PDA

View Full Version : Even Steelers fans know there's no defense for Roethlisberge



fordfixer
04-18-2010, 12:24 AM
Even Steelers fans know there's no defense for Roethlisberger
Pat Howard
http://www.goerie.com/apps/pbcs.dll/art ... -1/OPINION (http://www.goerie.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20100418/OPINION04/304189945/-1/OPINION)

I write a weekly e-mail newsletter called Inside Erie that's as much about the responses from its readers as whatever I'm going on about.

Advertisement
The subject Thursday was what we've learned about the behavior of Pittsburgh Steelers quarterback Ben Roethlisberger, and "jerk" and "creep" were the operative words on my end. I figured the reaction would be lively, but wondered what directions it might take.

I wasn't so much surprised as gratified when readers started pinging my inbox. The gist overwhelmingly has been that nothing Roethlisberger does between the lines of a football field can excuse his conduct in that club in Georgia.

That vibe has been reinforced for me by the continuing coverage out of Pittsburgh, reading the investigative files from Georgia, my conversations with Steelers fans, and my travels around town. At a gathering of friends over chicken wings on Friday night, one black-and-gold die-hard, an ex-Marine, related his judgment to my wife in a single word.

Dirtbag.

Exactly.

There's been some reflexive defense of Roethlisberger rooted in his star power and athletic gifts, but not much in the scheme of things. And there's a strong sense that the faithful expect and count on the Steelers' owners, the Rooney family, to do the right thing and at least suspend the guy, even though an elite quarterback is the most precious commodity in their business.

The raw ingredients of this scandal are predictably combustible -- the gravitational pull of celebrity, animal attraction, the impulsiveness and foolishness of youth and, by all accounts, copious amounts of alcohol. Keeping the lid on such a situation requires someone involved to know better, and a loaded, star-struck, 20-year-old college student isn't the best bet for the role.

It's clear in the public revulsion of erstwhile fans that how that dumb kid ended up in a dingy bar restroom with the star quarterback hit a good many people much like it did me. They see a daughter, a sister, a niece or, in my case, a goddaughter.

Any of us with a young woman in our lives hope that someone would come to her aid if she found herself flirting with a prowling, world-wise shark and her judgment, maturity or capacity for booze failed her. It sounds as if that drunken kid's friends tried when one of Roethlisberger's "bodyguards" steered her into a hallway in the back of the club.

One of them told police that she approached another bodyguard and told him her friend was in no condition to be culled from their group and left alone with Roethlisberger. She said the guy wouldn't look her in the eye.

Well, no wonder.

The Georgia Bureau of Investigation identified that Roethlisberger handler/enabler as an off-duty Pennsylvania state trooper, Ed Joyner. The GBI said the bodyguard who led the young woman to her encounter with Roethlisberger was also an off-duty cop, Coraopolis municipal officer Anthony Barravecchio.

Yet another oath to protect and serve didn't work out much better for that kid when she and her friends sought out local police right after whatever happened in that restroom. The evidence suggests that Milledgeville police Sgt. Jerry Blash, who earlier in the evening had his picture taken with Roethlisberger, was more interested in covering the accused's backside than checking out allegations of a crime.

One of the cops in Roethlisberger's posse, Barravecchio, told investigators that Blash approached him and called the young woman a "drunken bitch" who was "making (expletive) up" against "Ben." A friend of the accuser said Blash agreed to file a report, but said it would be a waste of time in light of Roethlisberger's wealth and legal resources.

Blash resigned last week. Joyner, the Pennsylvania state trooper, is now the subject of an internal affairs investigation.

After the district attorney in Georgia announced there was insufficient evidence to charge Roethlisberger with a crime -- and told him to "grow up" -- Steelers President Art Rooney II made it clear his quarterback will face disciplinary action after the NFL completes its review of his behavior. And that he'd be on a very short leash from now on.

But the damage has been done. And it's the kind that lingers.

One fan related to the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette how his 8-year-old son asked him why his dad wouldn't let him wear his Roethlisberger jersey, his favorite shirt, to a Pittsburgh Penguins game. "Please ask Big Ben how he would have answered that question for me," the man wrote.

That sometimes our heroes turn out to be heels is a hard lesson for a little boy. Those iconic black-and-gold jerseys are supposed to stand for something, and now No. 7's stands for that.

SanAntonioSteelerFan
04-18-2010, 12:37 AM
Even Steelers fans know there's no defense for Roethlisberger
Pat Howard
http://www.goerie.com/apps/pbcs.dll/art ... -1/OPINION (http://www.goerie.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20100418/OPINION04/304189945/-1/OPINION)

I write a weekly e-mail newsletter called Inside Erie that's as much about the responses from its readers as whatever I'm going on about.

Advertisement
The subject Thursday was what we've learned about the behavior of Pittsburgh Steelers quarterback Ben Roethlisberger, and "jerk" and "creep" were the operative words on my end. I figured the reaction would be lively, but wondered what directions it might take.

I wasn't so much surprised as gratified when readers started pinging my inbox. The gist overwhelmingly has been that nothing Roethlisberger does between the lines of a football field can excuse his conduct in that club in Georgia.

That vibe has been reinforced for me by the continuing coverage out of Pittsburgh, reading the investigative files from Georgia, my conversations with Steelers fans, and my travels around town. At a gathering of friends over chicken wings on Friday night, one black-and-gold die-hard, an ex-Marine, related his judgment to my wife in a single word.

Dirtbag.

Exactly.

There's been some reflexive defense of Roethlisberger rooted in his star power and athletic gifts, but not much in the scheme of things. And there's a strong sense that the faithful expect and count on the Steelers' owners, the Rooney family, to do the right thing and at least suspend the guy, even though an elite quarterback is the most precious commodity in their business.

The raw ingredients of this scandal are predictably combustible -- the gravitational pull of celebrity, animal attraction, the impulsiveness and foolishness of youth and, by all accounts, copious amounts of alcohol. Keeping the lid on such a situation requires someone involved to know better, and a loaded, star-struck, 20-year-old college student isn't the best bet for the role.

It's clear in the public revulsion of erstwhile fans that how that dumb kid ended up in a dingy bar restroom with the star quarterback hit a good many people much like it did me. They see a daughter, a sister, a niece or, in my case, a goddaughter.

Any of us with a young woman in our lives hope that someone would come to her aid if she found herself flirting with a prowling, world-wise shark and her judgment, maturity or capacity for booze failed her. It sounds as if that drunken kid's friends tried when one of Roethlisberger's "bodyguards" steered her into a hallway in the back of the club.

One of them told police that she approached another bodyguard and told him her friend was in no condition to be culled from their group and left alone with Roethlisberger. She said the guy wouldn't look her in the eye.

Well, no wonder.

The Georgia Bureau of Investigation identified that Roethlisberger handler/enabler as an off-duty Pennsylvania state trooper, Ed Joyner. The GBI said the bodyguard who led the young woman to her encounter with Roethlisberger was also an off-duty cop, Coraopolis municipal officer Anthony Barravecchio.

Yet another oath to protect and serve didn't work out much better for that kid when she and her friends sought out local police right after whatever happened in that restroom. The evidence suggests that Milledgeville police Sgt. Jerry Blash, who earlier in the evening had his picture taken with Roethlisberger, was more interested in covering the accused's backside than checking out allegations of a crime.

One of the cops in Roethlisberger's posse, Barravecchio, told investigators that Blash approached him and called the young woman a "drunken bitch" who was "making (expletive) up" against "Ben." A friend of the accuser said Blash agreed to file a report, but said it would be a waste of time in light of Roethlisberger's wealth and legal resources.

Blash resigned last week. Joyner, the Pennsylvania state trooper, is now the subject of an internal affairs investigation.

After the district attorney in Georgia announced there was insufficient evidence to charge Roethlisberger with a crime -- and told him to "grow up" -- Steelers President Art Rooney II made it clear his quarterback will face disciplinary action after the NFL completes its review of his behavior. And that he'd be on a very short leash from now on.

But the damage has been done. And it's the kind that lingers.

One fan related to the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette how his 8-year-old son asked him why his dad wouldn't let him wear his Roethlisberger jersey, his favorite shirt, to a Pittsburgh Penguins game. "Please ask Big Ben how he would have answered that question for me," the man wrote.

That sometimes our heroes turn out to be heels is a hard lesson for a little boy. Those iconic black-and-gold jerseys are supposed to stand for something, and now No. 7's stands for that.

Somebody who hurts others by spreading rumor and gossip so that he may benefit?

One more time: it is NOT responsible to recite and retread witness statements from four VERY drunk college girls - who lied about their age, falsified IDs, and followed Ben around the town from bar to bar - as gospel. Please.

All these sports "journalists" are piling one for one reason - because it helps their employers get more "clicks" on-line (or sell more TV commercials, etc.), and so makes their job more secure.

The DA, who WANTED to prosecute, had to discount these witness statements so much he had to drop the case. But now these "journalists" are reciting them, without a so much as "allegedly". And it's influencing the opinion of just about everyone who hears it.

Dirtbags.

fordfixer
04-18-2010, 12:47 AM
Even Steelers fans know there's no defense for Roethlisberger
Pat Howard
http://www.goerie.com/apps/pbcs.dll/art ... -1/OPINION (http://www.goerie.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20100418/OPINION04/304189945/-1/OPINION)

I write a weekly e-mail newsletter called Inside Erie that's as much about the responses from its readers as whatever I'm going on about.

Advertisement
The subject Thursday was what we've learned about the behavior of Pittsburgh Steelers quarterback Ben Roethlisberger, and "jerk" and "creep" were the operative words on my end. I figured the reaction would be lively, but wondered what directions it might take.

I wasn't so much surprised as gratified when readers started pinging my inbox. The gist overwhelmingly has been that nothing Roethlisberger does between the lines of a football field can excuse his conduct in that club in Georgia.

That vibe has been reinforced for me by the continuing coverage out of Pittsburgh, reading the investigative files from Georgia, my conversations with Steelers fans, and my travels around town. At a gathering of friends over chicken wings on Friday night, one black-and-gold die-hard, an ex-Marine, related his judgment to my wife in a single word.

Dirtbag.

Exactly.

There's been some reflexive defense of Roethlisberger rooted in his star power and athletic gifts, but not much in the scheme of things. And there's a strong sense that the faithful expect and count on the Steelers' owners, the Rooney family, to do the right thing and at least suspend the guy, even though an elite quarterback is the most precious commodity in their business.

The raw ingredients of this scandal are predictably combustible -- the gravitational pull of celebrity, animal attraction, the impulsiveness and foolishness of youth and, by all accounts, copious amounts of alcohol. Keeping the lid on such a situation requires someone involved to know better, and a loaded, star-struck, 20-year-old college student isn't the best bet for the role.

It's clear in the public revulsion of erstwhile fans that how that dumb kid ended up in a dingy bar restroom with the star quarterback hit a good many people much like it did me. They see a daughter, a sister, a niece or, in my case, a goddaughter.

Any of us with a young woman in our lives hope that someone would come to her aid if she found herself flirting with a prowling, world-wise shark and her judgment, maturity or capacity for booze failed her. It sounds as if that drunken kid's friends tried when one of Roethlisberger's "bodyguards" steered her into a hallway in the back of the club.

One of them told police that she approached another bodyguard and told him her friend was in no condition to be culled from their group and left alone with Roethlisberger. She said the guy wouldn't look her in the eye.

Well, no wonder.

The Georgia Bureau of Investigation identified that Roethlisberger handler/enabler as an off-duty Pennsylvania state trooper, Ed Joyner. The GBI said the bodyguard who led the young woman to her encounter with Roethlisberger was also an off-duty cop, Coraopolis municipal officer Anthony Barravecchio.

Yet another oath to protect and serve didn't work out much better for that kid when she and her friends sought out local police right after whatever happened in that restroom. The evidence suggests that Milledgeville police Sgt. Jerry Blash, who earlier in the evening had his picture taken with Roethlisberger, was more interested in covering the accused's backside than checking out allegations of a crime.

One of the cops in Roethlisberger's posse, Barravecchio, told investigators that Blash approached him and called the young woman a "drunken bitch" who was "making (expletive) up" against "Ben." A friend of the accuser said Blash agreed to file a report, but said it would be a waste of time in light of Roethlisberger's wealth and legal resources.

Blash resigned last week. Joyner, the Pennsylvania state trooper, is now the subject of an internal affairs investigation.

After the district attorney in Georgia announced there was insufficient evidence to charge Roethlisberger with a crime -- and told him to "grow up" -- Steelers President Art Rooney II made it clear his quarterback will face disciplinary action after the NFL completes its review of his behavior. And that he'd be on a very short leash from now on.

But the damage has been done. And it's the kind that lingers.

