Frostee Article

[TJJackson]

Well, that wasn't exactly my point....which was that someone being cleared of charges does not mean a person is in truth innocent, same as there are plenty of innocent folks behind bars as well

But I can handle being called a douchebag. NP :-)

[bengalsfansince68]

which was that someone being cleared of charges does not mean a person is in truth innocent,

While it is true that being cleared of the charges does not necessarily mean that Frostee is innocent of the charge, it does say that there is not enough evidence to prove it.

There is no correlation between these two cases.

In the O.J. case, the judge could not have been worse, the prosecutors were incompetent and the jury, too, could not have been worse. The jury was predisposed to believe the lies that the sleazy defense lawyers presented to them. I have read a dozen books on that trial and I have no doubt at all that the horrible jury, judge and prosecutors conspired to allow a double murderer to walk the golf courses of the world.

In the Frostee case, anyone who has lived through enough women knows how spiteful and vindictive they can be. I'd bet dollars against donut holes that's what happened in the alleged rape. I don't know any better than you and DC what happened in that case but I know that all it takes for a woman to pull something like this is she didn't get what she wanted. She obviously lied to the police and the court threw out the charge.

You guys should stop referring to the man as a rapist until you have some actual evidence, which it seems does not exist.

[TJJackson]

There is no correlation between these two cases.

Mostly agreed....the single correllation was that both defendants were acquitted. The point is that being acquitted in court does not mean one is in fact innocent of the charge....OJ almost certainly isn't innocent. OJ is merely one of the most extreme examples,and I chose it to best get the point across.....tho clearly, it escaped you.

[HairOnFire]

OJ is merely one of the most extreme examples,and I chose it to best get the point across.....tho clearly, it escaped you.

Well, this is what happens when you make a bad joke. A joke that wasn't funny AND is only relevant in the broadest sense.

In Ruckers example a witness came forward and disputed everything the accuser claimed. Normally even that wouldn't be enough to remove all doubt of Rucker's innocence unless the presence of that witness is enough to convince the accuser to admit she had lied.....which is exactly what happened. Obviously that should be enough to put the matter to rest, but just as obviously it never will, because the accusation of a crime being committed is sensational while the finding of innocence isn't.

Again, Rucker is no boyscout. He's clearly got issues with women. ...although what they are isn't clear at all. That said, he wasn't guilty of the crime he was charged with and under the circumstances he actually does deserve the benefit of the doubt. Instead, his reputation is repeatedly blasted by those who continue to believe accusations that have been proven false....and they do so even when confronted with news that shows Rucker in a different light.

But then again, how often do we see examples of Bengal fans going out of their way to shat on good news?

[bengalsfansince68]

Mostly agreed....the single correllation was that both defendants were acquitted. The point is that being acquitted in court does not mean one is in fact innocent of the charge....OJ almost certainly isn't innocent. OJ is merely one of the most extreme examples,and I chose it to best get the point across.....tho clearly, it escaped you.

If you admit that the only correlation is the one you sight, then there is no correllation at all. O.J. was acquitted and Frostee's charge was dropped. You can't get acquitted or convicted by a bad jury unless you are brought to trial.

Nothing escaped me. You guys want to brand the man a rapist when it is apparent that he is not one. You used a bad analogy to advance a deceitful point.

[TJJackson]

Uh, no, I didn't brand anyone a rapist.

The one correllation stands....both men walked out of a courtroom without being found guilty of anything. My point....that walking out of a courtroom without being convicted of anything is not the same as being truly innocent.....stands.

Mind you, this was the only correllation I cared about.....the rest is irrelevant no mater how many times you want to try to drag other stuff into this

I'm sorry you can't get this. Really.

[HairOnFire]

Uh, no, I didn't brand anyone a rapist.

The one correllation stands....both men walked out of a courtroom without being found guilty of anything. My point....that walking out of a courtroom without being convicted of anything is not the same as being truly innocent.....stands.

Mind you, this was the only correllation I cared about.....the rest is irrelevant no mater how many times you want to try to drag other stuff into this

I'm sorry you can't get this. Really.

Oh I think he gets it. The problem rests with you defending a point that wasn't worth making in the first place.

[bengalsfansince68]

I'm sorry you can't get this. Really.

C'mon TJ, don't feign mental superiority on this one.

You didn't actually refer to Frostee as a rapist but DC absolutely did. You jumped in with a lame analogy to give credence to DC's ridiculous post, and in my mind what you said was not much different than what DC said. The intent, at least, is the same, find ways to make Frostee look like a scumbag.

I'm pretty sure that most of us know that guilty people frequently walk away.

I am completely sure that in America, one is, and should be, presumed innocent until proven guilty. It is a doctrine that is one of the cornerstones on which this country was built.

I'm sorry that you and DC can't get that. Really.