Steely Dan Posted April 11, 2010 Share Posted April 11, 2010 Link Updated: April 9, 2010, 10:15 PM ET Witness takes blame ORLANDO, Fla. -- A witness has taken responsibility for tossing a glass at a woman at an Orlando nightclub, according to the lawyer for Pittsburgh Steelers receiver Santonio Holmes who was first accused of attacking the woman. An investigator tracked down the witness, who gave a sworn statement saying he threw the glass because the woman was attacking Holmes, Adam Swickle said Friday. Swickle did not identify the witness, but said it was the first person the woman's friends told police threw the glass. "This is extortion in its purest form," Swickle said. Anshonae Mills filed a lawsuit last month claiming Holmes threw a glass at her, cutting her above the eye. In the lawsuit, she said Holmes and a police officer intimidated her so she wouldn't press charges. Mills changed her mind, and the case has been reopened by the Orlando police. Cool to see that one less idiotic gold digger doesn't make a dime. Link What might have been the factors that caused District Attorney Fred Bright to conclude that there was no case against Roethlisberger? Although the precise reasoning behind Bright's decision not to file charges will not be known until his news conference on Monday, it is certain that he analyzed the evidence gathered by the police on at least three key issues: the accuser's veracity, the accuser's drinking the night of the alleged assault and the accuser's injuries. To determine her veracity, the police no doubt checked every detail of the accuser's story in interrogations of her friends and others who were in the tavern. They also examined the cramped bathroom and reviewed other circumstantial evidence to determine whether it was consistent with the accuser's story. The police and the prosecutor reviewed the records of the accuser's visit to the emergency room immediately after the incident, looking for indications of intoxication and checking on the accuser's claims of injury. Any evidence that contradicted the accuser's story or showed that she was intoxicated would push the prosecutor toward his conclusion that there is not enough evidence to charge Roethlisberger. Looks like her story doesn't add up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steely Dan Posted April 11, 2010 Author Share Posted April 11, 2010 More on the legal fronts of players; http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=5071605 Police allege Thomas and Fadel followed Walker while he spent a night club-hopping and gambling, and talked Walker into willingly getting into Fadel's black Range Rover just before 6 a.m. at the valet entrance of the Bellagio resort on the Las Vegas Strip. Walker was found a little more than an hour later robbed and unconscious on a side street off the Strip. Police have said Walker was hospitalized for two days with facial injuries and a concussion. He told investigators about $3,000 in cash and $100,000 worth of jewelry had been stolen. Thomas was arrested a month later while he was free on $200,000 bail in a pandering, kidnapping, child abuse and statutory sexual seduction case in Las Vegas. That case is set for trial in May. Thomas has five prior felony convictions dating back to 1987 in California's Alameda County. Charges include cocaine possession, assault with a firearm, being an ex-felon in possession of a firearm and possession of cocaine base for sale, according to court records. $3,000 in cash and $100,000 in jewelry? IMO you're almost asking to be robbed if you're wearing $100,000 in jewelry. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steely Dan Posted April 11, 2010 Author Share Posted April 11, 2010 More on the player crime front; http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=5071819 Updated: April 9, 2010, 7:23 PM ET Starks pleads to misdemeanor MIAMI -- The case against Miami Dolphins defensive end Randy Starks has been resolved with the charges being reduced to a misdemeanor traffic violation. Court papers show Starks will pay a $219 fine and take eight hours of mandatory traffic classes. He originally faced a felony charge of aggravated battery against a police officer. Miami Beach police say Starks was driving a large truck packed with people along Ocean Drive last Memorial Day weekend when an officer came up alongside. Starks allegedly swerved slightly, striking the officer and pinning him against another vehicle. The officer wasn't injured. Starks pleaded no contest to a charge of failure to use due care. He pinned a cop against another vehicle and he's only being fined $219? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CarolinaBill Posted April 11, 2010 Share Posted April 11, 2010 well, it's official, Rapelisburger can get away with whatever he wants, simply amazing Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thoner7 Posted April 11, 2010 Share Posted April 11, 2010 well, it's official, Rapelisburger can get away with whatever he wants, simply amazing The article states that the investigation found Ben didnt do anything crimminal.... Guilty until proven innocent... but once proven innocent they are still guilty!?!?!? - These players are targets for dirt ball scammers trying to make a quick dollar by taking advantage of their fame. The crimminals are the ones lying and fabricating stories for some cash. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steely Dan Posted April 11, 2010 Author Share Posted April 11, 2010 well, it's official, Rapelisburger can get away with whatever he wants, simply amazing Not enough evidence = innocent in legal terms = don't assume he is guilty just because. JMO Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
silvermike Posted April 11, 2010 Share Posted April 11, 2010 The article states that the investigation found Ben didnt do anything crimminal.... Guilty until proven innocent... but once proven innocent they are still guilty!?!?!? - These players are targets for dirt ball scammers trying to make a quick dollar by taking advantage of their fame. The crimminals are the ones lying and fabricating stories for some cash. That's not what the investigation found. The investigation found that there wasn't enough evidence to convince the prosecutor that he had a reasonable chance of winning. That's not proof of innocence, it's just a determination that it's unlikely anyone could convince twelve jurors that Roethlisberger is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. That's a far cry from an affirmative finding of his innocence. Innocent until proven guilty is a legal standard. Nobody goes to jail until that's met. But it doesn't mean that it's crazy to believe it's still more likely than not that Roethlisberger - or anyone else - did what he was accused of. See O.J. Simpson. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
H2o Posted April 11, 2010 Share Posted April 11, 2010 Who knows whether Ben Ro is guilty or innocent. The truth behind the story is Ben keeps getting drunk and putting himself into bad situations. Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me. If he is innocent, he needs to start watching his step because things like this will keep building steam and could end up costing him his livelihood. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CarolinaBill Posted April 11, 2010 Share Posted April 11, 2010 It would be interesting to see what was on that tape that was destroyed, damning evidence perhaps?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pondslider Posted April 11, 2010 Share Posted April 11, 2010 It helps that the police "lost" the security tape from the night that would have shown what really happened. I'm sure that was just an accident though... Did Big Ben just evade a key legal tackle? Security camera footage from the night Pittsburgh Steelers star Ben Roethlisberger is accused of sexually assaulting a Georgia college girl is mysteriously gone. The disappearance of security footage at Capital City nightclub was reported by the Pittsburgh Tribune Review, which claims parts of the tape have been erased. A lawyer for the club produced this explanation: "The DVD system overwrote itself ... Had it just been deleted, they might have been able to save some of it." Link Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steely Dan Posted April 11, 2010 Author Share Posted April 11, 2010 It helps that the police "lost" the security tape from the night that would have shown what really happened. I'm sure that was just an accident though... Link Duncan said that footage showed the 20-year-old Ben Roethlisberger accuser hanging out before the alleged incident and police speaking with Ben afterward. Duncan was quick to point out, however, that the video did not show Ben and his accuser going towards the bathroom where the alleged incident took place. The lawyer for the club later said cops watched the video with Rocky "shortly" after the alleged incident, but they did not take the video with them at that time. Supposedly the bathroom where the alleged assault took place is fairly small. That comes from the link I posted above. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pondslider Posted April 11, 2010 Share Posted April 11, 2010 Duncan said that footage showed the 20-year-old Ben Roethlisberger accuser hanging out before the alleged incident and police speaking with Ben afterward. Duncan was quick to point out, however, that the video did not show Ben and his accuser going towards the bathroom where the alleged incident took place. The lawyer for the club later said cops watched the video with Rocky "shortly" after the alleged incident, but they did not take the video with them at that time. Supposedly the bathroom where the alleged assault took place is fairly small. That comes from the link I posted above. Yeah, but who really knows since it's conveniently gone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KD in CA Posted April 11, 2010 Share Posted April 11, 2010 Innocent until proven guilty is a legal standard. Nobody goes to jail until that's met. But it doesn't mean that it's crazy to believe it's still more likely than not that Roethlisberger - or anyone else - did what he was accused of. See O.J. Simpson. Holy apples to dumptrucks comparison, Batman! BR's first accuser was completely discredited, meaning 1) there is no pattern, and 2) makes him a much bigger target for the next skank out for a quick buck. I don't tend to give many passes to athletes for their misbehaviors/crimes, but there's been no evidence that BR did anything wrong in these cases. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted April 11, 2010 Share Posted April 11, 2010 Lynch should fire his guys and hire Holmes' and Roethlisberger's guys. So, when do those sit downs happen with Sir Roger, again? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gobillsinytown Posted April 11, 2010 Share Posted April 11, 2010 The article states that the investigation found Ben didnt do anything crimminal.... Guilty until proven innocent... but once proven innocent they are still guilty!?!?!? - These players are targets for dirt ball scammers trying to make a quick dollar by taking advantage of their fame. The crimminals are the ones lying and fabricating stories for some cash. I'm assuming they tested the girl for signs of sexual assault. It's typically called a "rape kit". The article doesn't mention it, but if they're declining to press charges, then it's likely that the results of the kit came back negative. That being said, Ben certainly needs to be more careful when he goes out. I think he needs to realize that he's not going to be able to "go out" like he used to. He's a high profile NFL player and he's going to have to undertand that. Even though criminal charges are not going to be filed, he's still subject to discipline by the NFL. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
firemedic Posted April 11, 2010 Share Posted April 11, 2010 More on the player crime front; http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=5071819 Updated: April 9, 2010, 7:23 PM ET Starks pleads to misdemeanor MIAMI -- The case against Miami Dolphins defensive end Randy Starks has been resolved with the charges being reduced to a misdemeanor traffic violation. Court papers show Starks will pay a $219 fine and take eight hours of mandatory traffic classes. He originally faced a felony charge of aggravated battery against a police officer. Miami Beach police say Starks was driving a large truck packed with people along Ocean Drive last Memorial Day weekend when an officer came up alongside. Starks allegedly swerved slightly, striking the officer and pinning him against another vehicle. The officer wasn't injured. Starks pleaded no contest to a charge of failure to use due care. He pinned a cop against another vehicle and he's only being fined $219? Attack me with a deadly weapon (car) and I'm a cop? You're getting shot................. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Just Jack Posted April 11, 2010 Share Posted April 11, 2010 They also examined the cramped bathroom ... Johnny Cochran : "If the man and woman doesn't fit in the toilet stall, you must acquit." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thoner7 Posted April 12, 2010 Share Posted April 12, 2010 That's not what the investigation found. The investigation found that there wasn't enough evidence to convince the prosecutor that he had a reasonable chance of winning. That's not proof of innocence, it's just a determination that it's unlikely anyone could convince twelve jurors that Roethlisberger is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. That's a far cry from an affirmative finding of his innocence. Innocent until proven guilty is a legal standard. Nobody goes to jail until that's met. But it doesn't mean that it's crazy to believe it's still more likely than not that Roethlisberger - or anyone else - did what he was accused of. See O.J. Simpson. I will rephrase - "innocent" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
liverpoolkev Posted April 12, 2010 Share Posted April 12, 2010 Link Updated: April 9, 2010, 10:15 PM ET Witness takes blame ORLANDO, Fla. -- A witness has taken responsibility for tossing a glass at a woman at an Orlando nightclub, according to the lawyer for Pittsburgh Steelers receiver Santonio Holmes who was first accused of attacking the woman. An investigator tracked down the witness, who gave a sworn statement saying he threw the glass because the woman was attacking Holmes, Adam Swickle said Friday. Swickle did not identify the witness, but said it was the first person the woman's friends told police threw the glass. "This is extortion in its purest form," Swickle said. Anshonae Mills filed a lawsuit last month claiming Holmes threw a glass at her, cutting her above the eye. In the lawsuit, she said Holmes and a police officer intimidated her so she wouldn't press charges. Mills changed her mind, and the case has been reopened by the Orlando police. Cool to see that one less idiotic gold digger doesn't make a dime. Link What might have been the factors that caused District Attorney Fred Bright to conclude that there was no case against Roethlisberger? Although the precise reasoning behind Bright's decision not to file charges will not be known until his news conference on Monday, it is certain that he analyzed the evidence gathered by the police on at least three key issues: the accuser's veracity, the accuser's drinking the night of the alleged assault and the accuser's injuries. To determine her veracity, the police no doubt checked every detail of the accuser's story in interrogations of her friends and others who were in the tavern. They also examined the cramped bathroom and reviewed other circumstantial evidence to determine whether it was consistent with the accuser's story. The police and the prosecutor reviewed the records of the accuser's visit to the emergency room immediately after the incident, looking for indications of intoxication and checking on the accuser's claims of injury. Any evidence that contradicted the accuser's story or showed that she was intoxicated would push the prosecutor toward his conclusion that there is not enough evidence to charge Roethlisberger. Looks like her story doesn't add up. Big Ben is a RAPIST plain and simple .and should be suspended If that was Vick this board we be on fire ......He has nothing on Marshawn lynch Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
silvermike Posted April 12, 2010 Share Posted April 12, 2010 I will rephrase - "innocent" No, that's really not innocent. We have a system that's designed to make it very difficult to convict an innocent man and very easy to acquit a guilty man. I'm not saying you should look at all the evidence and decide that he's definitely guilty. I'm just saying that it's not crazy to look at the evidence and still think he might have done it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts