TL-TwoWinsAway Posted January 23, 2021 Share Posted January 23, 2021 17 minutes ago, Nnivolcm said: Actually, studies show false accusations are rare. I said "false accusations happen all the time". That is a factual statement. The beauty of this country is that a person isn't guilty of something based on accusation alone. There is no proof that Patricia committed that act, and the complainant has dropped the case. Continuing to push it speaks volumes about your character. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nnivolcm Posted January 23, 2021 Share Posted January 23, 2021 (edited) 6 minutes ago, TL-TwoWinsAway said: I said "false accusations happen all the time". That is a factual statement. The beauty of this country is that a person isn't guilty of something based on accusation alone. There is no proof that Patricia committed that act, and the complainant has dropped the case. Continuing to push it speaks volumes about your character. Accusation alone doesn't meet the burden of probable cause. Again, any LEO knows this. Feel free to continue with your Ad hominem argument. Edited January 23, 2021 by Nnivolcm 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TL-TwoWinsAway Posted January 23, 2021 Share Posted January 23, 2021 7 minutes ago, Nnivolcm said: Accusation alone doesn't meet the burden of probable cause. Again, any LEO knows this. Feel free to continue with your Ad hominem argument. "Patricia being indicted, then, does not prove that Patricia is guilty and should not be equated with a finding of fault." Of course, any person with any sort of common sense knows this. Anyone who has actually done the job knows how easy it is to make one-sided accusations (especially in a "he says-she says" case that lacks actual proof) that aren't scrutinized or challenged until trial. It's why an indictment alone isn't a guilty verdict. This is factual. You can pretend that it isn't, like you always do, but it doesn't change the truth. In this case - more than others, surprisingly - you have shown to be a complete waste of time. As fans on an internet forum, there is nothing lower we can do than accuse others of committing such heinous acts over 20 years ago in a case that lacked proof and was dropped by the complainant. As it stands, Patricia did absolutely nothing wrong. Insisting on tarnishing the character and reputation of someone else based on such a case, simply because you dislike their coaching style or lack of success, is disgusting. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nnivolcm Posted January 23, 2021 Share Posted January 23, 2021 (edited) 50 minutes ago, TL-TwoWinsAway said: "Patricia being indicted, then, does not prove that Patricia is guilty and should not be equated with a finding of fault." Of course, any person with any sort of common sense knows this. Anyone who has actually done the job knows how easy it is to make one-sided accusations (especially in a "he says-she says" case that lacks actual proof) that aren't scrutinized or challenged until trial. It's why an indictment alone isn't a guilty verdict. This is factual. You can pretend that it isn't, like you always do, but it doesn't change the truth. In this case - more than others, surprisingly - you have shown to be a complete waste of time. As fans on an internet forum, there is nothing lower we can do than accuse others of committing such heinous acts over 20 years ago in a case that lacked proof and was dropped by the complainant. As it stands, Patricia did absolutely nothing wrong. Insisting on tarnishing the character and reputation of someone else based on such a case, simply because you dislike their coaching style or lack of success, is disgusting. The court of public opinion is not the court of law. As a reasonable person I can look at the facts and circumstances available in a given situation and form opinions based on those facts and circumstances. We never had the ability to see the situation play out in a court of law due to Patricia's victim not wanting to be retraumatized with a trial. Something very common in those types of cases. As a reasonable person, particularly one with a deal of experience in the justice system, I can form an opinion based on the totality of the circumstances. I don't need to mindlessly wait for a trial that never happened to form an opinion as my opinion has no impact on anyone involved. Patricia won't face fines, jail time, or anything else based on my opinions, which are based on facts available to anyone. The only injustice is for Patricia's victim. You're really engraining your argument with logical fallacies with this one. As for the quote, that's simply a way for a news reporting agency to avoid libel. It's common sense. Edited January 23, 2021 by Nnivolcm 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TL-TwoWinsAway Posted January 23, 2021 Share Posted January 23, 2021 28 minutes ago, Nnivolcm said: As for the quote, that's simply a way for a news reporting agency to avoid libel. It's common sense. Uh, no. It's the truth. It's how things work in this country. The fact that you don't seem to get that is telling. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nnivolcm Posted January 23, 2021 Share Posted January 23, 2021 28 minutes ago, TL-TwoWinsAway said: Uh, no. It's the truth. It's how things work in this country. The fact that you don't seem to get that is telling. It is how things work in this county. If you don't include that quote you're gonna get sued. Common sense. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flyguy1609 Posted January 23, 2021 Share Posted January 23, 2021 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sllim Pickens Posted January 23, 2021 Share Posted January 23, 2021 22 minutes ago, flyguy1609 said: I like this hire. Some experience and did a good job with Herbert last year. Hearing that we are parting with Stafford means we need someone to develop a young QB. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Karnage84 Posted January 24, 2021 Share Posted January 24, 2021 1 hour ago, flyguy1609 said: He was my principal target other than Bevell. Excellent hire. Now...this Stafford news... It was going to happen some day but not thrilled that it's out there already. Lessens our leverage in a year with a strong QB class. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
diehardlionfan Posted January 24, 2021 Share Posted January 24, 2021 On 1/20/2021 at 2:06 PM, Karnage84 said: Do you think this could be because the experienced options (ex. Lewis or Bowles) either did not fit what they wanted in a coach or they did not want to come here? That’s a great question. Wish I knew. I expect it’s a bit of both. I expect Lewis didn’t fit and they pulled the plug on the Bowles interview because they already knew Campbell was their guy. I expect a number of individuals interviewed simply for experience and had no interest in the Lions job. Its obvious they discount experience and put far more value in guys that interview well. Thats not surprising because the interview is important. I’m sure each has a vision with examples of their philosophy and style. How they mesh is anyone’s guess. Especially how they mesh during adversity. I would’ve preferred some level of experience however the theme of the Lions is inexperience from the top down. I was initially most satisfied with the Campbell hire however after his press conference my enthusiasm waned. This is likely to be a resounding success or another typical Lions failure. Only time will tell. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
diehardlionfan Posted January 24, 2021 Share Posted January 24, 2021 1 hour ago, Sllim Pickens said: I like this hire. Some experience and did a good job with Herbert last year. Hearing that we are parting with Stafford means we need someone to develop a young QB. They already had the ability to work with young QB’s in Bevell. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BarryTheBest Posted January 24, 2021 Share Posted January 24, 2021 5 minutes ago, diehardlionfan said: They already had the ability to work with young QB’s in Bevell. For Bev, I think it was HC or bust. Do not see a scenario where he would have stuck around as the OC after not being given the job. Unless of course you wanted him as the HC, which is of course a different thing all together. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TL-TwoWinsAway Posted January 24, 2021 Share Posted January 24, 2021 59 minutes ago, Karnage84 said: He was my principal target other than Bevell. Excellent hire. Now...this Stafford news... It was going to happen some day but not thrilled that it's out there already. Lessens our leverage in a year with a strong QB class. Not happy with the news either. If we aren't able to get a decent return, losing him is a poor decision. We have to hope that there's a bidding war. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
diehardlionfan Posted January 24, 2021 Share Posted January 24, 2021 (edited) 4 hours ago, Karnage84 said: He was my principal target other than Bevell. Excellent hire. Now...this Stafford news... It was going to happen some day but not thrilled that it's out there already. Lessens our leverage in a year with a strong QB class. Given the speculation surrounding Stafford with a complete regime change I don’t really think it’s going to lessen leverage. It will be interesting to see the market for him and what value they can get in return. Will compensation be picks, a player or a combination. This will be the first test for the new GM, Coach, President and other participants in their CDM team. It will define their collective futures. My prediction is Fields will now be a Lion. Edited January 24, 2021 by diehardlionfan 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
diehardlionfan Posted January 24, 2021 Share Posted January 24, 2021 4 hours ago, BarryTheBest said: For Bev, I think it was HC or bust. Do not see a scenario where he would have stuck around as the OC after not being given the job. Unless of course you wanted him as the HC, which is of course a different thing all together. Given how everything rolled out I would’ve been fine with him as HC. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.