- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Vilma's attorney: 10k "bounty" did not exist, did not happen
Posted on 5/11/12 at 11:01 am to Bayou
Posted on 5/11/12 at 11:01 am to Bayou
quote:
had a guy at work tell me today that when he saw the video replay of Hargrove coming off the field, after injuring Favre, that his yelling, "Show me my money!" was enough for him to feel the Saints are guilty
Hell, using that logic, it would prove the Saints aren't guilty of paying for cart offs since Favre played the entire game.
That would have to be filed under pay for performance, not pay for taking a guy out of the game.
0
Posted on 5/11/12 at 11:05 am to Fun Bunch
:getchaPopcornReady:
Just a thought, but this goes both ways. Deny, deny, deny works - UNLESS the NFL actually lays out it's evidence and it's damning. If they have evidence and laid it all out - I could see Vilma absolutely getting banned from the NFL.
Lots of IF's of course, but if the NFL says they have the evidence and throw it down - Vilma's foooooooookkkkeeeeed.
Just a thought, but this goes both ways. Deny, deny, deny works - UNLESS the NFL actually lays out it's evidence and it's damning. If they have evidence and laid it all out - I could see Vilma absolutely getting banned from the NFL.
Lots of IF's of course, but if the NFL says they have the evidence and throw it down - Vilma's foooooooookkkkeeeeed.
Posted on 5/11/12 at 11:09 am to DoubleDown
quote:
Lots of IF's of course, but if the NFL says they have the evidence and throw it down - Vilma's foooooooookkkkeeeeed.
I'm sure he knows that. And I think he's confident that they don't have it.
Posted on 5/11/12 at 11:09 am to DoubleDown
Why would they increase his penalty after releasing the evidence they used to determine his penalty in the first place? 
Posted on 5/11/12 at 11:10 am to AmosMosesAndTwins
quote:
Well, I'm sold, because attorneys always tell the truth.
Here's the thing though, LOGICALLY, the burden of proof is on the commissioner. LEGALLY, the burden of proof is on the commissioner. AT THIS POINT IN TIME, the commissioner has yet to provide ANY proof.
So why, exactly, are you so inclined to believe a person who has proven NOTHING?
Posted on 5/11/12 at 11:13 am to Sophandros
As an attorney, it is pretty rare for me to say anything unequivocal. You always want to leave some wiggle room in your words.
Posted on 5/11/12 at 11:19 am to Fun Bunch
quote:
As an attorney, it is pretty rare for me to say anything unequivocal. You always want to leave some wiggle room in your words.
so how do you interpret his words?
Posted on 5/11/12 at 11:29 am to thedice20
I think he thinks the NFL doesn't have sufficient evidence. Therefore, they can't prove that the 10k bounty actually existed. Whether it did or not is irrelevant, they can't prove it did and don't have the evidence.
It suggests to me an EXTREMELY high level of confidence.
It suggests to me an EXTREMELY high level of confidence.
This post was edited on 5/11/12 at 11:30 am
Posted on 5/11/12 at 12:10 pm to DoubleDown
quote:I don't see why he would.
I could see Vilma absolutely getting banned from the NFL
Posted on 5/11/12 at 12:18 pm to shel311
quote:
I don't see why he would.
I don't think he would be welcome back in the league if he turns out to be a bounty hunter AND a liar.
I don't think there would be a lifetime suspension per-se, but he would be toast.
Posted on 5/11/12 at 12:18 pm to Sophandros
quote:
So why, exactly, are you so inclined to believe a person who has proven NOTHING?
The intent of that statement was for comical effect only. I'm a lifelong Saints fan and wish, just like the next guy, that this god awful shitty mess would resolve itself.
I know Vilma didn't offer 10k for bounties, just like I believe OJ didn't do it.
Posted on 5/11/12 at 12:27 pm to AmosMosesAndTwins
quote:
The intent of that statement was for comical effect only.
I don't care.
My statement still stands, and is intended for everyone, not just you.
The FACT remains that the logical burden of proof is on the commissioner. The media and the fans out there either don't understand that concept or have conveniently ignored it. They took what he said at face value and ran with it instead of being rational, logical people and asking for evidence.
Another thing that these people did is fail to think through the concept of a $1,000 or $1,500 payment for an action that might result in a $7,500 or great fine. It makes no sense whatsoever.
But again, absent of evidence, I choose not to believe the commissioner's claim.
quote:
I know Vilma didn't offer 10k for bounties, just like I believe OJ didn't do it.
Try not to go full retard.
This post was edited on 5/11/12 at 12:28 pm
Posted on 5/11/12 at 12:33 pm to AmosMosesAndTwins
Sure, maybe the lawyer is telling the truth...but...if only because a lawyer can grand stand on a radio/tv show and proclaim his client's innocence, everyone here should also blindly think Sandusky is innocent too, because the government hasn't released an evidence besides he said/she said statements to the public to justify the charges.
Posted on 5/11/12 at 12:37 pm to Broketec
How in the world you can compare the two is beyond me. Where are the eye witnesses in this case? Where are all of the players coming out against the Saints players with statements that they have proof they were targeted? Where was the criminal investigation? Etc, etc, etc, Come on....
Posted on 5/11/12 at 12:38 pm to Broketec
I'm going to repeat this until it gets through everyone's skull:
Why are you accepting Goodell's claim without any evidence? The burden of proof is on him, not on the Saints or anyone else.
Absent of evidence to support Goodell's claims, no one should believe them.
Why are you accepting Goodell's claim without any evidence? The burden of proof is on him, not on the Saints or anyone else.
Absent of evidence to support Goodell's claims, no one should believe them.
Posted on 5/11/12 at 12:39 pm to Broketec
quote:
Sure, maybe the lawyer is telling the truth...but...if only because a lawyer can grand stand on a radio/tv show and proclaim his client's innocence, everyone here should also blindly think Sandusky is innocent too, because the government hasn't released an evidence besides he said/she said statements to the public to justify the charges.
In Sandusky's case, he is at least receiving due process, and will not be punished without adequate evidence to support the claims against him.
Posted on 5/11/12 at 12:40 pm to Broketec
quote:
Sure, maybe the lawyer is telling the truth...but...if only because a lawyer can grand stand on a radio/tv show and proclaim his client's innocence, everyone here should also blindly think Sandusky is innocent too, because the government hasn't released an evidence besides he said/she said statements to the public to justify the charges.
Vilma received a punishment, not charges. The government will have to present their evidence before any punishments can be handed down to Sandusky.
NFL hasn't shown any evidence. These 2 instances are not comparable in the least
Posted on 5/11/12 at 12:56 pm to Sophandros
quote:
Try not to go full retard.
Try not to get your legs tangled in that tampon string while you're jumping to conclusions.
Posted on 5/11/12 at 1:31 pm to Broketec
quote:
Sure, maybe the lawyer is telling the truth...but...if only because a lawyer can grand stand on a radio/tv show and proclaim his client's innocence, everyone here should also blindly think Sandusky is innocent too, because the government hasn't released an evidence besides he said/she said statements to the public to justify the charges.
quote:
Broketec
You win dumbest poster of the day. Congrats.
Posted on 5/11/12 at 1:46 pm to Broketec
quote:
Sure, maybe the lawyer is telling the truth...but...if only because a lawyer can grand stand on a radio/tv show and proclaim his client's innocence, everyone here should also blindly think Sandusky is innocent too, because the government hasn't released an evidence besides he said/she said statements to the public to justify the charges.
Ok, everyone is entitled to their opinions.
But this is just dumb.
Page 2 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News