Inside tale of Ray Lewis' parking-lot brawl homicide case

[Sisyphean Bills]

Yes there was enough reasonble doubt, obviously. It's also clear that Lewis orchestrated the creation of that doubt. I have little doubt that if these two guys were not with Lewis when that fight broke out then thye would be in jail for a long time.

 

As for alphadawg and his "ton of factual evidence", there is no such ton. It is all based on conflictiing eyewitness accounts.

Not surprising given the situation was a melee of around 20 people that had been drinking in and around a dark alley.

[BuffOrange]

Ok, for the love of god, will you people PLEASE get the facts of the case and the acquittal straight. Its fine if you want to disagree and somehow link Ray to a murder that NO WITNESSES and NO EVIDENCE have yet to do, but at least get your facts straight.

 

1. Why do people keep acting like the no one knows who stabbed the 2 men? The people wielding the knives and stabbing the victims are known to be Sweeting and Oakley. So please stop speculating on who did or did not stab someone, they did, Ray testified to it as did others.

2. No one got off on a loop hole. The two men, Sweeting and Oakley, were acquitted in SELF DEFENSE.

3. The group of men that Ray and his entourage had an altercation with were waiting for Ray and his friends. Its speculated and believed to have been an attempted robbery attempt.

4. The group of men struck Rays group first with a champagne bottle, witnesses collaborated that.

5. The group of men not only had fire arms, but fired upon the limo leaving it full of bullet holes when the police found the car. These innocent fellows seem to have misplaced these harmless guns as none were found at the scene and one of the men who admits to firing the guy said the gun is just gone as he destroyed it before police could inspect it.

6. Ray and his friends all turned themselves in while none of the other crew did nor came forward.

7. Rays friends had no prior records, the two men did that died, one of them serious.

8. Ray testified against the two men, even describing how the men stabbed the victims.

9. People are taking a quote and twisting the meaning of the quote to be boasting like they were championing around about stabbing someone. All that was quoted was that Sweeting and Oakley said "I stabbed mine" and "I stabbed mine too" like it was meant to be a trophy. How do you know that they were not yelling that out in a panic...more like holy sh*t...I stabbed mine...and his friend saying me too. You have no idea about the tones behind those quotes, yet despite an over whelming pile of evidence of self defense, so many want to twist that one piece to be an act of pride and boasting.

10. People saying its hard to believe Ray did not fight...well I am sure he did fight and initially did not want to admit that because he was worried no one would believe he had nothing to do with the stabbings. I would have done the same thing initially if I was him. He later changed that statement too when he plead guilty to obstruction of justice and agreed to testify to what he knew.

 

I get the families are still very upset by all this and still think Ray knows more than he does. They never got the answers they wanted so I do not blame them. In the end, no one faced any punishment for the deaths of those two men. However, the families also do not want to face the possibility that the 2 men might have instigated it, were suspected of potentially being there to rob Ray, and might not have been as innocent as they want to believe. Were they innocent victims, or slain assailants...hard to say, but the TRUTH is that the evidence overwhelmingly suggests that the men started an unfortunate string of events and were intentionally there to start a confrontation.

 

Yet even more information being ignored about these 2 victims that some want to paint to be so innocent of any wrong doing that led to their deaths. The first one talks about their legal issues...the second one talks about one of the witnesses who was WITH THE VICTIMS, not a Ray entourage member, but a member of the group from the VICTIMS side testifying that they planned to rob him and had a gun. Third one talks about who struck first, and fourth one talks about how not a single witness said Ray stabbed anyone. All of these are from main stream news articles from the time of the trials.

 

"Both victims had scrapes with the law in their native Ohio. Lollar had twice been convicted of misdemeanor marijuana possession. Baker pleaded guilty in 1997 to improperly handling a firearm. He received probation, which he apparently violated the next year when he was indicted on charges of possession of cocaine and driving with an open container of alcohol. He failed to appear at his arraignment and a warrant was outstanding at the time of his death."

 

"A woman who was with the three on the morning of the murders told investigators that they overheard people in Lollar's and Baker's group plotting the armed robbery of some of Lewis' companions, who had separated from Lewis' main group and were walking down the street. Court documents filed earlier by attorneys for Sweeting suggested that Lollar had been carrying a gun and that he and Baker were "aggressors" in the incident."

 

"Witnesses to the Jan. 31 melee outside an Atlanta nightclub in which two men were fatally stabbed report that one of the victims hit the man now accused of his murder over the head with a champagne bottle as the fight began, according to evidence turned over to defense attorneys on Friday."

 

"Although there are contradictions among witnesses to the struggle, sparked after a night of revelry following the Super Bowl, none of them say Lewis stabbed anyone. One of the victims, Jacinth Baker, was seen by some smashing Oakley with a bottle, sources said. This would appear consistent with suggestions made in court motions by an attorney for Sweeting that the victims had been the aggressors."

 

If you're going to accuse others of getting emotional and not looking at facts, it'd probably be good to specify where either the article or I did that. Ranting about additional key information the article left out in your opinion - like the opposing group being off their rocker (which I don't know if anyone disputes...I personally can't see myself ever attacking an NFL LB's posse) and saying "it was speculated that..." on your supposed 'fact sheet' doesn't really cut it.

"He turned himself in!" Lol great - so after ditching his limo, fleeing his hotel & having the mistress burn stuff and pick up pieces from the hotel, the NFL LB opted not to change his name and flee to Europe, or go into hiding in North Dakota somewhere. Cool seems like a standup guy.

 

Also I don't know why you're so adamant about his buddies having one, wielded the knife, and two, also having no record & having obviously acted in pure self defense. I mean when you're making that 3rd stab to the heart in self-preservation in a heroic effort to help the good guys while simultaneously dodging bullets Matrix style (who says you can't bring a knife to a gun fight?) why would you really care who did the stabbing?

[Mr. WEO]

Alphadawg, Excellent post.

 

 

WEO,The conflicting accounts is the central point of alphadawg's excellent comprehensive response. There is no way that a conclusive determination can be made of what happened. What do you want to do when rendering a verdict for a serious crime? Guess?

 

 

Guilty of what? Certainly not murder.

 

No, John, he is not guilty of murder, but I believe his two friends murdered those two guys during a fight. And it should be clear to anyone at this point that Lewis orchestrated an extensive obstruction of justice to hide the only "facts" (physical evidence) of this case. He also acted to shape the testimony of eyewitnesses and the accused. This is a serious crime. Despite alphadawgs straw-man claims, no one is painting the dead guys as innocents. But their "serious criminal records" are a joke. And "speculation" of a intent for robbery is not fact, despite him listing it as such. And his "fact" that the perps "turned themselves in" is also misleading. They did so only after 2 weeks and after they heard Lewis cut a deal with the DA.

 

It's obvious to me that he dead men did not have guns on them. You don't run away from a guy with a knife (or let him place it in your heart, repeatedly, after he beats you first) when you have a gun. Therefore, when you go from beating a guy senseless, to taking out the new knife Ray Lewis bought you the day before and plunging into the guys heart to finish him off, you've crossed the threshold of self defense to murder.

 

Why did Lewis do all of those things immediately after the fight if he and his friends had done nothing wrong? Why destroy his clothing? Why burn pictures? Why have his sister relaying messages to the perps? Why hire an investigator to get to his own people before the cops?

[Dat Dude]

Thought this was a good fair article on the subject ....

 

http://m.nypost.com/...SvvbhKA5AvqpmbM

[Alphadawg7]

If you're going to accuse others of getting emotional and not looking at facts, it'd probably be good to specify where either the article or I did that. Ranting about additional key information the article left out in your opinion - like the opposing group being off their rocker (which I don't know if anyone disputes...I personally can't see myself ever attacking an NFL LB's posse) and saying "it was speculated that..." on your supposed 'fact sheet' doesn't really cut it.

"He turned himself in!" Lol great - so after ditching his limo, fleeing his hotel & having the mistress burn stuff and pick up pieces from the hotel, the NFL LB opted not to change his name and flee to Europe, or go into hiding in North Dakota somewhere. Cool seems like a standup guy.

 

Also I don't know why you're so adamant about his buddies having one, wielded the knife, and two, also having no record & having obviously acted in pure self defense. I mean when you're making that 3rd stab to the heart in self-preservation in a heroic effort to help the good guys while simultaneously dodging bullets Matrix style (who says you can't bring a knife to a gun fight?) why would you really care who did the stabbing?

 

LOL, first off, you clearly have never been in a fight, especially one where you feel your life may be threatened, or you wouldn't have even bother to write those last 2 sentences.

 

Second, what is it you want to say Ray is guilty of? I am confused, because NOT ONE, literally not a single person or eye witness ever at any point accused Ray of stabbing anyone. So if he didn't stab them, what's left. Oh yeah, obstruction of justice...but wait, he plead guilty to that. Ok then, what else could it be...oh, you and others want to say he did not give up his friends...but wait, he testified that they had the knives, that he drove them the day before to buy the knives, and demonstrated how they stabbed them. So what more is it that Ray did or didn't do? It was the court and jury that found them innocent of murder and acquitted in self defense, not to mention it only took them less than 5 hours to deliberate (which is very short, especially in a high profile case like this).

 

 

Yes there was enough reasonble doubt, obviously. It's also clear that Lewis orchestrated the creation of that doubt. I have little doubt that if these two guys were not with Lewis when that fight broke out then thye would be in jail for a long time.

 

As for alphadawg and his "ton of factual evidence", there is no such ton. It is all based on conflictiing eyewitness accounts.

 

Ok, so this statement right here just proves that you are just going to convict him based on his celebrity Ray could never win with you because in any case of being found innocent you are going to use the excuse that they got off because Ray is a celebrity. It doesnt matter that people who knew the victims testified to the premeditated robbery of Ray...doesnt matter that they also testified to bringing firearms to the club. Doesnt matter that just about every eye witness testimony has the victims starting the brawl by cracking a champagne bottle over Rays friends head. Doesn't matter that one of victims already had priors including issues with fire arms. Doesnt matter that the limo was shot up. Doesnt matter that at no point was Ray believed to have stabbed anyone. Doesnt matter that Ray identified the 2 stabbers and testified to how they stabbed them. Doesnt matter every single witness says Ray did not stab anyone.

 

All that matters to you is that he was a celebrity, therefore, any acquittal is going to be based on your perception that money bought his freedom. And lets not forget, Ray was no where near the name he is today back then at the time of event. He was just a young talented LB that most people had never heard of yet until the case. It wasnt until the Ravens SB run the next year that Ray the football player became a house hold name because of all the media attention on him after the case.

Edited January 29, 2013 by Alphadawg7

[Juror#8]

Did I or did I not just say that he said that? Lol, I said you twist it to mean that it's an admission of guilt or knowing something sinister. It could simply mean that without video evidence no one will ever know what is or isn't true and it comes down to what people believe.

 

But you must be right, Ray is having fun with people and running around going "na na nana, I know something you don't know" because he knows he can't be tried again on double jeopardy and is secretly gloating and telling people they will never know.

 

Lmao, I guess to you that makes more sense than using common sense and just realizing that the truth will never be confirmed because without an actual video recording of the events no one can ever know for sure one way or the other and that's what he is alluding to.

 

I find it entertaining that your response to a ton of factual evidence, the same evidence that acquitted the two men, was to focus on a comment in a speech that can be interpreted many ways as if that somehow proves all the other facts wrong.

 

But dat federal pinch doeeee?

[JohnC]

No, John, he is not guilty of murder, but I believe his two friends murdered those two guys during a fight. And it should be clear to anyone at this point that Lewis orchestrated an extensive obstruction of justice to hide the only "facts" (physical evidence) of this case. He also acted to shape the testimony of eyewitnesses and the accused. This is a serious crime. Despite alphadawgs straw-man claims, no one is painting the dead guys as innocents. But their "serious criminal records" are a joke. And "speculation" of a intent for robbery is not fact, despite him listing it as such. And his "fact" that the perps "turned themselves in" is also misleading. They did so only after 2 weeks and after they heard Lewis cut a deal with the DA.

 

It's obvious to me that he dead men did not have guns on them. You don't run away from a guy with a knife (or let him place it in your heart, repeatedly, after he beats you first) when you have a gun. Therefore, when you go from beating a guy senseless, to taking out the new knife Ray Lewis bought you the day before and plunging into the guys heart to finish him off, you've crossed the threshold of self defense to murder.

 

Why did Lewis do all of those things immediately after the fight if he and his friends had done nothing wrong? Why destroy his clothing? Why burn pictures? Why have his sister relaying messages to the perps? Why hire an investigator to get to his own people before the cops?

 

What is the legal standard for a conviction? The standard is simple in nature but very often in application very difficult to come to terms with. This case had a lot of conflicting testimony. The legal authorities were not able to conclusively prove their case. That is not an unusal situation with a case that has such a chaotic crime scene.

 

With respect to ML's behavior it certainly was questionable. You are giving it the worst intrepretation based on your judgment and biases, not based on knowledge as to why he behaved the way he did. Just because you have a strong opinion of the facts and motivation behind some behavior that certainly doesn't qualify as proof.

 

Lewis was ultimately pled quilty to an obstruction and false testimony. That was the right charge and the right judgment. You need to remember that opinions are often free flowing on blogging boards but they don't constitute as useful evidence in a case that involved a chaotic and conflicting crime scene. The judicial system is often very messy and frustrating to deal with. That is the nature of the beast. This isn't science where the application is more black and white. There is little purity in the law. It calls for a tremendous amount of judment. That is a quality that many scientists find a difficult to accept.

 

Why hire an investigator to get to his own people before the cops?

 

 

That is a very naive question that you pose. If you have a lot of money and a lot of resources you use it in such an important matter that could affect you for the rest of your life. Whether in health or legal issues wealthy people have advantages that the average person doesn't have. It's the reality of life.

Edited January 29, 2013 by JohnC

[NoSaint]

Here's a fun one - ray was caught buying banned substances this season. Won't be suspended as no way an appeal would be done by Sunday but that's a fun note to go out on

 

On espn at this point, links out there but on my phone

 

No failed test but tape of him ordering it it seems

Edited January 29, 2013 by NoSaint

[ExiledInIllinois]

Again, you would think obstruction of justice in a multiple murder case would BE WORSE than the murder itself. Especially when that obstruction was successful!

 

They should have said in the plea: You will get the slap on the wrist Ray if these two get convicted. If they walk... We are throwing the book @ you for fouling this whole damn thing up! But, I guess there was no book to be thrown @ him... Blame the screwy system and how it "rewards" different choices.

[Mr. WEO]

LOL, first off, you clearly have never been in a fight, especially one where you feel your life may be threatened, or you wouldn't have even bother to write those last 2 sentences.

 

Second, what is it you want to say Ray is guilty of? I am confused, because NOT ONE, literally not a single person or eye witness ever at any point accused Ray of stabbing anyone. So if he didn't stab them, what's left. Oh yeah, obstruction of justice...but wait, he plead guilty to that. Ok then, what else could it be...oh, you and others want to say he did not give up his friends...but wait, he testified that they had the knives, that he drove them the day before to buy the knives, and demonstrated how they stabbed them. So what more is it that Ray did or didn't do? It was the court and jury that found them innocent of murder and acquitted in self defense, not to mention it only took them less than 5 hours to deliberate (which is very short, especially in a high profile case like this).

 

 

 

 

Ok, so this statement right here just proves that you are just going to convict him based on his celebrity Ray could never win with you because in any case of being found innocent you are going to use the excuse that they got off because Ray is a celebrity. It doesnt matter that people who knew the victims testified to the premeditated robbery of Ray...doesnt matter that they also testified to bringing firearms to the club. Doesnt matter that just about every eye witness testimony has the victims starting the brawl by cracking a champagne bottle over Rays friends head. Doesn't matter that one of victims already had priors including issues with fire arms. Doesnt matter that the limo was shot up. Doesnt matter that at no point was Ray believed to have stabbed anyone. Doesnt matter that Ray identified the 2 stabbers and testified to how they stabbed them. Doesnt matter every single witness says Ray did not stab anyone.

 

All that matters to you is that he was a celebrity, therefore, any acquittal is going to be based on your perception that money bought his freedom. And lets not forget, Ray was no where near the name he is today back then at the time of event. He was just a young talented LB that most people had never heard of yet until the case. It wasnt until the Ravens SB run the next year that Ray the football player became a house hold name because of all the media attention on him after the case.

 

You are very easily confused it seems. I haven't said Lewis stabbed anyone. I have said repeatedly that I believe he aided and abetted 2 murderers.

 

I have never been in a fight where, after beating a guy bloody, i then ended his life with a knife to the heart. Next you will tell this stuff just happens. Anyway, I guess it "doesn't matter" that an eye witness saw one victim running for his life. Why on earth didn't these two guys just shoot Lewis's buddies who were beating on them? Answer that.

 

Also, you keep harping on this victims "serious" rap sheet. Yet it was anything but--by your own description. And the amount of time a jury deliberates means nothing. The OJ murder jury, after many months of highly detailed and technical testimony in the most famous trial ever deliberated for 4 hours before letting him off the hook. What's your point with that?

 

As for Lewis's celebrity, you are again confused. He was already a 2 time Pro Bowler and All Pro in his 4th season when he went to that party. People who watched American professional football knew who he was.

 

What is the legal standard for a conviction? The standard is simple in nature but very often in application very difficult to come to terms with. This case had a lot of conflicting testimony. The legal authorities were not able to conclusively prove their case. That is not an unusal situation with a case that has such a chaotic crime scene.

 

With respect to ML's behavior it certainly was questionable. You are giving it the worst intrepretation based on your judgment and biases, not based on knowledge as to why he behaved the way he did. Just because you have a strong opinion of the facts and motivation behind some behavior that certainly doesn't qualify as proof.

 

Lewis was ultimately pled quilty to an obstruction and false testimony. That was the right charge and the right judgment. You need to remember that opinions are often free flowing on blogging boards but they don't constitute as useful evidence in a case that involved a chaotic and conflicting crime scene. The judicial system is often very messy and frustrating to deal with. That is the nature of the beast. This isn't science where the application is more black and white. There is little purity in the law. It calls for a tremendous amount of judment. That is a quality that many scientists find a difficult to accept.

 

 

 

 

That is a very naive question that you pose. If you have a lot of money and a lot of resources you use it in such an important matter that could affect you for the rest of your life. Whether in health or legal issues wealthy people have advantages that the average person doesn't have. It's the reality of life.

 

I have clearly stated that this is my opinion. But you can't just say his actions were "questionable" and leave credulousness out of the discussion. As to your claim regarding the resources of the rich, I'm not naive to that. Most wealthy men with nothing to hide in such a situation would just call a lawyer. Would they start a serious of actions to destroy evidence and the orchestrate a plan of obstruction of an investigation? I just don't see why if it's a simple case as a confusing fight scene.

[JohnC]

You are very easily confused it seems. I haven't said Lewis stabbed anyone. I have said repeatedly that I believe he aided and abetted 2 murderers.

 

I have never been in a fight where, after beating a guy bloody, i then ended his life with a knife to the heart. Next you will tell this stuff just happens. Anyway, I guess it "doesn't matter" that an eye witness saw one victim running for his life. Why on earth didn't these two guys just shoot Lewis's buddies who were beating on them? Answer that.

 

Also, you keep harping on this victims "serious" rap sheet. Yet it was anything but--by your own description. And the amount of time a jury deliberates means nothing. The OJ murder jury, after many months of highly detailed and technical testimony in the most famous trial ever deliberated for 4 hours before letting him off the hook. What's your point with that?

 

As for Lewis's celebrity, you are again confused. He was already a 2 time Pro Bowler and All Pro in his 4th season when he went to that party. People who watched American professional football knew who he was.

 

 

 

I have clearly stated that this is my opinion. But you can't just say his actions were "questionable" and leave credulousness out of the discussion. As to your claim regarding the resources of the rich, I'm not naive to that. Most wealthy men with nothing to hide in such a situation would just call a lawyer. Would they start a serious of actions to destroy evidence and the orchestrate a plan of obstruction of an investigation? I just don't see why if it's a simple case as a confusing fight scene.

 

I don't understand where you are going with this? Ray Lewis plead guilty to his "questionable" actions. What more do you want? Whatever issue you have with his behavior he has been held accountable for it with his guilty plea. Again, what more do you want?

 

Your response to how wealthy people would respond to a situation that could possibly put them in jail for the rest of their life is odd. Unless you are an incurable dope you use everything within your financial means to challenge the charges whether you are guilty or not. He did some questionable things with respect to the evidence prior to getting legal representation. Once he got his legal team working they addressed his "after" the incident responses. He was held accountable for his behavior with a guilty plea. Again, what more do you want?

 

You are entitled to your prejudices. But you are not allowed under the law to apply them in the judicial proceedings. He was appropriately charged; he was held accountable. What more do you want?

[Ronin]

You have no problem with placing video taping a jets DC in the same category as obstruction of justice in a multiple murder? And Belichick needs to turn his life around?

This place is creepy weird on the Patriots.

 

Actually, you appear to have missed my point completely. I'll spell it out more simply for you.

 

I made reference to the two "turning their lives around."

 

Lewis has, at least to a large extent.

 

Belichick, after getting busted, and absolutely nowhere did I equate cheating on that level with a murder (that Lewis didn't commit BTW), said he was clean, but a couple of seasons after that, when Sal Alosi was busted for that punting thing with the players lined up on the sidelines blocking the gunners, and it was proven that NE first began doing it, after Spy Gate and after Belichick said he was clean now, hardly anyone picked up on that.

 

Again, my point, which I thought was clear, was that Lewis has in fact turned his life around, particularly as NFL players go. Belichick clearly lied once again and is a habitual liar.

 

Get it now?

 

Perhaps you didn't read the article linked. Ray's personal chauffeur recanted on his immediately following the murder eye-witness testimony. That's mainly what did the case in--that and Lewis having the other 7 clam up and lawyer up before the cops even spoke to them. Maybe "the other &" aren't spoken about because they didn't rent the getaway car and they didn't direct the purposeful obstruction of the investigation after the murders. And they didn't destroy their blood soaked clothing and mink coat, like ol' Ray.. who was "just watching as he leaned on the limo".

 

And how is this a media creation?

 

Belichick? Are you insane?

 

Read my post above. You too missed the point entirely.

 

As to the driver, perhaps you didn't read it either. I doubt the guy was there positioned with his hands on his knees looking like a referee at what was going down. I'm sure all the guy saw was a blur of the 16 men involved and reason dictates that there's no way he could have seen much of anything specific unless he was in the middle, which he clearly wasn't. It was at 3:30 in the f'ing morning too, or did you miss that part? It clearly wasn't lit like daytime.

 

Also, it might be best to look at all the recorded statements instead of simply what some desk jockey sports writer says about them, don't you think? And did you think for a second that maybe the guy really didn't see a whole lot specific, was probably just trying duck and cover in fear of his own life, and before he sent an innocent person down the river, he might want to be 100% sure instead of 10% sure? Who drove the limo away? The driver. Where was he, exactly, the entire time? Again, stuff that I'm not going to leave up to some sports-writing-desk-jockey telling me what was in reports and on record by police. That's the problem in this country, it's trial by media. It's reprehensible.

 

Either way, and again, did you read the piece? I thought it was pretty clear which two guys plunged a knife into the victims' chests. It said clearly who did it.

 

It's hardly beyond the realm of reason that someone says "yeah, everyone was involved," but then afterwards, and upon thinking a little more clearly, reasons that "hey, I really didn't have a great view, all the guys were over there," as I'm sure they were, "but I couldn't really tell who did what."

 

You need to apply some common sense here. I mean come on, you've seen a huge brawl before at sometime in your life, right? I've seen a whole bunch, and I wouldn't claim to know what goes on in them in the middle at all. I was on the outside and merely looking at a mob of guys mixing it up. Heck, even on TV sometimes, perhaps even in a football scrum, you know that ****'s going on in a "pile," but you can't see either.

Edited January 31, 2013 by TaskersGhost