because Boston is to racist. Once again it is an invention that he said anything about "white" people. Boston is not 100% white, therefore it is impossible to draw that conclusion he was speaking only about white people. Instead he spoke of Bostonian's in general. Not to mention I think you would find many people say something to the extent that Boston is one of the more racist cities in the US. 2) Bonds being a good team mate has no relevance to whether or not he is a racist. Many players including Sir Michael Jorand have been called selfish and bad teammates. I believe there are books that outline how terribly Jordan treated some of his teammates. As for treating the media nice, the media has done nothing in my opinion to deserve being treated fair or with any sort of respect. They constantly are trying to create problems for atheletes, teams, managers, and create chaos. They purposefully distort interviews to create conflict, and then they put those players under an even more intense microscope knowing fully well that they created the entire problem. You need to look no farther than AJ Pierz of how the media can basically drag a players career through the mud. He has one incident in SF, and he becomes the poster boy for a bad teammate. Never mind the fact with the Twins he was one of the main reasons for their chemistry. It was only because in Chicago he got a second shot (at a very reduced price) that he has been able to some what over come what the media did to him.

Clemens, Any prosecutor worth a damn will not reveal ANY evidence prior to trial to the media. The burden of proof is entirely on the prosecution, therefore it is in their advantage to sandbag. Some prosecutors take this to the extreme, sandbagging their best argument all the way to rebuttal (which comes after defenses closing argument). This tactic is very risky because if defense waives their closing then you do not get a rebuttal. But the main thing is, Finnerty will have no credibility which will make it very hard for the defense to put on a case for him. Also most legal scholars will say that the taint of a prior conviction is so bad that a defendant almost never can over come it if the case is close. When a jury hears "This kid has beaten some one for being gay" they are not going to have to stretch it very far that "this kid raped a black girl", or even "this kid assaulted (or battered)" a black girl". Im not saying this will convict them, I honestly have no clue as I am not the prosecutor and do not have the information. Hayes, What I am saying is that if he is willing to flip on another lacrosse member, the prosecutor will most likely be able to get him off on the Rape and the Assault. He wont have to spend any time in jail, and will not have to have a felony on his record. That is going on the assumption that Finnerty has information that would help the prosecution in the rape case, and that he was not the main rapist.

And I fully will admit that Bonds has not been the nicest athlete to the media. But that is much different than saying he is a racist. I doubt that you will get any argument from people saying that "Bonds is a saint, he is the greatest human to walk the earth." What I am arguing is that it is unfair to keep labeling him a "racist" when there is nothing but conjecture, gossip, and hearsay as evidence of it. Bonds is not a sympathetic person, but that does not mean that I am just going to follow the mob and lynch him because he may have been mean to the media. I just do not think trying to be a martyr is the same as being a racist.