YoloinOhio Posted July 15, 2015 Author Share Posted July 15, 2015 Is it just me or does anyone else think that when they see a post or reply from Yolo that it will contain either a link or a Tweet CBF i have opinions too. Sometimes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buffalo_Stampede Posted July 15, 2015 Share Posted July 15, 2015 It's odd. First the kids say he helped them after Aaron left, now he was part of it? Something's not adding up. They all knew eachother. The families knew eachother. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canadian Bills Fan Posted July 15, 2015 Share Posted July 15, 2015 i have opinions too. Sometimes. haha I know thats my point I am shocked when a post or reply doesnt contain a link or Tweet lol CBF Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thebandit27 Posted July 15, 2015 Share Posted July 15, 2015 It's odd. First the kids say he helped them after Aaron left, now he was part of it? Something's not adding up. Agreed...I'll be very interested to find out what really happened. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lurker Posted July 15, 2015 Share Posted July 15, 2015 Lets hope this is the beginning of getting rid of more rotten apples in this organization so the Bills can become a team to be proud of. OK. I'll add you to my list... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buffalo_Stampede Posted July 15, 2015 Share Posted July 15, 2015 (edited) Agreed...I'll be very interested to find out what really happened. Its looking like the Kromer's had a few too many. Career over. Edited July 15, 2015 by TheTruthHurts Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoSaint Posted July 15, 2015 Share Posted July 15, 2015 It's odd. First the kids say he helped them after Aaron left, now he was part of it? Something's not adding up. as someone else said, there are instances where arguments happen and then things clear up quick (and then parents get involved and they escalate again) there are also times when early reports are completely made up Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. WEO Posted July 15, 2015 Share Posted July 15, 2015 That's not the same thing as knowing all the facts of the case. But you know, details. Kromer can provide his own facts at any time. Until he does, this is the evidence as it stands. Facts (actaul truths) are often not known in a case. Just conflicting accounts that a judge or jury gets to parse and decide. Details.... Were you saying the same thing when Brady didn't talk to Wells? He did talk to Wells. I don't ususally respond to you because I feel bad for you---this is why. Technically WEO's right. The kid's allegations are undisputed because no one has come forward to give Kromer's side or an impartial story. Kromer just didn't talk to the cops and lawyered-up quick, which is smart on his part. Everyone "lawyers up"--big deal. He has to respond at some point with his story. My guess is that it won't help. His actions are simple battery. No one has suggested he was defending himself so it doesn't matter what else he says happened that night. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KDS73 Posted July 15, 2015 Share Posted July 15, 2015 (edited) Were you saying the same thing when Brady didn't talk to Wells? Ouch. True though. When it was Brady in trouble, most Bills fans were plenty happy to accept "more probable than not" Edited July 15, 2015 by KDS73 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wayne Cubed Posted July 15, 2015 Share Posted July 15, 2015 as someone else said, there are instances where arguments happen and then things clear up quick (and then parents get involved and they escalate again) there are also times when early reports are completely made up oh I'm sure this is a parents getting involved situation. One of the other minors goes home and his parents grill him about what happened and asked if he was at all threatened etc. They all knew eachother. The families knew eachother. I'm not sure what your point is. I know they knew each other what does that have to do with the story now changing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thebandit27 Posted July 15, 2015 Share Posted July 15, 2015 Ouch. True though. When it was Brady in trouble, most Bills fans were plenty happy to accept "more probable than not" "More probable than not" is the NFL's standard of proof; akin to a "preponderance of the evidence" required in civil court. This is a criminal case, and subject to far stricter standards (i.e. beyond a reasonable doubt). The difference is this: Brady did not fully cooperate with an NFL investigation to the letter of the league's rules, and therefore (by those same rules) is subject to punishment. Kromer has the right to remain silent according to the law; he can't have his silence held against him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted July 15, 2015 Share Posted July 15, 2015 Kromer can provide his own facts at any time. Until he does, this is the evidence as it stands. Facts (actaul truths) are often not known in a case. Just conflicting accounts that a judge or jury gets to parse and decide. Details.... Those aren't details, that's talking out the side of your mouth. Everything known about the case is coming from the media -- an unreliable narrator on its best day. The only people who know what actually happened aren't talking, nor should they be expected to. So, knowing that, it's silly to rush to any sort of judgement like Very Wide Right has and you seem to have. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob's House Posted July 15, 2015 Share Posted July 15, 2015 Its looking like the Kromer's had a few too many. Career over. If that's true it's a far greater injustice than the worst case scenario of what he's charged with. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted July 15, 2015 Share Posted July 15, 2015 Technically WEO's right. The kid's allegations are undisputed because no one has come forward to give Kromer's side or an impartial story. Kromer just didn't talk to the cops and lawyered-up quick, which is smart on his part. Then again... Everyone "lawyers up"--big deal. He has to respond at some point with his story. My guess is that it won't help. His actions are simple battery. No one has suggested he was defending himself so it doesn't matter what else he says happened that night. Yeah everyone lawyers-up but a lot also talk to the police or get their story out through others. So far that hasn't happened, which is why technically you're correct that the kid's story is undisputed, but it's obviously not the whole or correct story. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. WEO Posted July 15, 2015 Share Posted July 15, 2015 Those aren't details, that's talking out the side of your mouth. Everything known about the case is coming from the media -- an unreliable narrator on its best day. The only people who know what actually happened aren't talking, nor should they be expected to. So, knowing that, it's silly to rush to any sort of judgement like Very Wide Right has and you seem to have. Unreliable at best? Most of the details have come from the Walton County Sherrif's Office. So has the word that Kromer's son would be charged. Are they the unreliable media you are referring to? Then again... Yeah everyone lawyers-up but a lot also talk to the police or get their story out through others. So far that hasn't happened, which is why technically you're correct that the kid's story is undisputed, but it's obviously not the whole or correct story. Why is it obviously not the correct story? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted July 15, 2015 Share Posted July 15, 2015 Why is it obviously not the correct story? Because one side of a story almost never is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Very wide right Posted July 15, 2015 Share Posted July 15, 2015 OK. I'll add you to my list... No need, i'm not in that organization nor would I be since the Kelly era. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted July 15, 2015 Share Posted July 15, 2015 Unreliable at best? Most of the details have come from the Walton County Sherrif's Office. So has the word that Kromer's son would be charged. Are they the unreliable media you are referring to? The point is rushing to judgement about an event where most of the facts remain unknown is silly. It's silly because it's done from a position of ignorance and relies entirely on emotion. It's why trying people in the court of public opinion is not how our justice system is supposed to work. Certainly we can agree on that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wayne Cubed Posted July 15, 2015 Share Posted July 15, 2015 Unreliable at best? Most of the details have come from the Walton County Sherrif's Office. So has the word that Kromer's son would be charged. Are they the unreliable media you are referring to? C'mon, it was one paragraph in the report told from the father of one of the victims point of view. Sure, it's reliable in the sense that the arresting officer accurately put what the father said in the report. Is it reliable in the sense of that's how events actually happened? We have no idea. No one does. The rest of the statements, from the victims, from the Kromers, were redacted. There is no accurate/reliable description currently out there from anyone who was actually at the scene. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PlayoffsPlease Posted July 15, 2015 Share Posted July 15, 2015 "More probable than not" is the NFL's standard of proof; akin to a "preponderance of the evidence" required in civil court. This is a criminal case, and subject to far stricter standards (i.e. beyond a reasonable doubt). The difference is this: Brady did not fully cooperate with an NFL investigation to the letter of the league's rules, and therefore (by those same rules) is subject to punishment. Kromer has the right to remain silent according to the law; he can't have his silence held against him. The only people obligated to not hold his silence against him is any judge or jury involved. The Bills or the NFL are well within their right to hold his silence against him. I am not saying they should or shouldn't. But they have that right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts