thebug Posted June 22, 2008 Share Posted June 22, 2008 you mean the text messages 6 hours after the fact? Please read the article. How did he know it was the police that took his car? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarkAF43 Posted June 22, 2008 Share Posted June 22, 2008 How did he know it was the police that took his car? yea everyone knows, it was repo Joe who took his car Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elegantelliotoffen Posted June 22, 2008 Share Posted June 22, 2008 There is zero evidence that Lynch was drunk. Really? You're right, no one who drives home from Chippewa at 330am is drunk. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elegantelliotoffen Posted June 22, 2008 Share Posted June 22, 2008 Were they driving a Porsche SUV? Have you seen those commercials that brag about not being able to feel the conditions of the road while driving? The reason these cars are so expensive is because they are insulated from the outside world. You cannot hear, or feel anything at all when in them. Are you oblivious to the fact that hundreds of cases of the driver not knowing someone was hit happen every year? He hit her with the side front of the car with someone sitting shotgun, there's no way neither of them didn't notice but were still able to see the dancing girl right next to her. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarkAF43 Posted June 22, 2008 Share Posted June 22, 2008 Really? You're right, no one who drives home from Chippewa at 330am is drunk. that's a broad brush to be painting with...... I drove home many a night from Chippewa and I was stone cold sober.... don't assume he was drunk because it's a high party area Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Posted June 22, 2008 Share Posted June 22, 2008 Really? You're right, no one who drives home from Chippewa at 330am is drunk. So everyone IS drunk at 3:30am on Chppewa? I have a very good friend who routinely hangs at the bar with us all night and never drinks a drop. Assuming he was drunk is just as erroneous and assuming he was sober. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thebug Posted June 22, 2008 Share Posted June 22, 2008 Sometimes when you commit a crime and you play all of your cards right, things work out in your favor, this will likely be one of those times.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elegantelliotoffen Posted June 22, 2008 Share Posted June 22, 2008 So everyone IS drunk at 3:30am on Chppewa? I have a very good friend who routinely hangs at the bar with us all night and never drinks a drop. Assuming he was drunk is just as erroneous and assuming he was sober. That's true but your friend doesn't have a history of bringing his own booze into Chippewa bars does he? Lynch may not of been completely hammered but he was definitely drinking and likely above the limit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarkAF43 Posted June 22, 2008 Share Posted June 22, 2008 That's true but your friend doesn't have a history of bringing his own booze into Chippewa bars does he? Lynch may not of been completely hammered but he was definitely drinking and likely above the limit. what proof do you have of that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elegantelliotoffen Posted June 22, 2008 Share Posted June 22, 2008 what proof do you have of that? It's a logical inference based on his past behavior and his behavior of that night. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarkAF43 Posted June 22, 2008 Share Posted June 22, 2008 It's a logical inference based on his past behavior and his behavior of that night. really? Cause if you can't prove it that night, well you got nothing anyone see him drinking? anyone see him drunk?-- better yet, did you? no? well that's a pretty ballsy statement Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adam Posted June 22, 2008 Share Posted June 22, 2008 really? Cause if you can't prove it that night, well you got nothing anyone see him drinking? anyone see him drunk?-- better yet, did you? no? well that's a pretty ballsy statement Actually, in a civil case you don't have to prove that. If he regularly drinks at the bar and then left the bar and was involved in a hit and run....... A criminal case on the other hand- it would have to be beyond a reasonable doubt Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thebug Posted June 22, 2008 Share Posted June 22, 2008 Actually, in a civil case you don't have to prove that. If he regularly drinks at the bar and then left the bar and was involved in a hit and run....... A criminal case on the other hand- it would have to be beyond a reasonable doubt Yah just ask OJ about civil law..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elegantelliotoffen Posted June 22, 2008 Share Posted June 22, 2008 really? Cause if you can't prove it that night, well you got nothing anyone see him drinking? anyone see him drunk?-- better yet, did you? no? well that's a pretty ballsy statement If people can make all these unfound statements about the victim why can't I make similiar comments about Lynch? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adam Posted June 22, 2008 Share Posted June 22, 2008 Yah just ask OJ about civil law..... I wouldn't give than loser the time of day Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
outsidethebox Posted June 22, 2008 Share Posted June 22, 2008 If people can make all these unfound statements about the victim why can't I make similiar comments about Lynch? Because he is a Buffalo Bill! They can pretty much do anything and have some idiot defend them. Does the word hypocrite ring a bell? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elegantelliotoffen Posted June 22, 2008 Share Posted June 22, 2008 Because he is a Buffalo Bill! They can pretty much do anything and have some idiot defend them. Does the word hypocrite ring a bell? They should realize that Lynch doesn't need more sycophants and enablers in his life but instead someone to knock some sense into him. If this woman had been seriously injured he'd have lost his career and his freedom and he would have screw his teamamtes over big time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarkAF43 Posted June 22, 2008 Share Posted June 22, 2008 Actually, in a civil case you don't have to prove that. If he regularly drinks at the bar and then left the bar and was involved in a hit and run....... A criminal case on the other hand- it would have to be beyond a reasonable doubt Ok should have clarified, i was referring to the criminal case, not the civil one Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VOR Posted June 22, 2008 Author Share Posted June 22, 2008 Were they driving a Porsche SUV? Have you seen those commercials that brag about not being able to feel the conditions of the road while driving? The reason these cars are so expensive is because they are insulated from the outside world. You cannot hear, or feel anything at all when in them. Are you oblivious to the fact that hundreds of cases of the driver not knowing someone was hit happen every year? Have you ever been in one, much less when music was blaring? I have (although not while it was also raining, and we didn't hit anyone). Despite your sarcasm, you're unwittingly correct about not being able to hear anything outside the car. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VOR Posted June 22, 2008 Author Share Posted June 22, 2008 Really? You're right, no one who drives home from Chippewa at 330am is drunk. LOL! So going a step further, anyone who walks in that area at 33am is also drunk, especially those who sing and dance in the middle of the street, in the rain. So the victim's and her friends' testimony is not credible. Thanks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts