News: PFT: Mike McCarthy: We feel it's important to support Kelvin Joseph based on information we have

[FuzzyLumpkins]

From the reports we've seen, it seems to me that someone close to the Cowboys organization recognized KJ and called the team directly, and the team advised him to go to the police and get ahead of the situation. Whether he made a deal or convinced them he was innocent remains to be seen.

What reports where?

 

[Haimerej]

Don't dish it out if you cannot take it.

Public forum... just commenting... yada yada

 

[Haimerej]

It's a free country, write what you want.

I am not interested in ham's supposition because the only considered outcomes are the worst possible outcomes. It borders on wishcasting.

And sure the DA went out of his way to reassert his right to press new charges and he can at any point. I'm not sure what new evidence or witness could be found but anything is possible.

The DA didn't need to make a deal. They had leverage because of the failure to report statute. If he hadn't cooperated they had a felony over his head. If one of the other witnesses had made them think he was an accessory or the shooter he wouldn't get a pass.

Do you not respect the abilities of lawyers to benefit privileged clients? There's a reason some lawyers get the big clients.

 

[Haimerej]

It isn’t about fake outrage or some moral high ground either. It’s about following through with standards you supposedly hold players accountable to. If you expect a certain standard of behavior, you’ve got to enforce it.

This sort of nuance is lost on the, "understanding."

 

[Haimerej]

And none of that is a felony conviction.

Lol. Nobody cares.

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Lol. Nobody cares.

Still struggling to speak for yourself.

 

[Haimerej]

Still struggling to speak for yourself.

Nah. I'm included in that demographic.

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Do you not respect the abilities of lawyers to to benefit privileged clients? There's a reason some lawyers get the big clients.

So you think he is guilty of accessory and his lawyer was able to get the DA to ignore it somehow? That is your take?

 

[Haimerej]

So you think he is guilty of accessory and his lawyer was able to get the DA to ignore it somehow? That is your take?

I'm saying he talked and arrests were made based on, "anonymous witness testimony." My assumption is he's, "anonymous."

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Public forum... just commenting... yada yada

You were complaining about it. Thus I said that.

You seem upset or drunk or something because you are mindless right now and spam responding.

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

I'm saying he talked and arrests were made based on, "anonymous witness testimony." My assumption is he's, "anonymous."

Of course it is but so what?

He had to cooperate because if he didn't they had the failure to report to charge him with. He had to make a deal but it wasn't for immunity from murder.

He wasn't charged with failure to report. That was the deal.

 

[Haimerej]

You were complaining about it. Thus I said that.

You seem upset or drunk or something because you are mindless right now and spam responding.

Complaining about what? Why do you keep hoping I'm upset?

 

[Haimerej]

Of course it is but so what?

He had to cooperate because if he didn't they had the failure to report to charge him with. He had to make a deal but it wasn't for immunity from murder.

He wasn't charged with failure to report. That was the deal.

Yes. That's what I said.

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Complaining about what? Why do you keep hoping I'm upset?

About my moral something or other and ad hominem. Said I was boring etc. It read like "I know you are but what I am" and whinging to me.

And I don't hope anything. You are spam responding to me when I hadn't been responding to you, youre complaining about me, the tone of your word choice. You seem upset. If I am wrong oh well.

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Yes. That's what I said.

That does not mean that the DA would not charge him if they had evidence or witness against him.

I think you fundamentally misunderstand what failure to report laws are designed to do. They are to leverage witnesses in crimes. It did its job and the people who were actually participating in the murder are arrested.

 

[Haimerej]

About my moral something or other and ad hominem. Said I was boring etc. It read like "I know you are but what I am" and whinging to me.

And I don't hope anything. You are spam responding to me when I hadn't been responding to you, youre complaining about me, the tone of your word choice. You seem upset. If I am wrong oh well.

Tone is a tricky subject when dealing with the written word. Easy for you to add a tone that's not there. Just some advice for the future.

As far as spamming you goes, you gave me material. You've been hen-pecking from the balcony wearing your lab coat. The minute I comment on your motives you turn it into me throwing a hissy fit. I think you're revealing more about what you've been up to and what you've been hoping to illicit than anything else.

But hey, you're a Howard Stern fan so you got that going for you.

 

[Haimerej]

That does not mean that the DA would not charge him if they had evidence or witness against him.

I think you fundamentally misunderstand what failure to report laws are designed to do. They are to leverage witnesses in crimes. It did its job and the people who were actually participating in the murder are arrested.

Ah yes. So all my statements in the nuked thread saying I don't expect he faces legal repercussions mean I fundamentally misunderstand the law. Good stuff. Any other insights? Care to restate what I just said and act like it's a counterpoint again?

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Ah yes. So all my statements in the nuked thread saying I don't expect he faces legal repercussions mean I fundamentally misunderstand the law. Good stuff. Any other insights? Care to restate what I just said and act like it's a counterpoint again?

Then why are you bringing up what a lawyer can do to get his client off? Thus my original comment of 'so what?'

And yeah I do think you misunderstand what the law was designed to do since you are holding it against KJ and his attorney.

 

[Haimerej]

Then why are you bringing up what a lawyer can do to get his client off? Thus my original comment of 'so what?'

And yeah I do think you misunderstand what the law was designed to do since you are holding it against KJ and his attorney.

How am I holding it against KJ and his attorney? By pointing out he's privileged enough to have an attorney savy enough to get a deal? Attorneys do their jobs and the good ones ain't cheap.

Do I have to spell it out again? I'm putting this all on Joseph. I'm saying he's a privileged athlete who took part in some shady stuff. Had there not been video evidence of him at the scene my assumption is he never comes forward. I think if he's not a Dallas Cowboy he's most likely in jail waiting his own trial.

But this is just me being a bot. Bleep bloop, murder is wrong, sizzle pop.

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

How am I holding it against KJ and his attorney? By pointing out he's privileged enough to have an attorney savy enough to get a deal? Attorneys do their jobs and the good ones ain't cheap.

Do I have to spell it out again? I'm putting this all on Joseph. I'm saying he's a privileged athlete who took part in some shady stuff. Had there not been video evidence of him at the scene my assumption is he never comes forward. I think if he's not a Dallas Cowboy he's most likely in jail waiting his own trial.

But this is just me being a bot. Bleep bloop, murder is wrong, sizzle pop.

So then how did the other guys in the vehicle not get charged then?