VOR Posted June 28, 2008 Share Posted June 28, 2008 He didn't, he just said their were witnesses (unnamed of course) who saw differently. The witness who said he stopped went ON THE RECORD! LOL! Because the story used just his account and his name? That means the others didn't? Please. Again the DA didn't accept Shpeley's account of what happened. If he did, he wouldn't have agreed to a plea bargain to what amounts to a slap on the wrist. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted June 28, 2008 Share Posted June 28, 2008 LYNCH LEFT A BAR! THAT'S AN ESTABLISHMENT WITH NO OTHER PURPOSE THAN TO SERVE DRINKS!!!! AND SOME OF THOSE DRINKS CONTAIN ZERO ALCOHOL!!!! (I can shout with the best of 'em) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nodnarb Posted June 28, 2008 Share Posted June 28, 2008 Thats probably the worst strawman any Lynch apologist has put out there yet. Can you get this through your thick skull- LYNCH LEFT A BAR! THAT'S AN ESTABLISHMENT WITH NO OTHER PURPOSE THAN TO SERVE DRINKS!!!! HE DIDN'T LEAVE A MUTANT GREEN FLAMINGO RESERVE! You're clearly an idiot. And you take from a post only what you want to read, and ignore the rest. The fact that bars exist to serve drinks is largely irrelevant to the two facts that matter: 1. We, and especially YOU, don't know if he even had a single drink that night. I know I've been to bars many times without so much as having a drink. 2. Even if he HAD been drinking, that doesn't mean that he had been drinking enough to be impaired. You can go to a bar and have a few drinks over a period of time and not be at all impaired, legally or otherwise. So who has the thick skull? I think the majority of respondents in this thread know. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Big Cat Posted June 28, 2008 Share Posted June 28, 2008 Ah, yes. I see now that your argument is, and always HAS been about the possibility of him drinking, Eliot. Your silence is deafening. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elegantelliotoffen Posted June 28, 2008 Author Share Posted June 28, 2008 LOL! Because the story used just his account and his name? That means the others didn't? Please. Again the DA didn't accept Shpeley's account of what happened. If he did, he wouldn't have agreed to a plea bargain to what amounts to a slap on the wrist. Are you kidding? The severity of the sentence is only because she wasn't injured badly. This was going to be a plea bargain since day one, Clark never wanted to tango with Lynch's lawyers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lori Posted June 28, 2008 Share Posted June 28, 2008 AND SOME OF THOSE DRINKS CONTAIN ZERO ALCOHOL!!!! (I can shout with the best of 'em) You're right. That was pretty good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VOR Posted June 28, 2008 Share Posted June 28, 2008 Are you kidding? The severity of the sentence is only because she wasn't injured badly. This was going to be a plea bargain since day one, Clark never wanted to tango with Lynch's lawyers. If this were going to be a plea bargain since day one, why wasn't this deal offered on day one? Why did it take 3 weeks? Obviously if Caffery is accepting the deal now, he would have done so 4 weeks ago IF IT WERE OFFERED. Clark overplayed his hand, thinking he had more than he did, and when he found out he didn't, he started threatening to subpoena everyone. And the original charge would have been the worst class (A) of misdemeanor. That's just a step below a felony. It's a large jump from that to a simple traffic ticket. So unless you're claiming that Clark perverted justice, the case is what it is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elegantelliotoffen Posted June 28, 2008 Author Share Posted June 28, 2008 You're clearly an idiot. And you take from a post only what you want to read, and ignore the rest. The fact that bars exist to serve drinks is largely irrelevant to the two facts that matter: 1. We, and especially YOU, don't know if he even had a single drink that night. I know I've been to bars many times without so much as having a drink. 2. Even if he HAD been drinking, that doesn't mean that he had been drinking enough to be impaired. You can go to a bar and have a few drinks over a period of time and not be at all impaired, legally or otherwise. So who has the thick skull? I think the majority of respondents in this thread know. And how exactly has Lynch earned the benefit of the doubt? Why are you guys so trusting of him? Do you guys think he's going to read this board and see how you blindly defend him and send you a signed football? He's not some flawless person who could never drive drunk. Here's the facts- 1)Lynch is know to drink on Chippewa 2)Lynch spent the night on Chippewa (and strip clubs) 3)Lynch left at 330am (If you get pulled over downtown at that time what do you think the cops first question is) 4)Lynch was involved in an extremely avoidable accident 5)Lynch (and Steve Johnson) didn't feel a collision strong enough to damage a SUV 6)Lynch didn't say he wasn't drinking in today's statement If this was anyone besides Marshawn Lynch you would assume he was drinking that night. "But Elegant, he only had 8 drinks over 7 hours..................blah blah blah" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elegantelliotoffen Posted June 28, 2008 Author Share Posted June 28, 2008 If this were going to be a plea bargain since day one, why wasn't this deal offered on day one? Why did it take 3 weeks? Obviously if Caffery is accepting the deal now, he would have done so 4 weeks ago IF IT WERE OFFERED. Clark overplayed his hand, thinking he had more than he did, and when he found out he didn't, he started threatening to subpoena everyone. Lynch & Co refused to speak with the DA/BPD for weeks, how could they offer a deal? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VOR Posted June 28, 2008 Share Posted June 28, 2008 Lynch & Co refused to speak with the DA/BPD for weeks, how could they offer a deal? Ever heard of a lawyer? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elegantelliotoffen Posted June 28, 2008 Author Share Posted June 28, 2008 I answered your question. He could have said all the things he WASN'T doing that night. And no one has come forward and said that he was drinking that night. On the contrary, one witness said he was just drinking water. So again I ask you, WHERE IS THE EVIDENCE THAT HE WAS DRINKING? How come then in his statement he clearly states that he wasn't speeding? He also fails to address why he didn't come to the door when the police were pounding on his door the next morning. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VOR Posted June 28, 2008 Share Posted June 28, 2008 How come then in his statement he clearly states that he wasn't speeding? He also fails to address why he didn't come to the door when the police were pounding on his door the next morning. Again, where is the proof he was drinking, much less driving drunk? Sorry but failing to say "I wasn't drunk" and not addressing why he didn't come to the door don't constitute evidence. Why has no one come forward and said they saw him drinking? Answer me this without a "because everyone is trying to protect him" and I'll find reasons why he didn't mention all the things he didn't do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kota Posted June 28, 2008 Share Posted June 28, 2008 In the spirit of the Howard Stern show i shall quote Mr. Artie Lange. WHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted June 28, 2008 Share Posted June 28, 2008 Again, where is the proof he was drinking, much less driving drunk? You missed his initial message. Let me help you out. Everyone who is on Chippewa at 3:30 a.m. is drunk. Everyone. Lynch. The girl he hit. The eyewitnesses. Everyone. Or more to the point, you can't tell me that (fill in the blank) was on Chippewa at 3:30 a.m. and wasn't drunk!!! The internet really brings out the deranged. So you agree with me that he was probably drinking? I'm still trying to decide: will I miss this incredible insight when you're gone? Hard to say. Probably not. Hakuna Retatta, BF. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buffalo_soul-dier Posted June 28, 2008 Share Posted June 28, 2008 Did you know that Timothy McVeigh was convicted and executed on circumstantial evidence? i havent been able to say this for a very long time....but i think i hate you Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SnakeOiler Posted June 28, 2008 Share Posted June 28, 2008 Pedestrians ALWAYS have the right of way. She was drunk, and the TV report said she was DANCING into the street. That doesn't sound good. The size of that canadian cow, she was bigger than the SUV. Lucky she didn't cause anymore damage to Lynch's sweet ride. Why do you conclude Lynch was drinking? Just because you might be unable to fathom going out to Chippewa and not drinking doesn't mean others don't have the discipline and will power to do so. I've been the Designated Driver many times and stayed out there until after 2am without drinking. There have also been witnesses who've said he was at the same bar, but only drinking water all night. The justice system ran its course, case closed. Move on. He apologized, you can choose to accept it or not. Nobody really cares. Now, don't you hate it when people come to conclusions without having all the facts? No one here has all the information that the DA has. Thus, you are not working with the complete picture. You haven't interviewed the witness or Marshawn. DA has done both, and has asked them all the relevant questions. Based on that information, he decided on the appropriate course of action. You're not working with a full deck of cards, my friend. Lastly, your evaluation of the video and his mannerisms is similarly over extrapolated and amateurish. You are apparently unable to apply these principles to real life, which must be why you have a hard time considering opinions other than your own....your friends and co-workers would classify you as a poor listener, rigid, and unable to adapt to a changing environment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted June 28, 2008 Share Posted June 28, 2008 your friends and co-workers would classify you as a poor listener, rigid, and unable to adapt to a changing environment. And the rest of us just see him as a !@#$ing douchebag. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SnakeOiler Posted June 28, 2008 Share Posted June 28, 2008 How come then in his statement he clearly states that he wasn't speeding? He also fails to address why he didn't come to the door when the police were pounding on his door the next morning. How do you know the police were "pounding" on the door ? You lose more credibility everytime you make sh*t like that up. Marshawn lives in a big Fing house, and after being out all night was probably in a very deep sleep. I live in a 3800 sq ft house, and if all the doors are closed to our master bedroom, knocking on the door or even ringing the doorbell will not wake me up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SnakeOiler Posted June 28, 2008 Share Posted June 28, 2008 He didn't, he just said their were witnesses (unnamed of course) who saw differently. The witness who said he stopped went ON THE RECORD! How do you know who did and didn't go on the police record? Have you seen the court documents and DA files? Have you seen each and every witness transcript? Based on what you said and all the facts you seem to know that others do not, YOU MUST HAVE THE CASE FILES. I can only conclude then, based on your statement, spaces between paragraphs, and typing style, that you MUST HAVE burglarized the DAs office and stole the documents. People who type like you do have burglar tendencies. You are a sicko......and a Fing burglar. Or worse, a canadian. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John from Riverside Posted June 28, 2008 Share Posted June 28, 2008 And the rest of us just see him as a !@#$ing douchebag. I go with that theory Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts