Pacman faces two felony charges

[justbob]

What would be the possible point of testing Pac's DNA twice if they didn't have a viable sample from the wound to compare it against? And unless it was a very minor bite, they'd be bite marks to compare against Pac's teeth. Again, they'd either match or they wouldn't.

Many state labs will not run a sample -unless you submit a "known sample "
to compare it with. This has changed slightly in the past few years because of thedna data banks that can used to search for suspects in muders and sexual assaults.
They may or may not have a sample to run it with -or they may have
a mixture of dna and the weaker sample not enough to determine. The living victim would be the strongest contributer

 

[5Stars]

They had DNA. But it didn't match PacMan's DNA.

I think what everyone is missing here is that Pacman does not have DNA. He has ADD!!

 

[Doomsday101]

Like who?

You’re the one saying it is not a problem yet many in the coaching ranks and GM's know damn well that there is more trouble than good coming out of those places and continue to talk with players about it. Keep your head in the sand all you want but why do you think the NFL warns these players about these pit falls and encourages them not to hang out at these joints? I would say because they are concerned for the welfare of these players

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

I think what everyone is missing here is that Pacman does not have DNA. He has ADD!!

:laugh2:

You staying out of the heat there 5?

 

[5Stars]

:laugh2:

You staying out of the heat there 5?

I'm not sure what "heat" you are talking about? The "heat" of this thread or the "heat" here in Utah?

If you're talking about the heat here in Utah, no. About two hours ago I finished an 18 mile mountain bike ride (the first of this summer) and I am dog tired...but feel good.

 

[silverbear]

No, I'm pretty sure they have conclusive evidence he didn't bite the guy.

No, you don't... you have an ASSERTION, made by a DEFENSE ATTORNEY...

I'm not sure what your common sense tells you about DNA evidence,

Well, let's see, what does my common sense tell me about DNA evidence??

Well, I just asked, and my common sense says that if there was definitively exculpatory evidence of ANY kind out there, the DA would not have filed the charges he did... you see, this is a high-profile case, getting attention around the nation, and prosecutors tend to not want to embarrass themselves by filing charges that they can't possibly hope to prove...

And what does YOUR common sense tell you about that argument??

but I'm sure the Nevada state judge that's assigned the case would love to hear about it.

I'm simply suggesting that grandstanding is a potential reason for going forward with the case. People were wondering and I offered a reason.

IOW, you're willing to believe the prosecutor is an idiot... even though he's moved quite cautiously in this case, taken his time before filing any charges... IOW, he gives the impression that rather than "grandstanding", he's acting CAUTIOUSLY...

But you still try to insinuate that he's a junior grade Dennis Nifong... in fact, you sound a lot like you wish you could be Pac-Man's defense attorney...

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

I'm not sure what "heat" you are talking about? The "heat" of this thread or the "heat" here in Utah?

If you're talking about the heat here in Utah, no. About two hours ago I finished an 18 mile mountain bike ride (the first of this summer) and I am dog tired...but feel good.

I know better then to ask if you are staying out of the heat on this board.

Remember, Hydrate.

 

[silverbear]

Yes, I've worked in the court system. I'm glad you don't need DNA evidence.

And I do hope you share these opinions during voir dire if you're ever called for jury duty. If you want to get immediately struck from a jury, these are great opinions to share with the court.

And if YOU were honest about your opinions during voir dire, you'd get struck just as fast... in particular, make sure you tell them about how the prosecutor is probably incompetent, and this is just an "overzealous prosecution"...

 

[theogt]

No, you don't... you have an ASSERTION, made by a DEFENSE ATTORNEY...

Oh my goodness. Do we have to follow every single post with a disclaimer stating that the aforementioned statments were premised on the assumption that all known facts are true and correct?

Of course we don't know whether the lawyer is lying or not. By what on earth would we assume otherwise?

Why even assume that the lawyer actually exists? He could be a lie made up by the newsmedia! Why assume the newsmedia exists? It could all be a program that exists in our minds known as "The Matrix."

OH NOES!

 

[theogt]

And if YOU were honest about your opinions during voir dire, you'd get struck just as fast... in particular, make sure you tell them about how the prosecutor is probably incompetent, and this is just an "overzealous prosecution"...

No, I wouldn't. They tend to want unbiased opinions.

 

[silverbear]

you need serious help man

David

Check the batteries on your sarcasm meter, David, I do believe it's gone dead on ya...

 

[5Stars]

Remember, Hydrate.

That's exactely what I'm doing right now...BudLight style....! With all the sweat that poured out of me today, I'll be drunk here in a few more minutes!

 

[kevwun]

Pacman has been charged with 2 felony counts of coercion. Here's the definition of coercion from wikipedia.

Coercion is the practice of compelling a person to involuntarily behave in a certain way (whether through action or inaction) by use of threats, intimidation or some other form of pressure or force.

How in the world would DNA evidence prove or disapprove that Pacman threatened to kill club employees?

 

[silverbear]

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=2902948

And who is "Huyghue", Vintage??

Why, he's Pac-Man's ATTORNEY... and lo and behold, he's trying his case in the MEDIA...

And you accept what he says without question??

 

[silverbear]

Conspiracy.

Twin sons of different mothers...

 

[silverbear]

I was just commenting on the DNA stuff since someone asked about it.

As far as guilt/evidence, I would assume that the prosecution has something in the form of other evidence since they are charging him.

Yeah, that's the assumption I'm making, too... especially since it has taken so long for that prosecutor to file ANY charges, suggesting nor a rush to judgement, but rather a careful and sober look at the facts...

Facts none of us have at our disposal...

 

[silverbear]

I think what everyone is missing here is that Pacman does not have DNA. He has ADD!!

You must be dyslexic, what he actually has is DAD-- DumbA** Disease...

 

[silverbear]

Oh my goodness. Do we have to follow every single post with a disclaimer stating that the aforementioned statments were premised on the assumption that all known facts are true and correct?

You're trying to portray the claim of no DNA match as absolute truth, and it is legitimate for me to point out that it's actually one side's CLAIMS, not the undisputed truth...

Of course we don't know whether the lawyer is lying or not. By what on earth would we assume otherwise?

Well, if the prosecutor has gone on and filed charges on the biting incident, you probably ought to assume that he has SOME basis for believing he can make that case...

But you act as if the claim made by Huyghue is the absolute truth, and as if that DNA evidence provides absolute exoneration of the charges... even without knowing if the claim is true or not, even without knowing what the state has that might prove their case...

So you've done went and did what you say we shouldn't do-- you've passed judgement, without having all the facts... why is it OK for you to rush to judgement that way, but wrong for us to do so??

 

[silverbear]

No, I wouldn't. They tend to want unbiased opinions.

LOL... OK, honesty combined with a sense of humor goes a long way with me...

I've also said that I could never get selected for such a trial...

 

[Big Dakota]

I think what everyone is missing here is that Pacman does not have DNA. He has ADD!!

:laugh2: