Jock Sniffer Posted June 13, 2008 Posted June 13, 2008 How dense are you? Lynch's attorney obvious would have told him not to talk to anyone. Hell, he knew that they would be called to testify when he took the silent approach. If they did question him, he most definitely did not answer, as all of his attorney's actions point to it. okay
Fingon Posted June 13, 2008 Posted June 13, 2008 okay You are seriously suggesting that Lynch's attorney did this?: 1. Lynch talked to Wilson/Brandon 2. Admitted it. 3. Then says "Screw you Frank, you are going to have to indict us" While passing up a plea deal? His lawyer is not an idiot. He knew from the start that this would come down to an indictment, hell, the DA said that a week ago. Do you know how ridiculous you sound?
generaLee83 Posted June 13, 2008 Posted June 13, 2008 Wow, either this DA/Police official is a total bigot or he's got a serious axe to grind. What is his problem!? For you old timers... Issuing subpoeanas to follow up on an investigation is standard procedure, all who may possibly hold pertinent information can be subpoenad. All will testify in front of 23 jurors and see if there is enough for indictment which I assume there will be given the basic facts of this case. I honestly hope that none of them perjur themselves, that would be far greater of a concern than a hit and run. I worry the most about James Hardy in this case if he was a passenger.
zonabb Posted June 13, 2008 Posted June 13, 2008 The BPD doesn't issue suppoenas, the DA does. All your post did was make you look retarded On a more important note, the Ben Franklin quote you have there, it's a forgery, a lie, bunk. Franklin did not say "Wine is proof...." He said "Beer is proof..." Ben Franklin's attorney is going to sue you for libel and slander for even thinking for on second that one of the founding fathers of this country was a wine drinker, when everyone knows, revolutionaries and visionaries aren't wussified wine drinkers. Wine is for people who haven't discovered good beer, who've only been subjected to yellow fizz, ie. Coors, Miller, Buttwiper, Labastard Blow, Genny, etc. On with your regularly scheduled rants.
Saudi Arabia Rob Posted June 13, 2008 Posted June 13, 2008 The victim was wearing dark clothing, officers said. A hard rain was falling, and road conditions were slippery. Police said the woman had the right of way.“As [shpeley] crossed the road, another woman was walking in front of her. The woman in front of Shpeley was kind of dancing and singing in the street . . . like ‘Singin’ in the Rain.’ That could have distracted whoever was driving Marshawn’s car,” a law enforcement official said. “The driver never stopped, just kept moving south on Delaware,” the official said. “It could very well be that the driver never saw [shpeley] and didn’t know he hit her.” I still don't think that it's naive to think that this was an honest mistake and they didn't know what happened. The arguement's getting slimmer and slimmer, but 3 young guys, leaving a bar could have been distracted by a woman in the middle of the street dancing. Obviously there's still more that we don't know. Just wanted to get that out there before the priests start posting If this was the case, then why didn't he just come in the next day, publicly apologize, pay her off and drive on with the season hoping the NFL wouldn't suspend him. Now it appears we've got an entire team, to include it's 90 year old owner holding to "stop snitching." This is asinine. I can see why Jauron gave the team the day off, they must be totally distracted by now. I'm a lifelong fan and am appalled at the team right now. This is absolutely incredible and could now potentially derail the season. We've got James Hardy involved. I don't want the Bills to become like the Bengals.
ieatcrayonz Posted June 13, 2008 Posted June 13, 2008 How every rational adult on this board does not agree with this is beyond me! Ummmm.....maybe because the police themselves have said it is very possible that the driver didn't even know he hit the person. Are you supposed to stop your car every 10 feat and look behind you just to be sure you didn't hit someone? That would certainly increase the old morning commute. You seriously think that the DA issuing subpoenas to half of the areas #1 economic engine baecause some drunk Canadian broad got a scratch on her leg is good government policy?
Max997 Posted June 13, 2008 Posted June 13, 2008 EXACTLY!! What the hell is Marshawn doing hanging out on the town with 2 rookies and a scrub? does it really matter?
Max997 Posted June 13, 2008 Posted June 13, 2008 Ummmm.....maybe because the police themselves have said it is very possible that the driver didn't even know he hit the person. Are you supposed to stop your car every 10 feat and look behind you just to be sure you didn't hit someone? That would certainly increase the old morning commute. You seriously think that the DA issuing subpoenas to half of the areas #1 economic engine baecause some drunk Canadian broad got a scratch on her leg is good government policy? if they hit the woman hard enough to damage his car and no one noticed then they clearly were not in the right state of mind....how many times have you heard about a drunk driver saying they didnt even realize they hit something or someone..... I love how its now become the womans fault she got hit....so in your logic its not good government policy to investigate a hit and run because half the areas #1 economic engine is involved? It doesnt matter how injured the woman is, a hit and run is a hit and run
theesir Posted June 13, 2008 Author Posted June 13, 2008 On a more important note, the Ben Franklin quote you have there, it's a forgery, a lie, bunk. Franklin did not say "Wine is proof...." He said "Beer is proof..." Ben Franklin's attorney is going to sue you for libel and slander for even thinking for on second that one of the founding fathers of this country was a wine drinker, when everyone knows, revolutionaries and visionaries aren't wussified wine drinkers. Wine is for people who haven't discovered good beer, who've only been subjected to yellow fizz, ie. Coors, Miller, Buttwiper, Labastard Blow, Genny, etc. On with your regularly scheduled rants. Hey Numbnuts, if your going to try to discredit me at least try doing it with something with other than Urban Legend! Not everything your drinking friends in college told you is true.... The Myth of Ben Franklin and His Love of Beer While closing up the last edits of Beer & Food: An American History, I started to read Walter Isaacson's Benjamin Franklin, An American Life. Knowing me to be the history buff that I am, my wife picked up a trade paperback of the 2004 printing on one of her business trips. I saw this as a possible answer to something that puzzled me throughout the research and writing of Beer & Food; no matter where I looked to source Franklin's supposed famous quote "Beer is proof that God loves us and wants us to be happy," I came up empty-handed. To make matters more confusing, I knew that Franklin was very big on wine, not beer. Anyone who lived in France for nine years as the U.S. Ambassador to France, surely had partaken more of the noble grape in lieu of French beer (wouldn't you, beer drinker or not?) Nonetheless, scores of websites, writers and organization use this quote, typically without attribution or as an element of Franklin's Poor Richards Almanack from 1733 to 1758. I, however, couldn't find the quote, nor anything remotely like it. What I did find were Franklin witticisms that mentioned wine; * "Never spare the Parson's wine, nor the Baker's pudding." * "Take counsel in wine, but resolve afterwards in water." * "Women and wine, game and deceit, make the wealth small and the wants great." * "Be temperate in Wine, in eating, Girls, and Sloth, or the Gout will seize you and plague you both." Even rum gets a mention: * "He that spills the Rum, loses that only; He that drinks it, often loses both that and himself." In all of the issues of Poor Richard's, no mention is made of God and beer. Next, I tried searching through some of Franklin's writings, including his autobiography and letters to various friends and associates during his lifetime. Reading from his autobiography from 1706-1757, I came across this passage which might give readers and idea of what he really thought of beer, or at least, the over indulgence of it; "At my first admission into this printing-house I took to working at press, imagining I felt a want of the bodily exercise I had been us'd to in America, where presswork is mix'd with composing. I drank only water; the other workmen, near fifty in number, were great guzzlers of beer. On occasion, I carried up and down stairs a large form of types in each hand, when others carried but one in both hands. They wondered to see, from this and several instances, that the Water-American, as they called me, was stronger than themselves, who drank strong beer! We had an alehouse boy who attended always in the house to supply the workmen. My companion at the press drank every day a pint before breakfast, a pint at breakfast with his bread and cheese, a pint between breakfast and dinner, a pint at dinner, a pint in the afternoon about six o'clock, and another when he had done his day's work. I thought it a detestable custom; but it was necessary, he suppos'd, to drink strong beer, that he might be strong to labor. I endeavored to convince him that the bodily strength afforded by beer could only be in proportion to the grain or flour of the barley dissolved in the water of which it was made; that there was more flour in a pennyworth of bread; and therefore, if he would eat that with a pint of water, it would give him more strength than a quart of beer. He drank on, however, and had four or five shillings to pay out of his wages every Saturday night for that muddling liquor; an expense I was free from. And thus these poor devils keep themselves always under… From my example, a great part of them left their muddling breakfast of beer, and bread, and cheese, finding they could with me be suppli'd from a neighboring house with a large porringer of hot water-gruel, sprinkled with pepper, crumbl'd with bread, and a bit of butter in it, for the price of a pint of beer, viz., three half-pence. This was a more comfortable as well as cheaper breakfast, and kept their heads clearer. Those who continued sotting with beer all day, were often, by not paying, out of credit at the alehouse, and us'd to make interest with me to get beer; their light, as they phrased it, being out. I watch'd the pay-table on Saturday night, and collected what I stood engag'd for them, having to pay sometimes near thirty shillings a week on their account. This, and my being esteem'd a pretty good riggite, that is, a jocular verbal satirist, supported my consequence in the society. My constant attendance (I never making a St. Monday) recommended me to the master; and my uncommon quickness at composing occasioned my being put upon all work of dispatch, which was generally better paid. So I went on now very agreeably." Ben's disdain for too much drink brought about one of his least famous publications, Drinker's Dictionary, that listed 250 or so synonyms for being drunk, including..."boozy, buzzey, craked," and my personal favorite, "halfway to Concord." Franklin didn't seem to be much of a beer drinker or a boozer in general, I concluded, at least in his early years. The Benjamin Franklin Tercentenary does note, however, Franklin's first recorded purchase of an alcoholic beverage, a modest 1s, 6d, worth of beer, on December 31, 1739. Ready to give up on my quest to find the actual attribution to Franklin's supposed God and beer quote, I finally came across a letter from him to André Morellet, a French economist, written about 1779. READ THIS LETTER CAREFULLY; _On Wine_ FROM THE ABBE FRANKLIN TO THE ABBE MORELLET You have often enlivened me, my dear friend, by your excellent drinking-songs; in return, I beg to edify you by some Christian, moral, and philosophical reflections upon the same subject. In vino veritas_, says the wise man, -- _Truth is in wine._ Before the days of Noah, then, men, having nothing but water to drink, could not discover the truth. Thus they went astray, became abominably wicked, and were justly exterminated by _water_, which they loved to drink. The good man Noah, seeing that through this pernicious beverage all his contemporaries had perished, took it in aversion; and to quench his thirst God created the vine, and revealed to him the means of converting its fruit into wine. By means of this liquor he discovered numberless important truths; so that ever since his time the word to _divine_ has been in common use, signifying originally, _to discover by means of_ WINE. (VIN) Thus the patriarch Joseph took upon himself to _divine_ by means of a cup or glass of wine, a liquor which obtained this name to show that it was not of human but _divine_ invention (another proof of the _antiquity_ of the French language, in opposition to M. Geebelin); nay, since that time, all things of peculiar excellence, even the Deities themselves, have been called _Divine_ or Di_vin_ities. We hear of the conversion of water into wine at the marriage in Cana as of a miracle. But this conversion is, through the goodness of God, made every day before our eyes. Behold the rain which descends from heaven upon our vineyards; there it enters the roots of the vines, to be changed into wine; a constant proof that God loves us, and loves to see us happy. The miracle in question was only performed to hasten the operation, under circumstances of present necessity, which required it.
The Rev.Mattb74 ESQ. Posted June 13, 2008 Posted June 13, 2008 I have stayed away from this topic because it is becoming way extreme on both sides as both those for and against are getting way to extreme. For those of you supporting Lynch in this matter he is wrong, whoever was driving his car made a mistake and that person should be held accountable for thier actions. Also stop saying alledgedly because if it has gone this far it was his car. For those of you being anti-Lynch back off and calm down- they guy has millions of dollars at stake in a civil suit because we are a sue happy nation. His lawyer is having him keep his mouth shut to probably reach a fair settlement to avoid a civil trial. It could very well be at the time he did not know he hit someone( I doubt it but I will give him the benefit of the doubt), but more then likely he is a young man that made a bad judgement in a split second, and while he should be punished I think calling for his livelyhood(by cutting him) or a prolonged jail sentence, or even an absurd amount of money in a lawsuit is overkill. I think a fair punishment should be in order-pay for the hospital bills, perform some kind of community service. I know I wont win brownie points around here for this post but this topic is going crazy on both sides of the fence. Young men make mistakes not just profesional athletes but they get the media attention because they are who they are. ML could become someone our town crowns as a saviour in ten years, lets give him a chance instead of letting one mistake ruin him.
julian Posted June 13, 2008 Posted June 13, 2008 football is entertainment (mine atleast) and i just dont give a rats a$$ how the players conduct themselves anywhere other then the field. A few kids party and make a mistake and i'm supposed to be all offended, umm no thanks. i have family and friends to whom i hold high standards and could care less that marshawn is a rude self absorbed prick. the bills are my escape from the real world and i need marshawn on the field so i can cheer and jump around like a fool after he carries a few defenders into the endzone. cant remember the last time i sat around and bragged to my friends how the bills players are such great citizens. i hope marshawn plays every down this year and playoffs are reached because thats what im in this for, not to say my team is full of good guys...its entertainment and i want to be entertained !!
Fan in San Diego Posted June 13, 2008 Posted June 13, 2008 Wow, either this DA/Police official is a total bigot or he's got a serious axe to grind. What is his problem!? For you old timers... Oooh, he has this pesky problem called doing his job and enforcing the law. You think the victim might be pressing him for justice ?
Fan in San Diego Posted June 13, 2008 Posted June 13, 2008 Marshawn's lawyer attempted to plead-down the charges beforehand and was rebuffed. If anyone set themselves down this path, it was the DA. Lynch wasn't going to and still wouldn't do jailtime if he's convicted (which he won't without proof he was driving), so why wouldn't the DA accept the deal? The victim will get her money either way. We don't know that? The lawyer did meet and talk with, yes we know that. What we don't know is what they talked about. I'm guessing the lawyer was being flippant saying you have nothing on my client why are you bugging him? etc. etc.,
eball Posted June 13, 2008 Posted June 13, 2008 Not only would stopping and being a man have been the right thing to do ... enough of a reason to do it for most people ... but consider this. If the driver (Marshawn or not) HAD done the right thing and STOPPED, I dare say the situation would not have grown into the full-blown clusterf*<k circus it has now become. If Lynch and his drinking buddies drove away to AVOID trouble, I dare say they may have gessed wrong ... DWI, dude...DWI.
Pyrite Gal Posted June 13, 2008 Posted June 13, 2008 What happened to the character of this team? They got older (former Bill leading tackler and ordained minister London Fletcher) got hurt (former Pro Bowler and MBA student TKO) and both (former MBA Ivy League course organizer and NFLPA Pres Troy Vincent ). The Bills cut these players who had clear demonstrations and vocal support of using the gifts of NFL talent for other things than partying and having all the girls you can eat and did not replace them with other older players and internal team leaders. Perhaps the thought was that high quality guys like Jauron could set an example to replace them, but this view fails to recognize that the team character is not set only by having a good father figure but needs the internal reinforcement of having a successful peer or brother figure. The youth movement is necessary and good but it is not perfect and needs supplementation as well.
obie_wan Posted June 13, 2008 Posted June 13, 2008 They got older (former Bill leading tackler and ordained minister London Fletcher) got hurt (former Pro Bowler and MBA student TKO) and both (former MBA Ivy League course organizer and NFLPA Pres Troy Vincent ). The Bills cut these players who had clear demonstrations and vocal support of using the gifts of NFL talent for other things than partying and having all the girls you can eat and did not replace them with other older players and internal team leaders. Perhaps the thought was that high quality guys like Jauron could set an example to replace them, but this view fails to recognize that the team character is not set only by having a good father figure but needs the internal reinforcement of having a successful peer or brother figure. The youth movement is necessary and good but it is not perfect and needs supplementation as well. nothing has changed. Reality has just met up with the hypocritical pronouncements from One Bills Drive. You can talk about builidng a high character organization but when you continually bring in players with questions reagarding their character, like Hargrove, Lynch, Hardy, - expect to get burned eventually. Even Marv made "exceptions" - like when he brought in Reggie Rogers
eball Posted June 13, 2008 Posted June 13, 2008 They got older (former Bill leading tackler and ordained minister London Fletcher) got hurt (former Pro Bowler and MBA student TKO) and both (former MBA Ivy League course organizer and NFLPA Pres Troy Vincent ). The Bills cut these players who had clear demonstrations and vocal support of using the gifts of NFL talent for other things than partying and having all the girls you can eat and did not replace them with other older players and internal team leaders. Perhaps the thought was that high quality guys like Jauron could set an example to replace them, but this view fails to recognize that the team character is not set only by having a good father figure but needs the internal reinforcement of having a successful peer or brother figure. The youth movement is necessary and good but it is not perfect and needs supplementation as well. It seems as though Whitner is trying to fill that void, but they need others to step us as well (Stroud? Evans? McFly?)
ieatcrayonz Posted June 13, 2008 Posted June 13, 2008 I love how its now become the womans fault she got hit....so in your logic its not good government policy to investigate a hit and run because half the areas #1 economic engine is involved? It doesnt matter how injured the woman is, a hit and run is a hit and run Dude, the DA is clearly grasping at straws and going for headlines. Bringing in Ralph? Way to go after the real story. All he is going to do is annoy Ralph and make his family want to sell the team. Plus, the DA is probably hoping Ralph gets confused on the stand and mistakenly gets Lynch in trouble. I have as much or more respect for old people than anyone, but let's face it, Ralph could easily confuse Lynch with OJ and recount the wrong conversation. The words: "I hit her Mr. Wilson, but I didn't kill her." if retold by Ralph makes Lynch look bad. But it is very possible that Ralph had that very conversation with OJ. This DA has clearly decided to go after the Bills for some reason. The drunk Canadian broad is obviously just an excuse.
UConn James Posted June 13, 2008 Posted June 13, 2008 I would say it's a fair response given Lynch's refusal to talk. How smart does Lynch and his attorney look now? It's a felony to lie to a grand jury, so if Brandon met with Lynch about the incident and Lynch told him who was invlolved, Russ gets to be the whistle blower if he is asked to testify first. .....And if Russ told Ralph what happened, then Ralph might have the same opportunity. Great move by the DA. I would imagine that the Bills will suggest to Marshawn that he go talk to the police very soon. Sorry, but Lynch has acted in a stupid fashion throughout this. This was an accident and he (and/or the driver if not him) is turning it into a crime. Character? He's lacking a bunch. He does further damage to himself and the team for each day that goes by without resolving this. Stupid. Agreed 100%. This laundry list is all just intimation and intimidation on the DA's part. Subpoena the big bosses, and it puts some serious pressure on ML to talk first to avoid involving the employer who's giving him millions of dollars. The DA's primary job is to get cases resolved, and in this case he's using the NFL's prestige/visibility as leverage to get ML to want to come forward. It might be lowdown or below the belt, whatever you may, but in dealing with someone who has shown no morality, it's tit for tat. Subpoena power is in his toolbox, and since they've tried most of the other tools with no result, now they're pulling it out. The Constitution was written in a time when men feared for their mortal soul if they committed a crime/sin. The protections written into it were meant to prevent the state from scurrying up false charges and putting the burden of proof on the defendant to show they were innocent. But it assumed some sense of decency, morality and acceptance of responsibility that has now been totally lost since the NYTimes said God is dead.
BuffaloRebound Posted June 13, 2008 Posted June 13, 2008 Is this the same Frank Clark who claimed that 13 year old girl who was murdered in the 90's had consensual sex with a 50 year old, the same guy who was convicted of a previous murder in a similar way? Dateline NBC exposed Clark for being incompetent at best, vindictive at worst in their special on the Buffalo cold case detective who cleared wrongly imprisoned people. What do you have to gain by talking to the police/DA if you're Lynch? Even if you know you're innocent, why would you trust that they won't use what you said against you? Let them build their case. As far as I know, you can't incriminate yourself, so if the DA has the evidence to press charges, go ahead and do so instead of running to reporters. You can't expect someone to willingly talk to police especially someone who rightly or wrongly is distrustful of them, unless he has to. Lynch very well could have known he hit someone and drove away. But I don't know that and I doubt anyone here knows that. After watching that Dateline special, I would be handling this exactly the same way Lynch has been handling this.
Recommended Posts