Lynch's Silence

[Mickey]

The Levy/Polian character was always about on-the-field character - playing every down to the whistle, blocking when you've gotta, participating in special teams, showing up. Bruce, Jimbo, and the rest had plenty of off the field problems, they just showed up Sunday to play the game.

You are absolutely right. In fact, Marv once described precisely what he meant by "character" in very similar terms.

[bills_fan]

I thought that eyewitnesses are not credible?

 

 

Re-read my post.

 

I don't think any eyewitness at 4 AM on Chippewa Street can positively identify ML as the driver of the SUV as it clipped the girl. Its dark, the windows are tinted by the manufacturer and may have more tint that ML put on, and the eyewitness likely had at least one alcoholic beverage. Also, the eyewitness came forward days later. Any defense attorney worth his salt will likely be able to discredit this witness. I think the police know this and that is why ML has not yet been arrested.

[stuckincincy]

Damn man, you're obsessed with boners.

 

Not at all. I believe that was the first time ever, I typed the word.

 

Nice try at a patently false, self-serving, cheap character smear.

 

Don't do it again, though. If you do, I'll no longer be there to add a bit of support to your Vince Young propaganda campaign.

[Mickey]

You guys are all such a bunch of homers. You have to be an idiot not to put this together. Pretty simple, Lynch went down to the Chip, had one too many drinks, clipped a girl, got scared & drove away. He was the driver in the car, im 99% sure of that. My guess is this information will come out next week, he will be arrested & when it is all said & done he will get probation & a small fine, plus find himself right in the middle of a civil lawsuit. MY biggest fear is that Goodell is going to suspend him for the 1st 4 weeks. Hopefully, since this is his 1st offense this is not the case. You guys that are flaming appu just because he could see the obvious really need to take the rose colored glasses off.

What exactly are you basing your 99% certainty on that he had "too many drinks" ( I assume that means he you are 99% certain he had a bac over the legal limit?), "clipped a girl" (I take that to mean that your are 99% certain that he was driving the car and that the car actually struck the girl) that he "got scared & drove away" (I assume then that you are 99% certain that he was knew that the car made contact with the girl rather than with the curb, parked car or something else and that knowing that, he drove away). I am just wondering where this 99% certainty comes from based on what I think the known facts are at this point which are A) it was his car B) the police say they have a witness who pegs him as the driver but they also say they aren't sure yet who was driving.

 

The fact that you may be right in the end doesn't justify a present declaration of 99% certainty of all these facts based on the information currently available nor flaming as homers anyone who thinks the facts should probably come out first.

[ndirish1978]

Weren't there 3 other players in the truck as well? Also, have you ever seen Marshawn's buddies? They all have dreads, which would make it much easier to confuse him for someone else.

[BillsWatch]

Everybody is using the term "Hit and Run" like driver was already convicted in it. The term "Hit and Run" is used in a lot of situations including those in which a person was in a blindspot of a vehicle and driver never saw or heard anything and did not notice anything until they saw damage to vehicle. It is a category meaning damage / injury without stopping. There was a local incident where a construction worker's truck hit someone and he did not even notice any damage to vehicle or person and this was during the day when lighting is good. Police initially labelled it a "Hit and Run" but when news reported the license plate if the vehicle he called his company who put him touch with corporate attorney who contacted police. Three weeks later he still had not been contacted by police and he was not a football player.

 

Let it be resolved by police and process.

[Mickey]

Re-read my post.

 

I don't think any eyewitness at 4 AM on Chippewa Street can positively identify ML as the driver of the SUV as it clipped the girl. Its dark, the windows are tinted by the manufacturer and may have more tint that ML put on, and the eyewitness likely had at least one alcoholic beverage. Also, the eyewitness came forward days later. Any defense attorney worth his salt will likely be able to discredit this witness. I think the police know this and that is why ML has not yet been arrested.

Exactly. When you have a case with tons of publicity, and then, days after the fact a witness suddenly comes forward, you have to wonder. Add in all the circumstances you mention, and I am sure the police are concerned about this witness, assuming that witness exists.

 

One of the oldest tricks in the book is to claim you have a witness who nails the defendant even if you don't. The defendant then figures he is better off coming clean to earn points with the DA and get a good plea/sentencing recommendation. I have even seen the ploy used in civil cases by insurance adjusters.

 

I am sure you have seen an interrogation session on Law & Order where, making it up out of whole cloth, they tell the suspect, "look, we have witnesses who can place you at the scene, we know you had the motive, the only thing we can't figure out is whether you used a hammer or or a baseball bat...?"

 

We just don't know diddly at this point. The police could have a witness, a good one, a lousy one or none at all. They might be holding off to give him a chance to do the right thing or they might be holding off because their evidence if for S....

[DC Tom]

You guys are all such a bunch of homers. You have to be an idiot not to put this together. Pretty simple, Lynch went down to the Chip, had one too many drinks, clipped a girl, got scared & drove away. He was the driver in the car, im 99% sure of that. My guess is this information will come out next week, he will be arrested & when it is all said & done he will get probation & a small fine, plus find himself right in the middle of a civil lawsuit. MY biggest fear is that Goodell is going to suspend him for the 1st 4 weeks. Hopefully, since this is his 1st offense this is not the case. You guys that are flaming appu just because he could see the obvious really need to take the rose colored glasses off.

 

Your biggest fear in all this is that he gets a four-week suspension...and everyone else is a homer?

[kota]

Look, I'm not suggesting that Kelly and Co. were chiorboys. I know Jim's partner at Network and I've heard a million stories about what went on in the hot tub and back room. The difference is that Marshawn's car (with or without him at the wheel) hit a woman and left her in the road. I can't excuse that just because he's a Bill.

 

I hope there's some explainantion (like a cousin driving and an oblivious, passed-out Marshawn in the back seat) that clears him, but unlike some of you, I can't exonorate him because he's 22 and the woman wasn't seriously hurt.

 

I can tell you that at 22, I knew enough to call for help if I'd of hit someone with my car.

 

The orginal poster has mixed feelings about the current team based upon his perception of Jim Kelly and the band. I am saying that his perception of them then could possibly be incorrect and that times have changed since then.

 

Alot of people are taking Marshawn's silence as a sign that he is guilty. The only thing that is for certain was that it was his vehicle that is it. I seriously doubt the police have enough evidense to charge anyone in this case. They don't seem to know who the driver was. If they did that person would have been arrested and charged. It's pretty simple. The police can't pinpoint the driver so they are using the media to try and force Marshawn to fill in the blanks for them. I bet his lawyer has seen the evidence and knows the DA doesn't have a case against Marshawn. How can they charge Marshawn with anything if they don't know who the driver was. His car was involved in a hit and run but the driver can't be ID'd. I guess there is somekind of fine that could go towards Marshawn because it was his car but that is about it right now.

 

If the police can gather enough information to ID the driver that person will be charged. Nobody from Marshawn's camp is goign to say a word until that happens. The question is why should they? Because some girl got hurt and out of goodness of the heart? It's a dog eat dog world and it's all about self preservation. Marshawn stands to be fined, suspended, lose potentionally millions so of course he isn't giong to say a word until he has to. That "has to" comes when the police have a good case against him.

 

I am not trying to downplay the fact that someone got hurt and potentally drive away without checking on her. If it's a clear case of hit and run then someone should be punished. However, i am not stupid enough to ignore that alot of other things could have gone on that night around this incident.

 

I live in LA i have been down to clubs in the hollywood, Beverly Hills area at 2-3am. It's nuts. yes i understand it's buffalo but there is only one street to hang out there so everyone flocks there. People are retarded here in LA. I have seen people jaywalk on busy streets, yell, scream, holler, fight, hang onto cars as they drive away. I imagine it's the same in Buffalo. Pedestrians get away with alot of crap because they don't have a 2 ton car behind them.

 

Or maybe i play to much GTA IV.

[Gordio]

Exactly. When you have a case with tons of publicity, and then, days after the fact a witness suddenly comes forward, you have to wonder. Add in all the circumstances you mention, and I am sure the police are concerned about this witness, assuming that witness exists.

 

One of the oldest tricks in the book is to claim you have a witness who nails the defendant even if you don't. The defendant then figures he is better off coming clean to earn points with the DA and get a good plea/sentencing recommendation. I have even seen the ploy used in civil cases by insurance adjusters.

 

I am sure you have seen an interrogation session on Law & Order where, making it up out of whole cloth, they tell the suspect, "look, we have witnesses who can place you at the scene, we know you had the motive, the only thing we can't figure out is whether you used a hammer or or a baseball bat...?"

 

We just don't know diddly at this point. The police could have a witness, a good one, a lousy one or none at all. They might be holding off to give him a chance to do the right thing or they might be holding off because their evidence if for S....

 

I know most people go down to chippewa, stay out to 3:30 in the morning & do not have a drop to drink. I suppose lynch could be the exception. That is why I put the 99% in there. Also, you could honestly sit there & say you would not know if you hit/brushed up against a car or a person????? Seriously, & even if he did thought he hit a car he still left the scene of an accident, which brings me up to my first point that he was probably drinking & did not want to get a dwi. Im just using logic here.

[Gordio]

Your biggest fear in all this is that he gets a four-week suspension...and everyone else is a homer?

 

 

That is right, what else would I fear? I do not have a personal stake in this, I do not know lynch personally, it seems like the girl is going to be alright, what else are you scared of.

 

Tom, I know you think your smarter then everybody else on this board, but what else would you possibly fear?

[The Big Cat]

That is right, what else would I fear? I do not have a personal stake in this, I do not know lynch personally, it seems like the girl is going to be alright, what else are you scared of.

 

Tom, I know you think your smarter then anybody else on this board, but what else would you possibly fear?

 

If you didn't have any "personal stake" you wouldn't stalk/troll Bills message boards.

[Gordio]

If you didn't have any "personal stake" you wouldn't stalk/troll Bills message boards.

 

 

You know what, this board sucks during the offseason. I will see you guys in the fall.

[DC Tom]

I know most people go down to chippewa, stay out to 3:30 in the morning & do not have a drop to drink. I suppose lynch could be the exception. That is why I put the 99% in there. Also, you could honestly sit there & say you would not know if you hit/brushed up against a car or a person????? Seriously, & even if he did thought he hit a car he still left the scene of an accident, which brings me up to my first point that he was probably drinking & did not want to get a dwi. Im just using logic here.

 

If you were using logic, you'd say "Someone hit someone with Lynch's car and left the scene," which are the only facts you know. Everything else, you pulled out of your ass, which is the antithesis of logic.

[DC Tom]

Tom, I know you think your smarter then everybody else on this board, but what else would you possibly fear?

 

That he doesn't learn from this, and has worse lapses of judgement in the future that seriously hurt himself or others. Personally, I fear that he WON'T be suspended - the lesson "don't do stupid sh--" needs to be reinforced, and a thousand dollar fine isn't going to do it. That is, of course, IF HE EVEN DID ANYTHING.

 

 

But you just go ahead keep being a self-centered boorish pinhead. It's your right.

[The Big Cat]

You know what, this board sucks during the offseason. I will see you guys in the fall.

 

That was easy.

[UB Bull]

If you were using logic, you'd say "Someone hit someone with Lynch's car and left the scene," which are the only facts you know. Everything else, you pulled out of your ass, which is the antithesis of logic.

 

This is just a message board, not a court of law.

 

While the 99% figure is obviously hyperbole, can we agree that the circumstantial evidence sure suggests that Lynch likely did something wrong? Can we say there's a better-than-50% chance? I think we can.

 

While this is not proof enough to convict a guy in a court, this IS INDEED proof enough to discuss it. We're talking what-ifs here.

 

If, during the season we're 9-5, and we start discussing possible playoff scenarios, are you going to be the guy that jumps in and says "Hey guys! Stop talking about playoffs! It's not PROVEN that we will even get in the playoffs! Wait until we clinch it before you discuss that playoffs!"

[kota]

i gots some video of what happened. SFW.

 

http://www.break.com/index/dude-gets-hit-by-a-car.html

[Lurker]

If, during the season we're 9-5, and we start discussing possible playoff scenarios, are you going to be the guy that jumps in and says "Hey guys! Stop talking about playoffs! It's not PROVEN that we will even get in the playoffs! Wait until we clinch it before you discuss that playoffs!"

That would be the reasonable response--but inconceivable for the 'hot pockets' segment of TSW.

[DC Tom]

This is just a message board, not a court of law.

 

While the 99% figure is obviously hyperbole, can we agree that the circumstantial evidence sure suggests that Lynch likely did something wrong? Can we say there's a better-than-50% chance? I think we can.

 

While this is not proof enough to convict a guy in a court, this IS INDEED proof enough to discuss it. We're talking what-ifs here.

 

If, during the season we're 9-5, and we start discussing possible playoff scenarios, are you going to be the guy that jumps in and says "Hey guys! Stop talking about playoffs! It's not PROVEN that we will even get in the playoffs! Wait until we clinch it before you discuss that playoffs!"

 

Actually, Gordio was talking about logical certanties. He was jumping to asinine conclusions with no hard data, not discussing hypotheticals.