Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Oregon State Football Player Charged With Assault
San Jose Mercury News | 11/14/04 | Associated Press

Posted on 11/16/2004 10:33:34 AM PST by onehipdad

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-88 last
To: VeniVidiVici

Try this link.
http://www.gtconnect.com/articles/2004/11/20/news/community/sat03.txt

It appears that possibly you are the dumbass.


81 posted on 11/30/2004 4:56:47 PM PST by GilesB
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 78 | View Replies]

To: sport

Show me the case where it has happened - then make the case for unequal treatment.

The Grand Jury determined that Rudulph was not making the racial comments, but that his friend was.

See this link: http://www.gtconnect.com/articles/2004/11/20/news/community/sat03.txt

It's bad law - but don't ask that it be applied wrongly in order to prove that it's bad law and don't assume that it will be unfairly used in order to make the point that it's bad law.


82 posted on 11/30/2004 5:00:42 PM PST by GilesB
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 80 | View Replies]

To: GilesB
It appears that possibly you are the dumbass.

I may be wrong about what happened, but I'm not the dumbass.

So the grand jury didn't indict on intimidation. What a shocker.

The story still doesn't make sense.

83 posted on 11/30/2004 5:54:55 PM PST by VeniVidiVici (Got Wood?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 81 | View Replies]

To: VeniVidiVici

Remember - the DA can indict a ham sandwich.

The story doesn't make sense to you because you refuse to accept the validity of the information I have presented you.

If you would wrest yourself out of your bigoted (there's that word again) mindset and accept that the fracas wasn't about interracial marriage but about one guy married to a woman that another guy had had a previous relationship with, then it would make sense.

The racial slurs were "yapping", they were not the issue - if you don't believe that, then you must believe that anytime somebody shouts F@ck You! in a bar they are making a sexual proposition - right?

Read the story, removing all racial references. Instead of the part where it talks about a white guy married to a black woman, substitute in your mind these words "Why would you want to marry this dorky punk when you could have my buddy, the studliest of all men?" Erase references to soldiers and football players - then it all becomes the standard old barroom fight that plays out across America in hundreds of places every weekend. If anything in this world makes sense it is that guys will do very stupid things when alcohol, ex-girlfriends and current boyfriends are involved.

Until you're able to do that - yeah, you're a dumbass.


84 posted on 11/30/2004 6:35:42 PM PST by GilesB
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 83 | View Replies]

To: VeniVidiVici

"I may be wrong about what happened..."

Gee, ya' think????


85 posted on 11/30/2004 6:37:52 PM PST by GilesB
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 83 | View Replies]

To: All
I don't have no time to read da noospaper.. I got dogs ta fight.

CSI: Portland Insiders say that Qyntel Woods, the Trail Blazers guard who is being investigated for dog-fighting allegations by the Clackamas County district attorney, might not face charges. Staging a dog fight in Oregon is a felony but Woods' house was searched almost six weeks ago, more than enough time to have charged him by now. Still, the evidence gathered is disturbing. A second search warrant revealed that investigators found an L-shaped room above Woods' garage that had been freshly painted. After using hemaglow lighting, which picks up traces of blood, police found blood smears and dog prints all over the room. Other items seized from Woods' house: marijuana, a bong made out of a Gatorade bottle, dog medicine, a treadmill and several blood samples. The team reportedly is trying to buy out the $1.1 million left on Woods' contract.
86 posted on 11/30/2004 6:43:17 PM PST by Splatter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 84 | View Replies]

To: GilesB
Remember - the DA can indict a ham sandwich.

Really? You must watch a lot of TV.

The DA/GJ can also choose to ignore testimony or not bring forth a charge as to go easy on the perp.

Let me say this again so maybe it can penetrate that which you call a brain.

If the guy(s) who perpetrated the assault used racial slurs, they should be charged under existing law. Whether that law is right or wrong, I don't GAFF.

It should be applied equitably to all until the law is changed.

If you would wrest yourself out of your bigoted (there's that word again) mindset and accept that the fracas wasn't about interracial marriage but about one guy married to a woman that another guy had had a previous relationship with, then it would make sense.

If true, then why was it reported that Rudulph claimed Sapp used a racial slur against him, which witnesses discounted? Was Rudulph lying?

87 posted on 12/01/2004 6:52:45 AM PST by VeniVidiVici (Got Wood?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 84 | View Replies]

To: VeniVidiVici

"...why was it reported that Rudulph claimed Sapp used a racial slur against him..."

Hmmmmmmmm - maybe the witnesses lied, or maybe Rudulph grabbed a handy excuse - I don't know. Everybody knows that racial slurs were flying - so the idea may have been laying there waiting to be used.

I think I first read about DAs indicting ham sandwiches from reading F. Lee Bailey's books - not sure, but it wasn't from TV.

You obviously don't know much about Corvallis, Oregon. There is no chance that the DA didn't bring everything he had before the Grand Jury.

I will guarandamntee you that if those four guys had walked into that bar and saw a black woman and a white man together, and there hadn't been a prior relationship - you would have never heard the name Rudulph...nothing would have happened.

Apparently Rudulph didn't use racial slurs (I have three or four sources on this), and since you say "If the guy(s) who perpetrated the assault used racial slurs, they should be charged under existing law" and since I have always said that it wasn't a hate crime and have repeatedly said that Rudulph didn't use racial slurs, grace would require that you acknowledge that I have been correct all along, instead of your silly comments. It is obvious to any impartial observers of this discussion that the majority of the brain power has been exhibited above my tag.

Just think of me as Mr. Science...."he knows more than you".


88 posted on 12/01/2004 7:02:30 PM PST by GilesB
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 87 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-88 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson