Kobe's Accuser Picture.....supposedly

[Mini D]

Originally posted by Creamo
Oh, I’m sure like Michael Jordan’s wife she knew going in to the marriage the token snow flake 19 year olds were part of the deal.

And yes, being a broke bellybutton blue collar worker, with a wife that would castrate me in my sleep if I ever cheated, gives me pure entertainment that these retards with all their fame and money, are complete failures as men.

 And this isn’t “I’m a superior man post”, I’m not saying if Rude posts he went to shoot skeet I’ll  post in reply that I hunt pheasant and bring them home as food for “Little Half-pint”, or some gay veil of manhood, but I’d be damned if I’d ever cheat on my wife.

Kobe is rich, he’s a fool, and broke dick as a man. Regardless.

Well said tard.

MiniD

[Sixpence]

Originally posted by Steve
Like the pepetrator, the victim is only ALLEGED until the jury decides a crime has been committed.

Sorry Sixpence, but you are flat wrong.

How can there be an arrest or charges filed w/o a crime?

"Steve, you are under arrest for stealing a car that we think has been stolen, but we're not sure yet. A jury will decide if the car has been stolen."

[midnight Target]

Originally posted by Creamo
Oh, I’m sure like Michael Jordan’s wife she knew going in to the marriage the token snow flake 19 year olds were part of the deal.

And yes, being a broke bellybutton blue collar worker, with a wife that would castrate me in my sleep if I ever cheated, gives me pure entertainment that these retards with all their fame and money, are complete failures as men.

 And this isn’t “I’m a superior man post”, I’m not saying if Rude posts he went to shoot skeet I’ll  post in reply that I hunt pheasant and bring them home as food for “Little Half-pint”, or some gay veil of manhood, but I’d be damned if I’d ever cheat on my wife.

Kobe is rich, he’s a fool, and broke dick as a man. Regardless.

Dam Creamo... that was darn near eloquent.

[capt. apathy]

How can there be an arrest or charges filed w/o a crime?

"Steve, you are under arrest for stealing a car that we think has been stolen, but we're not sure yet. A jury will decide if the car has been stolen."

let me clean up your analogy, if I may.  steve is under arrest for stealing a car.  the car was reported stolen.  steve said it was loaned to him.

if it goes to court and it turns out that it was loaned to him, then there is no crime, the car was not stolen.  again, no victim.

a very close analogy for the kobe case.  she says he took it without permission,  kobe says she gave him the 'go ahead'

[john9001]

i never liked analogys ,because they are never right. what this comes down to is did he or didn't he and thats for the jury to decide, so all this is just blah blah.

but what amazes me is how some people think someone that is paid millions of dollars to play a kids game is some kind of a hero and can do no wrong.

[Sixpence]

I can't get the two words I want

[Holden McGroin]

Originally posted by capt. apathy
let me clean up your analogy, if I may.  steve is under arrest for stealing a car.  the car was reported stolen.  steve said it was loaned to him.

if it goes to court and it turns out that it was loaned to him, then there is no crime, the car was not stolen.  again, no victim.

a very close analogy for the kobe case.  she says he took it without permission,  kobe says she gave him the 'go ahead'

What kind of car we talkin' about?

[SaburoS]

Originally posted by Holden McGroin
What kind of car we talkin' about?

Funk's subaru?

[funkedup]

HEY WHERE'S MY CAR?!?!?
WTF?!?

[SaburoS]

Originally posted by funkedup
HEY WHERE'S MY CAR?!?!?
WTF?!?

But if no one gets convicted of stealing it, I guess you aren't a victim.

[Hortlund]

Originally posted by capt. apathy

if it goes to court and it turns out that it was loaned to him, then there is no crime, the car was not stolen.  again, no victim.
 

The thing most of you fail to understand, and what might be confusing you, is that the courts never rule along the lines of "the court finds that the car was loaned and not stolen", instead they dissmiss the case, or find that there is not enough evidence for a guilty-verdict.

There is a difference. Because if the court would rule like that "the car was loaned, not stolen" then it would at the same time rule that the one reporting the car stolen had been lying, and that in itself is a crime. But that would lead to the rather absurd consequence that that guy would be found guilty of a crime without a trial. So therefore the courts do not touch the "what really happened"-issue in case of a not guilty-verdict...they just say that there is not sufficient evidence to find the accused guilty, and then move on.

In some extreme cases where it becomes obvious that the one reporting the crime has lied about it, the prosecuter might file new charges against him. But that is very rare.

[Holden McGroin]

You see if the car were a Gremlin, it was put out on the curb to be picked up. Hence when it is removed from where it was parked, it was not stolen.

Pintos and Yugos are perhaps in the same category.

[SOB]

You have lost it Hortland.  Time to get back on the meds.  I suggest the full recommended dosage...don't skimp.


SOB

[capt. apathy]

But that would lead to the rather absurd consequence that that guy would be found guilty of a crime without a trial.

obviously the jury only decides one case at a time. so they decide if they believed the car was loaned (or at least enough doubt was raised that they are not sure it wasn't).  and based on this they decide if they believe a crime was committed.  

since the case for filing a false report also requires proof beyond reasonable doubt there can be no automatic guilties.  

but all this is just legal back pedaling.

  is it really that hard for you just to admit that you where wrong, and that it is very possible (just admit possible not definite, or even likely) that the girl is making false charges, and that if she is then she's not really a victim?

that was the original argument, when you said that she was a victim even if he didn’t rape her, and just because she said it was rape she would automatically be a victim  regardless of the courts verdict. and all these analogies and other arguments about rules of law that we wandered down where just an effort to get you to see what was right in front of your face

[Hortlund]

Originally posted by SOB
You have lost it Hortland.  Time to get back on the meds.  I suggest the full recommended dosage...don't skimp.


SOB

Is that the best you can do Mr Mason?