Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 13, 2007 19:37:50 GMT -5
The profession of stripping reflects poorly on everyone involved. Especially Gorf.
|
|
|
Post by flatlander on Apr 13, 2007 22:49:01 GMT -5
I think it's really unfortunate that the NC attorney general chose the word "innocent" to describe these young men. From a legal perspective, they may have been innocent of the crimes they were charged with, but they weren't innocent in the general sense of the word.
This morning, I heard a clip of one of the players talking about how horrible the last year has been for him and his friends. Between the overreaching, overzealous, obstinate DA, the image-conscious school administrators, and the scandal-happy media and shouting heads, I'm sure "horrible" doesn't begin to do justice to their experience.
But then he had to go and assert that "We did absolutely nothing wrong." The fact that this young man was utterly blind to the distinction between legal innocence and sound moral judgment -- and that NO ONE CALLED HIM ON IT -- was, for me, a really sad indictment of the current state of our culture, where everyone is entitled and no one is accountable.
And, btw, the excuse of "boys will be boys" or "jocks will be jocks" or "kids will be kids" is growing very tiresome -- and it doesn't make the behavior right.
|
|
|
Post by Chance on Apr 13, 2007 23:07:47 GMT -5
The general attorney is retained to be involved in legal judgements, not moral judgements on situations where laws were not broken.
And they were "innocent in the general sense of the word." It's not like they got off on some technicality or something, the accustations were total @$$%*!*. They might (i dont know) have made some separate poor judgements but they were definately innocent in EVERY sense of the supposed crimes being discussed on national TV.
Speaking of "accountability" and "sad indictment's of our culture," why is there not more media outcry as to whether or not this woman is going to jail? She deserves to be accountable for HER actions. These guys could have gone to jail for a very long time because of some story she made up, and it seems reasonable that she herself should now go to jail for at LEAST 5 years...
|
|
|
Post by flatlander on Apr 14, 2007 0:27:15 GMT -5
Chance -- good job. You've completely demonstrated my point, which, in case you missed it, is that THERE IS A DIFFERENCE BETWEEN LEGAL INNOCENCE AND MORAL CONDUCT.
It wasn't the AG's province to pass any kind of judgment on whether the players exercised sound moral judgment, and I'm not disappointed in the substance of his LEGAL decision.
I'm disappointed in the young man who took the AG's finding of LEGAL INNOCENCE and turned it into a sweeping exoneration of his conduct from a MORAL perspective as well as a legal perspective. "We didn't do anything wrong"?! Please.
As for the woman, if the evidence supports a charge of false reporting, then she should be charged. If it doesn't, then she shouldn't be charged -- just like the charges against the players should have dropped when the DNA tests came back negative.
|
|
|
Post by Gorf on Apr 14, 2007 0:35:37 GMT -5
donneyp - good post 1wvb - good post Young men and women let loose in college. These kids (young men) are no different at any college. Young and stupid - lets not make youth a crime. Some young men and women "let loose" in college by no means do all of them "let loose", go on drunken binges, hire strippers to entertain their team(s), or worse. Being "young and stupid" is not a good reason for excusing some of the actions done by the Duke LaCrosse players before, during, and after the allegations brought against 3 of them by the stripper they hired. Under age drinking is a crime. An adult that knowingly allows underage drinking to happen within there home is committing a crime. How many times do we have to hear about some under age student going on a drinking binge losing their life because of alchohol poisoning? Let's not let being "young and stupid" to be used as a free pass for allowing such things to happen.
|
|
|
Post by Barefoot In Kailua on Apr 14, 2007 2:08:48 GMT -5
Your going to have to excuse my friend UCSBVall, Gorf. His Tin flask has replaced his better judgement.
Hey did somebody say stippers? WOO HOO!
|
|
|
Post by doc on Apr 14, 2007 12:38:46 GMT -5
After ready most of the post regarding this topic, I'm amazed at how many people on this board are so quick to continue to bash these college students who were found innocent of all charges against them. I'm not sure what bible schools you all went to but there are a lot of campuses with some wild Frat parties. Be careful about throwing stones at other peoples houses. It's great that all of you have such perfect kids that never made any bad decisions. We have a system in this country that people are supposed to be presumed innocent until proven guilty. If I were a parent of one of these players I would start reviewing tapes of all the media shows that through them under the bus, then move on to the school that cast them aside including over 50 professors that are supposed to be educated people and finish up with the likes of Jackson and Sharpton. Law suites would be flying.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 14, 2007 15:50:30 GMT -5
Read about these jerks. Listen to what they have to say. Besides the fact they hired strippers to perform in their residence, there is plenty more out there to prove these guys are creeps.
There's a huge gap between these idiots and your "perfect kids". If they were somewhere in the middle, I'd have a lot more sympathy. I've said they were wronged. They were. They are still creeps.
|
|
|
Post by Chance on Apr 14, 2007 15:58:40 GMT -5
I think it's really unfortunate that the NC attorney general chose the word "innocent" to describe these young men. ... Chance -- good job. You've completely demonstrated my point, which, in case you missed it, is that THERE IS A DIFFERENCE BETWEEN LEGAL INNOCENCE AND MORAL CONDUCT. If your point is that there is a difference between them, then why do you have a problem with the AG, who is entirely concearned with LEGAL matters, using the word innocent... OOC, what exactly is so evil about hiring a stripper? I wouldn't personally do it, but i don't see anything wrong with it. To me it's something that is traditionally frowned on, but has no logical case as "wrong."
|
|
|
Post by Gorf on Apr 14, 2007 16:49:42 GMT -5
After ready most of the post regarding this topic, I'm amazed at how many people on this board are so quick to continue to bash these college students who were found innocent of all charges against them. I'm not sure what bible schools you all went to but there are a lot of campuses with some wild Frat parties. Be careful about throwing stones at other peoples houses. It's great that all of you have such perfect kids that never made any bad decisions. We have a system in this country that people are supposed to be presumed innocent until proven guilty. If I were a parent of one of these players I would start reviewing tapes of all the media shows that through them under the bus, then move on to the school that cast them aside including over 50 professors that are supposed to be educated people and finish up with the likes of Jackson and Sharpton. Law suites would be flying. The key word in your defense of their actions is "some". There are a lot of campuses with some wild frat parties. The majority of students do not belong to fraternities or sororities. Do you honestly think the majority of college students are prone to regularly going on wild drinking binges? Why excuse and apologize for the minority that do such things by saying that other kids on many campuses do the same things? Do you think you'd get out of a traffic violation (speeding ticket, etc) by complaining to the officer that other people are getting away with doing the same thing? The 3 accused Duke Lacrosse players were indeed found to be innocent of all charges brought against them, yet they (and other players present at the party) admitted to other things such as under age drinking happening at that off campus home (that is BTW owned by Duke University) during the party. Some of the Lacrosse team's games following the incident with the stripper were canceled because players attending that party had admitted to under age drinking. Those games were canceled before the remainder of their season was canceled. Finnerty admitted to (misdemeanor) assault charges in the Georgetown area of DC for an incident where he and a couple of friends were out drinking (again under age drinking) and decided to start gay bashing and taunting a couple of guys walking in the area and ended up in fighting after Finnerty was (allegedly) "shadow boxing" right in one of the guy's face while showing off to his friends. Evans was the captain of the team. attended the party, and turned a blind eye to the under age drinking. You can the excuse and apologize for these players by saying they made a bad decision. Yet, the players on the Lacrosse team had been making a litany of "bad decisions" in the years prior to the party with the strippers. Their coach had been warned prior to the season to get his players under control because of their off the field actions. At what point does your allowance of kids "making bad decisions" cross over to being kids feeling privileged doing whatever they want because they assume they'll either not get caught, or be excused because they're on a highly ranked team for the university? How often do you continue to apology for "bad decisions" that are continually being made by the same kids / players? I agree with you that: - Evens, Seligmann, and Finnerty didn't deserve to have the rape, kidnapping, and assault charges brought against them in this case. - NiFong was out of control and will hopefully get his own punishment as his own hearings take place in the weeks to come. - Sharpton ought to face some repercussions for his actions involved in provoking actions against the Duke players. I've been trying to find email addresses (or blogs that allow commenting) for Sharpton to ask when he's going to step up and at least apologize to the Lacrosse players for his comments against them during the course of the accusations and investigations. - Jackson I'm not sure about since the interviews I've seen with him from early on in the situation had him saying things like "if the charges are true". - The 50 professors at Duke that got together in favor of the stripper and against the players ought to face some repercussions themselves and at least minimally apologize to the players for jumping to conclusions and disparaging the players. - There are plenty of civil suits the 3 accused players could (and might) file. Time will tell whether they do and succeed in such suits. They'd not likely get much from the stripper(s) so civil suits against them don't seem to make much sense. They could potentially recover their defense expenses with a civil suit against NiFong or against the 50 professors. We'll see what happens with all of that.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 14, 2007 20:19:54 GMT -5
OOC, what exactly is so evil about hiring a stripper? I wouldn't personally do it, but i don't see anything wrong with it. To me it's something that is traditionally frowned on, but has no logical case as "wrong." Well, we'll disagree on this. EVERYONE involved in "professional" stripping is debased by it, and no one is more responsible than the rich, spoiled sh*its who put up the cash. The terrible thing about this case isn't that these creeps were in the news for a couple of months (the vast majority of it having to do with their PR machines cranking out articles about how they were "innocent"), it's that the Right Wing Machine is now using it to promote its racist and sexist agenda. This now becomes all about how persecuted the Rich and/or White are. Give me a friggin' break.
|
|
|
Post by doc on Apr 15, 2007 11:49:00 GMT -5
Pessquenebeg, your list of information is accurate and very well stated. I want to make it perfectly clear though, I'm not "apologizing" for the Lacrosse players. My beef is the fact that well educated adults (DA, Media, Lawyers, Professors, Guest Experts on shows, Sharpton, Jackson, etc.) failed to remember the fundamental rule of law in this country. Because it was poor vs rich and black vs white everyone just through the rich white kids under the bus because they were either to scared of political correctness, looking for headlines, or only know how to follow instead of lead.
|
|
|
Post by Gorf on Apr 15, 2007 15:53:12 GMT -5
Evans, Seligmann, and Finnerty are having their time in the media now.
If they're capable of acting in a manner similar to the Rutgers basketball players and coach (ie, not trying to further inflame the issue) they have a chance to call out the people you refer to by asking them to speak about the situation now.
The professors, Sharpton, some of the various media folks that assumed their guilt with the rape / assault / kidnapping charges at the very least owe those 3 and the rest of the lacrosse team an apology for declaring their assumptions publicly against the players / team.
I don't think having friends, family, etc protray them a "little angels" will help their cause in getting those you point out that jumped to conclusions publically to renounce their previous comments and apologize for their accusations.
The DA apologized, however, it came off as more than a little disengenuous and more of an attempt to save his job than an true apology.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 15, 2007 17:13:20 GMT -5
Maybe I missed something because I followed this case primarily in Newsweek, but the coverage there -- almost from week one -- was all about the cracks in the case. It was almost as if the reporters were being fed info from the players' lawyers (who can believe it?!). Just who exactly threw these kinds under the bus, besides the DA and Al/Jesse (briefly)?
Again, _my_ beef isn't so much this case, but what cases like these do the next _real_ victim of rape. Or how the Right Wing Machine uses stuff like this to justify its own racism.
|
|
|
Post by doc on Apr 15, 2007 21:40:19 GMT -5
Maybe I missed something because I followed this case primarily in Newsweek, but the coverage there -- almost from week one -- was all about the cracks in the case. It was almost as if the reporters were being fed info from the players' lawyers (who can believe it?!). Just who exactly threw these kinds under the bus, besides the DA and Al/Jesse (briefly)? Again, _my_ beef isn't so much this case, but what cases like these do the next _real_ victim of rape. Or how the Right Wing Machine uses stuff like this to justify its own racism. First, let me say this is my last post on this topic since it's a volleyball site. Not sure how this even ended up on this site. Ruffda, I have enjoyed many of your post on this site. Very insightful, however I have to ask, do you own a tv? Everynight on numerous channels the media was parading people out early in the case throwing the boys under the bus. Also, I would be careful about your "Right Wing" assertion. So what you are saying is a Right Wing person is automatically a racist. At least I know where you as a Left Winger stands. By the way check your history book and see who past the Civil Rights bill.
|
|