One fan related to the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette how his 8-year-old son asked him why his dad wouldn't let him wear his Roethlisberger jersey, his favorite shirt, to a Pittsburgh Penguins game. "Please ask Big Ben how he would have answered that question for me," the man wrote.

That sometimes our heroes turn out to be heels is a hard lesson for a little boy. Those iconic black-and-gold jerseys are supposed to stand for something, and now No. 7's stands for that.

Somebody who hurts others by spreading rumor and gossip so that he may benefit?

One more time: it is NOT responsible to recite and retread witness statements from four VERY drunk college girls - who lied about their age, falsified IDs, and followed Ben around the town from bar to bar - as gospel. Please.

All these sports "journalists" are piling one for one reason - because it helps their employers get more "clicks" on-line (or sell more TV commercials, etc.), and so makes their job more secure.

The DA, who WANTED to prosecute, had to discount these witness statements so much he had to drop the case. But now these "journalists" are reciting them, without a so much as "allegedly". And it's influencing the opinion of just about everyone who hears it.

Dirtbags.


Opps I clicked :cry:

SanAntonioSteelerFan
04-18-2010, 12:57 AM
Even Steelers fans know there's no defense for Roethlisberger
Pat Howard
http://www.goerie.com/apps/pbcs.dll/art ... -1/OPINION (http://www.goerie.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20100418/OPINION04/304189945/-1/OPINION)

I write a weekly e-mail newsletter called Inside Erie that's as much about the responses from its readers as whatever I'm going on about.

Advertisement
The subject Thursday was what we've learned about the behavior of Pittsburgh Steelers quarterback Ben Roethlisberger, and "jerk" and "creep" were the operative words on my end. I figured the reaction would be lively, but wondered what directions it might take.

I wasn't so much surprised as gratified when readers started pinging my inbox. The gist overwhelmingly has been that nothing Roethlisberger does between the lines of a football field can excuse his conduct in that club in Georgia.

That vibe has been reinforced for me by the continuing coverage out of Pittsburgh, reading the investigative files from Georgia, my conversations with Steelers fans, and my travels around town. At a gathering of friends over chicken wings on Friday night, one black-and-gold die-hard, an ex-Marine, related his judgment to my wife in a single word.

Dirtbag.

Exactly.

There's been some reflexive defense of Roethlisberger rooted in his star power and athletic gifts, but not much in the scheme of things. And there's a strong sense that the faithful expect and count on the Steelers' owners, the Rooney family, to do the right thing and at least suspend the guy, even though an elite quarterback is the most precious commodity in their business.

The raw ingredients of this scandal are predictably combustible -- the gravitational pull of celebrity, animal attraction, the impulsiveness and foolishness of youth and, by all accounts, copious amounts of alcohol. Keeping the lid on such a situation requires someone involved to know better, and a loaded, star-struck, 20-year-old college student isn't the best bet for the role.

It's clear in the public revulsion of erstwhile fans that how that dumb kid ended up in a dingy bar restroom with the star quarterback hit a good many people much like it did me. They see a daughter, a sister, a niece or, in my case, a goddaughter.

Any of us with a young woman in our lives hope that someone would come to her aid if she found herself flirting with a prowling, world-wise shark and her judgment, maturity or capacity for booze failed her. It sounds as if that drunken kid's friends tried when one of Roethlisberger's "bodyguards" steered her into a hallway in the back of the club.

One of them told police that she approached another bodyguard and told him her friend was in no condition to be culled from their group and left alone with Roethlisberger. She said the guy wouldn't look her in the eye.

Well, no wonder.

The Georgia Bureau of Investigation identified that Roethlisberger handler/enabler as an off-duty Pennsylvania state trooper, Ed Joyner. The GBI said the bodyguard who led the young woman to her encounter with Roethlisberger was also an off-duty cop, Coraopolis municipal officer Anthony Barravecchio.

Yet another oath to protect and serve didn't work out much better for that kid when she and her friends sought out local police right after whatever happened in that restroom. The evidence suggests that Milledgeville police Sgt. Jerry Blash, who earlier in the evening had his picture taken with Roethlisberger, was more interested in covering the accused's backside than checking out allegations of a crime.

One of the cops in Roethlisberger's posse, Barravecchio, told investigators that Blash approached him and called the young woman a "drunken bitch" who was "making (expletive) up" against "Ben." A friend of the accuser said Blash agreed to file a report, but said it would be a waste of time in light of Roethlisberger's wealth and legal resources.

Blash resigned last week. Joyner, the Pennsylvania state trooper, is now the subject of an internal affairs investigation.

After the district attorney in Georgia announced there was insufficient evidence to charge Roethlisberger with a crime -- and told him to "grow up" -- Steelers President Art Rooney II made it clear his quarterback will face disciplinary action after the NFL completes its review of his behavior. And that he'd be on a very short leash from now on.

But the damage has been done. And it's the kind that lingers.

One fan related to the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette how his 8-year-old son asked him why his dad wouldn't let him wear his Roethlisberger jersey, his favorite shirt, to a Pittsburgh Penguins game. "Please ask Big Ben how he would have answered that question for me," the man wrote.

That sometimes our heroes turn out to be heels is a hard lesson for a little boy. Those iconic black-and-gold jerseys are supposed to stand for something, and now No. 7's stands for that.

Somebody who hurts others by spreading rumor and gossip so that he may benefit?

One more time: it is NOT responsible to recite and retread witness statements from four VERY drunk college girls - who lied about their age, falsified IDs, and followed Ben around the town from bar to bar - as gospel. Please.

All these sports "journalists" are piling one for one reason - because it helps their employers get more "clicks" on-line (or sell more TV commercials, etc.), and so makes their job more secure.

The DA, who WANTED to prosecute, had to discount these witness statements so much he had to drop the case. But now these "journalists" are reciting them, without a so much as "allegedly". And it's influencing the opinion of just about everyone who hears it.

Dirtbags.


Opps I clicked :cry:

:lol: :lol:

Captain Lemming
04-18-2010, 12:23 PM
One more time: it is NOT responsible to recite and retread witness statements from four VERY drunk college girls - who lied about their age, falsified IDs, and followed Ben around the town from bar to bar - as gospel. Please.

The DA, who WANTED to prosecute, had to discount these witness statements so much he had to drop the case. But now these "journalists" are reciting them, without a so much as "allegedly". And it's influencing the opinion of just about everyone who hears it.

Dirtbags.

Actually, not prosecuting has zip to do with "four VERY drunk college girls" being poor witnesses.
ONE very drunk college girl, the ONLY GIRL who knows if a crime occured does not want the McNulty treatment and does not want to pursue the matter.

If she is forced to testify, an unwilling witness can suddenly "have difficulty recalling events," after all she had a lot to drink. :wink:

When you see her drivin a new Beamer you will know why the prosecution has no case.

At best the prosecution had a "he said she sajd". That is all you need to prosecute and believe me THEY WILL prosecute with no other evidence.

But no "she said", no case.

spyboots
04-18-2010, 09:14 PM
He said-she said. Many, many Steeler fans believe he is innocent but that he's just made some bad decisions. Most of these articles just tell 1 side, and we have no way of knowing what this person received in their emails. The witch-hunters are just crying louder than the rest of the people. As far as fans of other teams, they are just anti-Steelers no matter which player it would be.

eniparadoxgma
04-18-2010, 10:51 PM
One more time: it is NOT responsible to recite and retread witness statements from four VERY drunk college girls - who lied about their age, falsified IDs, and followed Ben around the town from bar to bar - as gospel. Please.

The DA, who WANTED to prosecute, had to discount these witness statements so much he had to drop the case. But now these "journalists" are reciting them, without a so much as "allegedly". And it's influencing the opinion of just about everyone who hears it.

Dirtbags.

Actually, not prosecuting has zip to do with "four VERY drunk college girls" being poor witnesses.
ONE very drunk college girl, the ONLY GIRL who knows if a crime occured does not want the McNulty treatment and does not want to pursue the matter.

If she is forced to testify, an unwilling witness can suddenly "have difficulty recalling events," after all she had a lot to drink. :wink:

When you see her drivin a new Beamer you will know why the prosecution has no case.

At best the prosecution had a "he said she sajd". That is all you need to prosecute and believe me THEY WILL prosecute with no other evidence.

But no "she said", no case.

I am completely and utterly in disagreement with your sentiments.

That is all.

BlackJackGold
04-18-2010, 11:12 PM
One more time: it is NOT responsible to recite and retread witness statements from four VERY drunk college girls - who lied about their age, falsified IDs, and followed Ben around the town from bar to bar - as gospel. Please.

The DA, who WANTED to prosecute, had to discount these witness statements so much he had to drop the case. But now these "journalists" are reciting them, without a so much as "allegedly". And it's influencing the opinion of just about everyone who hears it.

Dirtbags.

Actually, not prosecuting has zip to do with "four VERY drunk college girls" being poor witnesses.
ONE very drunk college girl, the ONLY GIRL who knows if a crime occured does not want the McNulty treatment and does not want to pursue the matter.

If she is forced to testify, an unwilling witness can suddenly "have difficulty recalling events," after all she had a lot to drink. :wink:

When you see her drivin a new Beamer you will know why the prosecution has no case.

At best the prosecution had a "he said she sajd". That is all you need to prosecute and believe me THEY WILL prosecute with no other evidence.

But no "she said", no case.


Pretty much spot on.

I'm glad someone gets it.

Captain Lemming
04-19-2010, 02:07 AM
One more time: it is NOT responsible to recite and retread witness statements from four VERY drunk college girls - who lied about their age, falsified IDs, and followed Ben around the town from bar to bar - as gospel. Please.

The DA, who WANTED to prosecute, had to discount these witness statements so much he had to drop the case. But now these "journalists" are reciting them, without a so much as "allegedly". And it's influencing the opinion of just about everyone who hears it.

Dirtbags.

Actually, not prosecuting has zip to do with "four VERY drunk college girls" being poor witnesses.
ONE very drunk college girl, the ONLY GIRL who knows if a crime occured does not want the McNulty treatment and does not want to pursue the matter.

If she is forced to testify, an unwilling witness can suddenly "have difficulty recalling events," after all she had a lot to drink. :wink:

When you see her drivin a new Beamer you will know why the prosecution has no case.

At best the prosecution had a "he said she sajd". That is all you need to prosecute and believe me THEY WILL prosecute with no other evidence.

But no "she said", no case.

I am completely and utterly in disagreement with your sentiments.

That is all.

Yes, but you cannot explain "why" can you.

In order to be "completely and utterly in disagreement" with me you must believe that that if the "alleged" victim was insistent on going after Ben she would have been ignored. That is ridiculous. Do you know what a stink she could raise if it looked like the rich famous athlete was "let off" easy. For political reasons alone that would never happen.

Women who were drunk women testify "ALL THE TIME" in these situations. You dont drop a case because you dont believe her because she was drunk. Heck "she was drunk" all by itself can make it criminal.

The credibility of her friends is meaningless without her because they werent in the bathroon. If the accuser insists on pursuing it, her friend can only testify on what they saw, which was not a crime.

Drunk, fake ID doesnt stop it from being prosecuted. The jury would decide whether or not they are credible. Unless he "knows" they are lying the prosecuter will prosecute. His job is not to be judge and jury.

The fact that suddenly the alleged vic does not want to pursue the matter (Payoff) and she is the the only one who "can" testify to a crime if a crime happened, is the only reason the case was dropped.

SanAntonioSteelerFan
04-19-2010, 09:17 AM
[quote=SanAntonioSteelerFan]

One more time: it is NOT responsible to recite and retread witness statements from four VERY drunk college girls - who lied about their age, falsified IDs, and followed Ben around the town from bar to bar - as gospel. Please.

The DA, who WANTED to prosecute, had to discount these witness statements so much he had to drop the case. But now these "journalists" are reciting them, without a so much as "allegedly". And it's influencing the opinion of just about everyone who hears it.

Dirtbags.

Actually, not prosecuting has zip to do with "four VERY drunk college girls" being poor witnesses.
ONE very drunk college girl, the ONLY GIRL who knows if a crime occured does not want the McNulty treatment and does not want to pursue the matter.

If she is forced to testify, an unwilling witness can suddenly "have difficulty recalling events," after all she had a lot to drink. :wink:

When you see her drivin a new Beamer you will know why the prosecution has no case.

At best the prosecution had a "he said she sajd". That is all you need to prosecute and believe me THEY WILL prosecute with no other evidence.

But no "she said", no case.

I am completely and utterly in disagreement with your sentiments.

That is all.

Yes, but you cannot explain "why" can you.

In order to be "completely and utterly in disagreement" with me you must believe that that if the "alleged" victim was insistent on going after Ben she would have been ignored. That is ridiculous. Do you know what a stink she could raise if it looked like the rich famous athlete was "let off" easy. For political reasons alone that would never happen.

