VOR

Have you ever been in one, much less when music was blaring? I have (although not while it was also raining, and we didn't hit anyone). Despite your sarcasm, you're unwittingly correct about not being able to hear anything outside the car.

There is zero evidence that Lynch was drunk.

Not according to Cambria they don't. And if they did, they would have arrested Lynch earlier this week.

I'll get back to you when I can do that test in a Porsche Cayenne while it's raining and music is playing.

No. I also don't dispute that it was his car that struck her. But those facts don't mean he knew he hit her.

Yep, that about sums-up your viewpoint.

In that case you give your account and then say "but I'm not exactly sure what happened." And again, there's a difference between slowing-down and stopping. If other witnesses said the car never slowed down period, much less never stopped, you're making it up. Just like she's making it up that she needs multiple doctors to care for her injuries.

Then say "I didn't see what happened exactly." Don't make stuff up.

He didn't arrest Lynch and is agreeing to a plea deal for less than a Class A misdemeanor.

If you're involved in it, you're less objective. Hence your testimony is useless in and of itself. Again it's not like I'm using just the witnesses account of things; I'm also using the conditions and Lynch parking his car in his driveway, as well as not one person coming forward saying Lynch was drinking that night, much less drunk when he got into his car. But in this case, I can see how if the car did slow down, different people might not have been able to judge that. But the victim said the car came to a complete stop, which is pretty obvious.

You have no proof her version is accurate. But it doesn't matter. Witnesses say otherwise. And the DA believes the witnesses.

You can't just ignore that something happened. A woman, despite her falacious claims as to the possible motives of the driver, got injured and someone's car was involved.

The DA has to buy one story or the other. Either the car slowed down +/- stopped or it didn't. If he believes the former happened, it supports the idea that the driver realized he hit someone and fled the scene, which is a crime, while the latter suggests the driver didn't know he hit anyone, which makes leaving the scene an accident. And since the latter is further supported by conditions that morning plus the car being found in Lynch's driveway and not hidden, if not the admittedly biased "source," i.e. all the evidence, it makes it more plausible. Furthermore, given the fact that the DA made a point to refute the victim's story, it's apparent he believes the witnesses, as he should. The victim's and her friends' account is about as credible as Lynch's, regardless of the alleged biases of the witnesses. Especially if alcohol was involved on the victim's side, as you believe it was when it comes to Lynch.

Are you serious? You're asking who is more credible/less biased between the victim and her friends, and bystanders? Besides, it looks like Clark is buying the bystanders' account. Not the victim's and her friends' account. I highlighted the most important part for you. Hence the reason I didn't include it.

I disagree. Trent isn't a rookie and it's time to start performing, so that's not an excuse. A rookie WR who isn't the #1 also isn't an excuse. Maybe Schonert could be considered a valid excuse, but since it's the same terminology, I'd say not really.

I've refrained from trashing the victim and even defended her right to exaggerate her injuries, but this from this morning's Buffalo News really got me furious: So apparently the vic and her friends made up the story about the car slowing down, stopping, and then speeding-off, because the driver realized he hit her. Yet unbiased witnesses said otherwise. This on top of exaggerating her injuries. Sorry but out and out lying is far worse than Lynch remaining silent on the incident. And I added the last part, i.e. that Lynch didn't know he hit her, because that's what I believed after learning that there were factors that made it hard to see that night (it was pre-dawn, raining, woman dancing in the street, etc.), the car never slowed down (now I know that for sure), and was parked in Lynch's driveway. Admittedly the last quote is from a source who has "been supportive of...Lynch," but the facts seem to support that support. I believe he'll agree to a plea for the least severe misdemeanor, or a traffic violation and that the victim won't see as much money as she thought because of her lies.

What, did you sit there hitting refresh 20 times in a row after posting your initial reply? I posted that and deleted it almost immediately.

The inference is that Johnson was driving. The headline states "Driver of Marshawn Lynch's SUV revealed." Then it starts-off with "Frank Clark won't tell us who was in Marshawn Lynch's Porsche SUV. But, Friday night, News 4 has learned it was his close friend, Buffalo Bills' Wide Receiver Steve Johnson." But I can see that it was more likely a poorly organized article which should have started-off talking about Lynch and not Johnson.

I think it's obvious that if the Bills don't make the playoffs this year, Jauron's 3rd with the team, he's gone. That's hardly breaking news or keen insight.

It says it where I said it says it.

http://www.wivb.com/global/story.asp?s=8494353

My bad.

McCargo suffered an injury in his rookie year to the same foot he injured in college. Last year he was healthy. Jones suffered a Lisfranc injury and then a torn ACL in each of his last 2 years in the NFL. Otherwise a great comparison.

...or maybe not (from KFFL.com):

Again he was a rookie. I can't say that he was great, but he seemed to impress more than a few NFL types. Whether that means he'll prove to be a great QB I don't know, but he should be better. I was unimpressed by the elevation of Schonert. That is, until he enumerated the problems with Fairchild's offense. Which happened to be things that had been discussed here and elsewhere. Before he got hurt, Schouman opened my eyes. But if you want concrete promises here, or in life, you're expecting too much. Hardy has 4.45 speed and is 6'6" tall. That's a tough assignment for most CB's. Whether Hardy is actually thrown-to, he commands extra attention. As for the reports that he was dropping a lot of passes, the only place I heard that was from Paul Hamilton, whose reports are specious at best.