Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 30 of 44
  1. #1
    Registered User
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    1,020
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default montero cleared of all charges..

    looks like hes in the clear... Now he can concentrate on scoring
    more goals..


    http://www.seattlepi.com/local/405126_Montero15.html

  2. #2
    Registered User
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    4,816
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Hey Carter, eat that buddy! I don't forget ignorant posts like yours. Some people on these boards should be ashamed based on some of the comments I saw.

  3. #3
    Awaiting Confirmation
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Vancouver
    Posts
    6,417
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    NOT surprising at all. The woman will get away scott-free as well. Despicable.

  4. #4
    Registered User
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Poshawa
    Posts
    13,559
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ginkster88 View Post
    NOT surprising at all. The woman will get away scott-free as well. Despicable.
    That may be the worse crime....but that is all I have to say on that...wasn't there so cannot comment on what transpired...
    Follow me...... https://twitter.com/#!/aGeRoO76
    "Just like JDG. It wasn't a post-and-in shot, but JDG is smart & experienced" - Carts

  5. #5
    RPB 2019
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Top of 115
    Posts
    3,582
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Pachuco View Post
    Hey Carter, eat that buddy! I don't forget ignorant posts like yours. Some people on these boards should be ashamed based on some of the comments I saw.

    and nobody forgets ones like yours, its a 2 way street chief

  6. #6
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Wanking to www.juliusjames.blogspot.com
    Posts
    31,924
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    laaaaaaad yea I called it LOL based on stats and all. Ah well he only missed one game. It was worse for Kobe.

  7. #7
    Registered User
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    3,493
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ladies Love Julius James View Post
    laaaaaaad yea I called it LOL based on stats and all. Ah well he only missed one game. It was worse for Kobe.
    lol based on his stats?

    But yeah, this entire story smelled of bullshit right from the beginning. Two sexual assaults in close succession on the same person? She better hope that no hardcore Seattle fans find out who she is.

  8. #8
    Awaiting Confirmation
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Vancouver
    Posts
    6,417
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    The whole world should know who she is. Lying... well I'm not going to let my mouth get me in trouble...

  9. #9
    Registered
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    4,496
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ginkster88 View Post
    NOT surprising at all. The woman will get away scott-free as well. Despicable.
    The title of the thread is misleading. He hasn't been charged with anything, not cleared of all charges. There is a significant difference between the two. All that the article states is that there is insufficient evidence to prosecute him. Not really a ringing endorsement to start a witch hunt against the woman, no?

    Not saying he did anything, not saying he didn't

  10. #10
    Awaiting Confirmation
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Vancouver
    Posts
    6,417
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    He can't be proven guilty, so he's innocent. That's how the law works last time I checked; too bad it's often the other way around in the press.

  11. #11
    Registered
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    4,496
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ginkster88 View Post
    He can't be proven guilty, so he's innocent. That's how the law works last time I checked; too bad it's often the other way around in the press.
    He can't be proven guilty so he's innocent, which automatically makes the woman "a lying...." in your words.

    Don't you see the hypocrisy in this position?

  12. #12
    Awaiting Confirmation
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Vancouver
    Posts
    6,417
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    No hypocrisy. He's innocent, therefore she lied. If there were any case here at all he would be tried, for sure. And if he were guilty I would hope that he be prosecuted as strongly as possible.

  13. #13
    Registered
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    4,496
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ginkster88 View Post
    No hypocrisy. He's innocent, therefore she lied. If there were any case here at all he would be tried, for sure.
    not really sure how to respond to this...

    Basically your position is that an accused rapist is innocent until proven guilty and his victim is lying until proven to be telling the truth...

  14. #14
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    11,600
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ginkster88 View Post
    He can't be proven guilty, so he's innocent. That's how the law works last time I checked; too bad it's often the other way around in the press.
    No, if you can't be proven guilty you are "not guilty." It's different than innocent, it means that there wasn't enough admissable evidence to prove beyond a reasonable doubt under the rules of a court.

    Is OJ innocent?

  15. #15
    Awaiting Confirmation
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Vancouver
    Posts
    6,417
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    No it isn't. Obviously that's a ridiculous position.

    Everyone is innocent until proven guilty, that's how the law works. An "accused rapist" is as innocent as a petty thief, and adding that to my statement is merely inflammatory.

    In this instance, the prosecution dropped the case. There isn't enough proof to even form a case against him, which in my books, means that he probably didn't do anything wrong.

    Therefore, he is innocent, and she is lying.

    I never made any final statements about this case until after the prosecution made their decision. I was skeptical about her claim from the beginning, but I never called her a liar until the prosecution did, that is, until the prosecution dropped the case.

  16. #16
    Awaiting Confirmation
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Vancouver
    Posts
    6,417
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Beach_Red View Post
    Is OJ innocent?
    We all know that was a unique case. Don't be ridiculous.

  17. #17
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    11,600
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ginkster88 View Post
    We all know that was a unique case. Don't be ridiculous.
    No, it was just a famous case. Those miscarriages of justice (going both ways) happen everyday.

  18. #18
    Awaiting Confirmation
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Vancouver
    Posts
    6,417
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    That case was brought to trial with overwhelming evidence against Simpson. It should have been open and shut. Many many factors combined to compromise that evidence and return the verdict "not guilty."

    This case didn't even merit enough to pursue prosecution.

  19. #19
    Registered User
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    6,178
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ginkster88 View Post
    No it isn't. Obviously that's a ridiculous position.

    Everyone is innocent until proven guilty, that's how the law works. An "accused rapist" is as innocent as a petty thief, and adding that to my statement is merely inflammatory.

    In this instance, the prosecution dropped the case. There isn't enough proof to even form a case against him, which in my books, means that he probably didn't do anything wrong.

    Therefore, he is innocent, and she is lying.

    I never made any final statements about this case until after the prosecution made their decision. I was skeptical about her claim from the beginning, but I never called her a liar until the prosecution did, that is, until the prosecution dropped the case.
    The prosecution dropped the case because they couldnt prove a sexual assault. They didnt call her a liar.

    Sexual assault is the hardest thing to prove, especially when the accused turns around and claims it was consensual. Not being able to prove otherwise doesnt create a truth. I'll bet montero can't prove it was consensual, or didn't happen, either. Fortunately for him the onus is on the prosecution to find proof and in this case they can't.

    Montero is in the clear, but who knows what the truth is?

    This attitude is the sort of thing that prevents women from reporting attacks on them. They know it's hard to prove, and they don't want to be called 'lying whores' by the media, and the rest of society.

    It should never have been reported in the media in the first place, and that applies to all sexual assault cases.

  20. #20
    olegunnar
    Guest

    Default

    I can't believe I'm getting involved in this thread....but

    when the verdict is read.....is it "not guilty" or "innocent"

  21. #21
    Awaiting Confirmation
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Vancouver
    Posts
    6,417
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ExiledRed View Post
    It should never have been reported in the media in the first place, and that applies to all sexual assault cases.
    I would definitely agree with that.

  22. #22
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Wanking to www.juliusjames.blogspot.com
    Posts
    31,924
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Dirk Diggler View Post
    lol based on his stats?

    But yeah, this entire story smelled of bullshit right from the beginning. Two sexual assaults in close succession on the same person? She better hope that no hardcore Seattle fans find out who she is.

    Not his stats, stats on athletes getting charged with rape and the conviction rate is extremely low.

    http://www.usatoday.com/sports/2003-...-assault_x.htm


    Of those 168 allegations, involving 164 athletes, only 22 saw their cases go to trial, and only six cases resulted in convictions. In another 46 cases, a plea agreement was reached. Combined with the six athletes convicted at trial and one who pleaded guilty as charged

  23. #23
    Registered User
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    3,103
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ginkster88 View Post
    No it isn't. Obviously that's a ridiculous position.

    Everyone is innocent until proven guilty, that's how the law works. An "accused rapist" is as innocent as a petty thief, and adding that to my statement is merely inflammatory.

    In this instance, the prosecution dropped the case. There isn't enough proof to even form a case against him, which in my books, means that he probably didn't do anything wrong.

    Therefore, he is innocent, and she is lying.

    I never made any final statements about this case until after the prosecution made their decision. I was skeptical about her claim from the beginning, but I never called her a liar until the prosecution did, that is, until the prosecution dropped the case.
    OJ was found not guilty. I guess using your logic, his wife's still alive. ;.)

  24. #24
    Registered
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    4,496
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Ginkster88 - I think you're missing the point. Assuming he is guilty before being proven guilty is just as bad as assuming she is lying just because there is insufficient evidence to file charges.

    Exiled said it best, and now I feel like

    So I will leave it here and hope you get what we are all say. The world really is more than just black and white...

  25. #25
    Awaiting Confirmation
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Vancouver
    Posts
    6,417
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Batman View Post
    OJ was found not guilty. I guess using your logic, his wife's still alive. ;.)
    You can't be serious. The prevailing attitude in this thread is that even though prosecution dropped the case due to insufficient evidence, he just might be guilty; for some of you, it seems that you think he is.

    I don't want this to get out of hand, so I'm going to stop posting. PM me if you wish to continue this discussion, or are interested in reading any of the literature I have read that has contributed to my admittedly aggressive position. I don't mean to offend, but this is an issue on which I have strong opinions.

  26. #26
    Registered User
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    3,103
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I won't carry it on further. I just found your logic flawed. No Problem..we just disagree.

  27. #27
    Awaiting Confirmation
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Vancouver
    Posts
    6,417
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JonO View Post
    Ginkster88 - I think you're missing the point. Assuming he is guilty before being proven guilty is just as bad as assuming she is lying just because there is insufficient evidence to file charges.
    I didn't see this before I posted. I'm not missing the point, I know exactly what you are saying, and for a different set of circumstances I would agree with you all; believe it or not, I can see the apparent (in my eyes, anyway) logical fallacy in my position.

    Here is why I think there is a difference: an assumption of guilt before proof does not take the evidence into account. An assumption that she lied (in this case) after the evidence has been deemed insufficient does.

    Like I said, I don't want this to get out of hand. I have nothing against any of you guys and enjoy a healthy debate, and this is an issue that I have very strong opinions about. I apologize if I have offended anyone (and no, the rules of logic don't count ).

  28. #28
    Registered
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    4,496
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Although I said I wouldn't I'm back...

    Assuming I shoplift a chocolate from a store (no cctv) and the store owner calls the cops. By the time the cops show up I have eaten the chocolate and disposed of the wrapper. Since there are no witnesses and no evidence, the cops don't charge me. How does this make the shopkeeper a liar?

    Nobody is saying that the alleged victim in this case is absolutely telling the truth. It's just disingenuous to assume she is lying.

    But now I am really done....

  29. #29
    Registered User
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    on the TTC
    Posts
    1,239
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ginkster88 View Post
    An "accused rapist" is as innocent as a petty thief

  30. #30
    Banned
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    101
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Pachuco View Post
    Hey Carter, eat that buddy! I don't forget ignorant posts like yours. Some people on these boards should be ashamed based on some of the comments I saw.
    dude dont sweat over a known douche .......

 

 

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •