stinky finger Posted June 4, 2008 Share Posted June 4, 2008 LOL!!! At least we know it wasn't JP. Hr would have put on his french maid outfit and cleaned up the debris. Lets not jump to conclusions here, Bill. JP'll do anything to ascertain community service therefore making him a prime suspect. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eball Posted June 4, 2008 Share Posted June 4, 2008 Point is you can't really draw a conclusion on WHAT happened based on the time it's taking... the reason it's taking so much time is because Marshawn's camp has been slow to cooperate. Hopefully his lawyer knows what he's doing. Sure you can. It doesn't guarantee you'll be right, but there are certainly factors and circumstances allowing such inferences to be drawn. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill from NYC Posted June 4, 2008 Share Posted June 4, 2008 So, according to you, marshawn was driving drunk, hit the girl, ran home and hid from the cops so the alcohol could wear off. Glad to see you are waiting until we hear the details. I hope that some cop never treats you the way you treat the Bills players. I never said that. Please show me where I said that he positively did this. But, unlike some posters, I wouldn't be in a state of shock if he did. Seriously, what am I missing here? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UConn James Posted June 4, 2008 Share Posted June 4, 2008 I never said that. Please show me where I said that he positively did this. But, unlike some posters, I wouldn't be in a state of shock if he did. Seriously, what am I missing here? I believe that would be the righteous indignation. You saying that a blood-alcohol test three days later would be scientifically unable to prove anything = You want ML executed for drunk driving and willful murder. The leaps and bounds of inference that people take here based on anything someone writes is astonishing. ----- Seriously, it would behoove ML and his lawyer to make a statement to the police post haste. The longer he goes, the worse this all looks. From a real-world perspective, even if he is perfectly innocent, complete radio silence makes police start to think you have something to hide. And if ML was driving or a party to the incident, noncooperation/nontimely manner makes them and the judiciary less likely to offer leniency. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beerball Posted June 4, 2008 Share Posted June 4, 2008 JP'll do anything to ascertain community service therefore making him a prime suspect. What means this? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beerball Posted June 4, 2008 Share Posted June 4, 2008 You saying that a blood-alcohol test three days later would be unable to prove anything = You want ML executed for drunk driving and willful murder. Nothing like overreactin UConn. You've got the player tried, convicted and executed already. Way to jump to conclusions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ieatcrayonz Posted June 4, 2008 Share Posted June 4, 2008 LOL!!! At least we know it wasn't JP. Hr would have put on his french maid outfit and cleaned up the debris. Can't be JP because no way he could have resisted the urge to clean up that debris. I was only hoping it was Trent for no prints/evidence. Real suspect list: Josh Reed or any of the tight ends because they couldn't hold onto the steering wheel. Parrish or any of the DBs as they can't see over the dash of Lynch's car. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
/dev/null Posted June 4, 2008 Share Posted June 4, 2008 Can't be JP because no way he could have resisted the urge to clean up that debris. I was only hoping it was Trent for no prints/evidence. Real suspect list: Josh Reed or any of the tight ends because they couldn't hold onto the steering wheel. Parrish or any of the DBs as they can't see over the dash of Lynch's car. I think we can rule out Schoebel. He would have had to loop halfway to Rochester before hitting the pedestrian Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UConn James Posted June 4, 2008 Share Posted June 4, 2008 I think we can rule out Schoebel. He would have had to loop halfway to Rochester before hitting the pedestrian because it's true. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
colin Posted June 4, 2008 Share Posted June 4, 2008 nyc bill, when you say the police can't talk to him cuz he's lawyered up, do you mean that they won't ask him questions as having his lawyer present will ensure that he won't say anything stupid that the police could use against him? if the cops can't prove it was marshawn driving, and there isn't strong enough evidence to link the car to the scene of the crime (the damage is just a scratch or something, witness can't say what the plate number was, etc.) can't he just ignore the whole thing and no one will press charges? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VOR Posted June 4, 2008 Share Posted June 4, 2008 The cops have no evidence that Marshawn was the driver of the vehicle, otherwise they would have arrested him by now. Whether he was really the driver, I don't know. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Senator Posted June 4, 2008 Share Posted June 4, 2008 This board just kills me sometimes - some drunken Canadien [sic] broad can't find her way back to the Peace Bridge, so instead she barhops on Chippewa 'til 3 AM, then runs into the street, jumps in front of ML's car and rips his mirror off - and some folks are blaming Marshawn??? We all know that if Marshawn was responsible for the whole mess, his mamma would make him fess up! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ndirish1978 Posted June 4, 2008 Share Posted June 4, 2008 We should be out trying to place blame on the REAL culprit, the drunk girl! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stenbar Posted June 4, 2008 Share Posted June 4, 2008 The cops have no evidence that Marshawn was the driver of the vehicle, otherwise they would have arrested him by now. Whether he was really the driver, I don't know. This is funny..Its his car that hit the lady..The Police have every right to arrest him and question him if they choose to..The District Attorney would listen and decide whether the evidence is enough to proceed or drop the charges..Or arrest the Ghost driver...If he is any kind of a man he will admit it and take his lumps and move on with life..Whether its admitting he did it or telling who was driving his truck..I am so sick of people who wont take responsibility for their actions.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Senator Posted June 4, 2008 Share Posted June 4, 2008 We should be out trying to place blame on the REAL culprit, the drunk girl! Exactly. Finally someone who gets it! Instead of noshing on bearclaws and glazed crullers, the cops should be grilling this girl about wrecking ML's luxury SUV. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarkyMannn Posted June 4, 2008 Share Posted June 4, 2008 This is bizarre. They say they can't do anything because they first have to find Lynch to talk to him. Meanwhile, Chris Brown says Lynch is at OTAs today. Keystone Cops is a term that comes to mind. Someone needs to tell the cops there is a doughnut shop next to RWS. That'll get them down there Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VOR Posted June 4, 2008 Share Posted June 4, 2008 This is funny..Its his car that hit the lady..The Police have every right to arrest him and question him if they choose to..The District Attorney would listen and decide whether the evidence is enough to proceed or drop the charges..Or arrest the Ghost driver...If he is any kind of a man he will admit it and take his lumps and move on with life..Whether its admitting he did it or telling who was driving his truck..I am so sick of people who wont take responsibility for their actions.. Wait, Lynch can be arrested for his car being in an incident? Is this true? Anyone? Again, obviously they can't arrest him for hit and run if they have no evidence of it. What they can arrest him for, and what they're threatening him with, is obstruction of justice because he won't talk. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted June 4, 2008 Share Posted June 4, 2008 Wait, Lynch can be arrested for his car being in an incident? Is this true? Anyone? Again, obviously they can't arrest him for hit and run if they have no evidence of it. What they can arrest him for, and what they're threatening him with, is obstruction of justice because he won't talk. They can't arrest him for his car being involved per se. If, however, he refuses to cooperate (refusing to tell them who had the car if he didn't, where it was, who was driving), I imagine they could hold him for one of a few charges - aiding and abetting, conspiracy, obstruction. Hell, even just as a material witness, I suppose. No criminal charges attach, though, to the owner of a car just because someone commits a crime with it. Civil liability, yes, but not criminal charges. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HurlyBurly51 Posted June 4, 2008 Share Posted June 4, 2008 So, according to you, marshawn was driving drunk, hit the girl, ran home and hid from the cops so the alcohol could wear off. Glad to see you are waiting until we hear the details. I hope that some cop never treats you the way you treat the Bills players. Don't worry about that. It's the rest of us who have to be leary of these dirty buffoons. Seriously, after watching that press conference, does anyone feel good these idiots are making life and death decisions every day?! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VOR Posted June 4, 2008 Share Posted June 4, 2008 They can't arrest him for his car being involved per se. If, however, he refuses to cooperate (refusing to tell them who had the car if he didn't, where it was, who was driving), I imagine they could hold him for one of a few charges - aiding and abetting, conspiracy, obstruction. Hell, even just as a material witness, I suppose. No criminal charges attach, though, to the owner of a car just because someone commits a crime with it. Civil liability, yes, but not criminal charges. Yep, that's what I thought. As I said, the cops are threatening him with obstruction for not talking to them. And the woman will likely get a nice out of court settlement because it was Marshawn's car and he has deep pockets. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts