quote:
Because in criminal law, the accused has a chance to defend himself. You are at the very least implying that this kid didn't have that chance and was already executed(even though he did in fct defend himself and was acquitted). So which is it?

the kid was put in a kangaroo court and was presumed guilty and had to prove his innocence to a person with no rules, regulations, or even a set standard of behavior that he's trying to punish. it was a faceless coward-criminal who refuses to be publicly accountable for his actions

quote:
The 10 names are the people they believe are guilty of either performing or not preventing the supposed crimes.

we don't even know what behavior constitutes a "Crime" in this situation, though

quote:
Where is your proof for this? Or is this like the hyperbolic comments thing where you are allowed to throw out accusations without evidence but nobody else is?

i said i assume, which means it's mostly a gut feeling. mainly i presume it's a local due to (1) picking this story out of many worse ones to publicize and (2) the intricate knowledge of the people, especially naming somebody as a "booster" in the 2nd video. it's just a hunch. the coward won't reveal him/herself, so i don't know who it is

quote:
But anonymous only named 10 people they believed were at the parties to go after. And you believe there were more than 10 people at the parties. So obviously, something isn't adding up here. What do you suppose that might be?

what isn't adding up is their starting point...the information that they began this witch hunt with, because they started from a faulty point and don't even know who they were accusing

if they can't even get their list of 10 correct, how do you think they'd even know who was at the party?

*ETA: if you go re-watch the first video, the group claims to be getting information on all of the football team, all the administrators, and the parents of the alleged perpretrators

This post was edited on 12/27/12 at 9:33 am

1 ...

Report Post

Posted by Open Your Eyes

Member since Nov 2012

9252 posts

Posted on 12/27/12 at 12:21 pm to SlowFlowPro

quote:
no i'm consistently comparing the 2 systems

As I already said, only when it's convenient fr you. See above for another example.

quote:
the kid was put in a kangaroo court and was presumed guilty and had to prove his innocence to a person with no rules, regulations, or even a set standard of behavior that he's trying to punish. it was a faceless coward-criminal who refuses to be publicly accountable for his actions

Another irrelevant circle. The kid proved his innocence and was acquitted of his charges. How did he not have a chance to defend himself?

quote:
we don't even know what behavior constitutes a "Crime" in this situation, though

This is another one of those situations where technically it's open to interpretation, but only a retard would interpret it the way you are.

quote:
i said i assume, which means it's mostly a gut feeling.

So is now the time that I get on my soapbox about you accusing someone of something on an obscure Internet website about something you have no proofs of? Or is this another thing only you are allowed to do?

quote:
(2) the intricate knowledge of the people, especially naming somebody as a "booster" in the 2nd video.

They hacked the guy's email. Is it not possible they found a single email exchange about donating money to the school or football team, therefore making him a booster?

quote:
what isn't adding up is their starting point...the information that they began this witch hunt with, because they started from a faulty point and don't even know who they were accusing

Another irrelevant circle, so lets try this another way.

T = 10 + A, where T is total number of people at the parties, 10 represents the people anonymous is charging, and A represents the number of additional people at the parties that anonymous isnt going after. According to you, A should be 0 because they were charging everyone at the party. Also according to you, you believe T > 10.

So lets say there were 100 total people at the parties. According to you, that means 100 = 10 + 0.

Please explain how you came to the above conclusion.

quote:
*ETA: if you go re-watch the first video, the group claims to be getting information on all of the football team, all the administrators, and the parents of the alleged perpretrators

After re watching the video, he specifically says a list of men named in the preliminary doc who took part in the kidnapping and rape of a 15 year old girl. Not a list of everyone at the party, a list of the men who took part.

So tell me, again, where you got that he was accusing everyone who was AT THE PARTY.

1 ...

Report Post

More Sports - Replies to Post

Return To Board

Page 1

Return To Board