Lurker

While the invite criteria is cringe-worthy at first blush, it's really no one's damn business what Shady does on his own time. lmo Or that the O-line can open some as large as Shady seems to get in the offseason...

16 pages is not enough...

Agreed. It's all about camp at this point, not whether he's guilty or innocent. Can't let it drag on, regardless of the resolution. Vic's blurb abot a grevience being filed suggests the FO knows he may get off on the charges but they don't want to wait for a decision...

He's gone. Vic's story had way too many hints to be speculative...

Consider the source...

Personal injury attorneys to the rescue! A dollar and a dream...

"The law only requires law enforcement and the justice system to ask three questions in self-defense cases: Did the defendant have the right to be there? Was he engaged in a lawful activity? Could he reasonably have been in fear of death or great bodily harm?" "It's a very low standard to prove preponderance," said Weaver, the West Palm Beach lawyer. "If 51 percent of the evidence supports your claim, you get off." http://www.tampabay.com/news/publicsafety/crime/florida-stand-your-ground-law-yields-some-shocking-outcomes-depending-on/1233133 Beyond the Castle: “Stand Your Ground”States that have adopted “stand your ground” laws have extended the castle doctrine to confrontations outside a person’s home, thus expanding an individual’s right to act in a threatening situation and protecting him against criminal prosecution and civil liability. The stand your ground defense may apply, depending on state law, in the following situations: Beyond the house. The defense may be available when the confrontation was in a person’s vehicle or on a person’s residential property, including the driveway, swimming pool area, or land around the home. A public place. The law may provide that, if an aggressor uses force or threatens violence against another in a public place, the person being attacked or threatened has no duty to choose an apparent safe way to retreat, and may instead use the amount of reasonable force necessary to fend off the attacker. Presumption of violence. The law may presume that an intruder in a home or vehicle intends to commit an unlawful act using force or violence—this means that the person raising self-defense need not produce evidence of the intruder’s intent. Presumption of fear. The law may presume that a person who uses force against an intruder in his home, residential area, or vehicle was fearful of violence. Like the presumption of violence on the part of the intruder, this means the person claiming self defense need not produce evidence of his fear. Once the defendant raises self defense, the prosecution has the burden of proving that the defendant did not act in self defense. http://www.criminaldefenselawyer.com/resources/stand-your-ground-new-trends-self-defense-law.htm

Rest in Peace, Van. You'll always live on in memory as one of the true greats...

Nightcrawler-ish...

Too many good golfers, IMO. The global nature of the game is way different than in Jack's day. There's probably some 13-year old kid in China that's gunning to be the next Jordan Speith even as we speak...

INcredible...

Just be sure to wear your lead-lined undies on those flights... http://www.ubergizmo.com/2013/11/yamamoto-comes-up-with-radiation-shielding-underwear/

OK. I'll add you to my list...

Thanks. This will be a really useful thread for managing my Ignore Prefs....

He'll have to wait in line behind the guy recommending they pull their Sabres sponsorship given Ryan O'Reilly's demolition spree of company stores...

I'll never buy another Adirondak chair. Those things are trouble magnets...

Tis how the Internet works...

Still trying to figure out Leroi's connection to the Bills. Secretary? Intern? Kelly Pegs? Each successive post seems far removed from what an insider would say, yet the heads up on Darby, Rex, etc. is hard to discount. Puzzling...

There's no down side to the Bills for doing this. They look like they're doing something when really they're not--since TC doesn't start for two more weeks. PR 101...

Fixed....

Mick's a pretty smart guy. I suspect he has someone do research on each city on the tour to come up with this kind of stuff (i.e., Darwin Martin House, Lombardo's restaurant, civic hot buttons like Brady's comments). This poster didn't just get whipped out of thin air on Friday...

Assuming he knew he committed a "crime." The extent of the property damage isn't spelled out that I can see. The facts will come out soon enough...

Yes, he left the scene. 'Fleeing' is editorializing....

Isn't that conjecture on your part? It could be just as true that after driving the truck a bit they realized it was messed up and parked to keep from doing more damage, deciding to walk home instead. Just like the Kromer thread, the facts will come out soon enough. No need to embelish things, IMO... Edit: The Timmy Ho's in question: https://www.google.com/maps/@43.184801,-81.396227,3a,75y,239.14h,87.83t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sOM5bQPiM5uJpqxtqSgGhpw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

OK. Semantics (and technical letter of the law definitions) aside, how much weight do statements from three minors (who may or may not be credible witnesses) have in meeting a "burden of proof" prosecutorial threshold?