JohnC

This is a local case. It originated from a response to a burglar alarm. You are correct that each state has its own statutes that are enforced. The charge in this case is possession and not distribution. Unless this case evolved into a major distribution case the feds would not have any interest in it. Again, this is a local matter.

What would be the reason for the drug suspicion? In the Chung case this was a situation where the police were responding to a burglar alarm. What would be the basis of using a drug sniffing in this situation?

No.

Paul's cackling laugh was a hoot. He was one of those good natured and grounded guys that everyone gravitated toward.

@PromoTheRobotis so influential within the program that he probably was the person who made the decision as to who will be the starter. When you are a big time contributor you become an influencer.

That's an important issue related to the case and police conduct. I have suspicions that there is more to this story that is presently known. It could be that the neighbors were not enamored with outsiders coming into their enclave to party or socialize. I wouldn't be surprised if there were prior complaints that put this residence on the police radar. The facts will soon come out after Chang's legal beagles get involved.

Not necessarily. Just because the individual owner owned the house doesn't mean that he is the only one who has access to that house. What if he allows his friends or family members to stay at one of his residences? Couldn't they be the owners of the drugs? You are making an assumption that holds no water from a legal standpoint. If you allowed a friend to stay in a rental unit that you owned does that mean that you are responsible for his/hers/their activities? As far as your backpack scenario that also misses the legal threshold for an arrest. What would be the legal basis for searching a backpack prior to an arrest? The burden of proof is on the police, not the individual. The individual in question is not obligated to say anything.

A tip in itself would not be enough of a basis to enter the house. If there was a tip that there were drugs in that house that in itself would not be enough enter the house or to garner a warrant. If there was a tip the type of person (friend, inside source, family member, anonymous etc) would be part of the affidavit requesting a warrant. If the police got a tip it might trigger a surveillance with the hope that more evidence would be discovered to bolster the affidavit to get a warrant. With what is known this drug case is very flimsy. There may be more to the story but as it stands it seems to me that the police acted beyond their authority.

How do you know that he is a dealer? He wasn't charged with that. Just because drugs are found in one of your residences that doesn't mean that the drugs in the house our yours. He had another residence. Who else had access to the residence? And I'm sure his attorney's first issue to pursue is whether the police had the authority to enter the house? Did they attempt to call him before entering the premises. Police respond to house and business alarms all the time. They usually don't enter the premises unless given permission or there is an exigent reason associated with safety before entering a premises. The feds have no interest or jurisdiction in this trivial case. It is a local matter.

That's the issue. We simply don't have all the facts. If the police responded to an alarm at the residence and upon arrival they observed the door locks tampered with or a window open then that would certainly raise suspicions for the police. Could they enter at that point? Not necessarily yes or no. Is there some commotion in the house or not? Before going in after surrounding the house were they able to get a hold of the owner? Right now with the limited information I would say this was a questionable entry.

Jack is primed to continue on the path to stardom. The most intriguing issue for me is who is going to be on his line? Do you split his line of Skinner and Reinhart to upgrade the second line? Or do you keep his elite line together with him and Skinner and Reinhart. There is some of talk from the GM suggesting that Reinhart could be moved to the second line in order to balance out the top two lines. I understand the reasoning but prefer keeping the premier Jack line in tact.

Unless there are more facts I would say no. Was there an open door or a window open that would indicate that someone surreptitiously entered? Did they hear any noise from the inside? It's not unusual for the police to respond to alarms. They have the ability to use their data base to call the owner of the property. If they made contact they would ask the owner for permission to enter or wait for the owner to arrive. If there was a legal basis to enter the house (that's an open issue) they can only examine what is in plain view. They can't go through drawers or open cabinets. For the sake of an argument even if drugs were found in plain view and they had the authority to enter (questionable/debatable issue) you still can't assume that he was the owner of the drugs because others (friends, family etc) might have access to the residence. The Kraft saga collapsed because of improper police procedures. I see that same scenario playing out here.

Something is off here. The alarm goes off and the police respond to the house. Was the house vacant? How did they get in? Were the doors and window locked? What was so suspicious about this situation that made them enter the house without permission? The police respond to alarms all the time. What they usually do after a cursory outside check is notify the owners, not enter the premises. Just because he owns the home doesn't mean that you can presume that the drugs are his. Does anyone else use the house? Something is off here. I wouldn't be surprised that after his attorney gets involved this case will be dismissed. Chung may have a bigger problem with the league than he does with the legal authorities.

As like you I don't understand the resentment against players for the amount of money they make. The issue is what share of the multi-billion dollar operation should they get for their services. The players certainly are instrumental to the success of the business. And an argument can be made that players, especially elite players, are more responsible to the success of the business than some owners. Who is more important to the Colts?: the oddball Irsay or Luck? In many respects players are like performers in movies and in the entertainment business where at the top level (which the NFL is in) they are central to the business. Some people are troubled over how contracts are not iron-clad legal documents upheld by the players. But the context in this football business is that contracts are in general not iron-clad for the management side because very often they have the option to release the player and replace the player with what essentially is cheaper labor. Also, there is nothing unusual for management to redo contracts for players when the player demonstrably outperforms the contract. That is not done out of altruism so much as it is done to secure the talented player/s for a longer term. When one is in such a precarious and short term business that is also a cut-throat business I'm not going decry and moralize to a player who is looking out for his own interest. Of course there are cases where players' demands are unreasonable but in general I will give players some allowance because of the nature of their physically punishing business.

The problem isn't the amount of money in the first. The issue is the length of the contract. If your lifespan as a player is shorter then it is not unreasonable for the expiration of the first contract should be sooner than the other positions.

The league has to address the issue of contracts as it applies to running backs. Under the current system the backs are discriminated against because their life-span is shorter. In addition, as with the Lev'an (sic) Bell situation there are backs who make up a disproportionate part of the offense because they are central to the running and passing game. Although Zeke's current contract is in force it is not fair that the current standard of pay applies to him and the position. The fairest approach would be to make the backs first contract shorter than everyone else because their football life span is shorter.

He is a great talent and football player regardless how good the line is. His value increases because he plays behind that formidable line. There are a variety of levels of talent at every position. He is at the top or vying for the top at his position. As I said in a prior post he is the most important offensive player on the Cowboys. And that ranking includes the qb and the receiving unit. He is that good!

I would take Saquan Barkley over him not because he is a better player but because he is a more reliable person. Don't misconstrue what I am saying here: Zeke is a great football player. When Zeke is on the field he drives the offense even more than their qb. I would have little fear in mortgaging some of my future for Saquan Barkley. But I would be very queasy about doing it for the more aggressive Buckeye socializer. He is the type of chap that whenever you get one of those late night or early morning phone calls the first thought that comes to mind before answering the phone is I hope it isn't about Zeke!

No one can argue that he isn't an elite player. Without question he is the best and most important player on offense for Dallas. However, I don't trust him, especially off the field. I'm not categorizing him as a bad dude but he is an immature and volatile person who has a history of incidents. None of the incidents individually are at a serious level. But when he continues to have incident after incident when he is already in a precarious situation with the league then his behavior is too problematic to make a major investment in and commitment to. No thank you.

Now he is working on RT, a Russian produced show in the US. I'm not making any insinuations other than stating where he is currently working.

Loaf of stale bread. If the poster speculated that there was a fifth or sixth round offer by the Eagles for McCoy then I would take notice. The bigger issue than what McCoy has left in the tank is who would be willing to take on his salary?

You are probably right. Because Connor plays such a high end two way go I would prefer Connor. From a cap perspective the Jets are going to be tightly squeezed after they sign their primary players. Attached is a link of their roster and stats. https://www.quanthockey.com/nhl/teams/winnipeg-jets-players-2018-19-nhl-stats.html

Paul Hamilton has on a number of occasions brought up Winnipeg as a destination for Risto if he were to be dealt. He has insinuated that the contours of a deal have already been established but until the free agents are signed the details can't be worked out. Craig Rivet on the Instigators gushes over Connor. I would love to deal for him but it would take a Risto plus player/s to get that deal done.

He practiced today wearing an approved helmet. He won't be playing regular season games unless he wears a certified helmet. Sometimes when you try to write a rule it is difficult to cover every conceivable circumstance. In this case the intent of the mutually agreed rule by the league and the union was obvious. I say with supreme confidence that he won't be playing or even practicing unless he wears a certified helmet. If Tom Brady and every other player in the league has to conform to the agreed upon standard then AB will have to conform. AB is attempting to search for an escape clause when all the doors have been shut to him.

The league hasn't made a determination on this particular grievance because he just filed it. His prior grievance was acted on by the league. The league ruled against him. It was just reported that AB was at practice wearing a certified helmet. Again, I'm confident that the league will not allow him to play with a helmet that doesn't meet the safety standards established by the league and the union. There are technicalities to rules that sometimes have merit. This is not an issue of technicality as it is an issue of a recalcitrant and fool player who is attempting to circumvent the established rule that dealt with the grace period. As it was noted by a prior poster the union is not supporting or acting on his behalf because his position is nonsensical. He can continue to file grievances until his pen has no more ink. The outcome is obvious. The "five day letter" should have been sent a week ago.