Women who were drunk women testify "ALL THE TIME" in these situations. You dont drop a case because you dont believe her because she was drunk. Heck "she was drunk" all by itself can make it criminal.

The credibility of her friends is meaningless without her because they werent in the bathroon. If the accuser insists on pursuing it, her friend can only testify on what they saw, which was not a crime.

Drunk, fake ID doesnt stop it from being prosecuted. The jury would decide whether or not they are credible. Unless he "knows" they are lying the prosecuter will prosecute. His job is not to be judge and jury. OK, so from what you say, since he didn't prosecute, he "knows they are lying". I don't have a problem with that, I can easily buy the scenario the 4 DTF chicks decided this is what they were going to do, regardless of the facts.

The fact that suddenly the alleged vic does not want to pursue the matter (Payoff) In a criminal case? Isn't that illegal, obstructing justice or something? and she is the the only one who "can" testify to a crime if a crime happened, is the only reason the case was dropped. Captain, you say this with such apparent certainty, but didn't the DA say exactly the opposite in his presser, something along the lines of, "Whether she wanted me to or not, if I had the evidence I would have prosecuted. However, bottom line, the evidence was not there to even have probable cause".[/quote:280mxw8v]

Captain Lemming
04-19-2010, 11:13 AM
Her full cooperation is his best evidence. Without that sure there is no case. Sure if Ben TOLD WILLIE, "dude she was saying no" or she was screaming no I dont want to go, while being dragged against her will into the bathroom, and witnesses testified to it, he would still proceed even if she didnt want to. But lacking obvious additional evidence, his case depends on her testimony.

If a woman says she was raped and she say she recognizes the dude and it is not deemed "impossible" due to clear evidence the guy "could not have done it" (ex. he was at work with multiple witnesses) it almost always goes to trial.

People who "never never saw the victim in their life" who were home with only familiy as witnesses have been convicted of rape based on a looking like a drawing and being ID'd in a lineup. The mistaken testimony of ONE PERSON is all that it took. DNA is proving many long time inmates innocent.

Ben was there, they were together talking dirty, flirting, and drinking. There was a bathroom where it was alleged to have happened.

The testimony of the alleged victim is all the evidence you need to go to trial, even when the dude never met the woman.

There is no way this does not go to trial if she wants to go after him.

Legality? Payoffs happen all the time. Many said from day one Ben should do that and cited examples where others have done this.

Sure if she is called she is legally obliged to do so honestly. But really how hard is it for things to become a little "unclear" for her. The prosecuter knows this. Why waste the time.

cruzer8
04-19-2010, 12:50 PM
Yes, there is no defense.


Forensic evidence, it turned out, was scant. Although testing showed the presence of male human DNA from the woman, there was no way to match it to Mr. Roethlisberger or anyone else, according to Ted R. Staples, GBI's manager of forensic biology.

"It was an extremely small quantity of that, and there simply was not enough to generate a nuclear DNA profile from that male" Mr. Staples said. "We carried it forward and made an attempt [to obtain a DNA profile.] The only profile generated was that of the female."

Even with today's technology, the sample was so infinitesimal that nothing could be determined.

"Normally what we're looking for is about a nanogram of DNA, which is a billionth of a gram. A raisin weighs about a gram, so if you could cut a raisin into a billion pieces, we need one of those. So this particular result was far less than even a nanogram. There was something there. It just wasn't enough."

Mr. Staples said scientists could not discern the source of the DNA in the sample, whether it was from saliva, semen or something else.



Read more: http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/10108/10 ... z0lZ83Gpwk (http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/10108/1051441-66.stm#ixzz0lZ83Gpwk)


One billionth of a gram. Wow. They didn't even have that.

Ben is the one getting raped here.

eniparadoxgma
04-19-2010, 01:16 PM
[quote=SanAntonioSteelerFan]

One more time: it is NOT responsible to recite and retread witness statements from four VERY drunk college girls - who lied about their age, falsified IDs, and followed Ben around the town from bar to bar - as gospel. Please.

The DA, who WANTED to prosecute, had to discount these witness statements so much he had to drop the case. But now these "journalists" are reciting them, without a so much as "allegedly". And it's influencing the opinion of just about everyone who hears it.

Dirtbags.

Actually, not prosecuting has zip to do with "four VERY drunk college girls" being poor witnesses.
ONE very drunk college girl, the ONLY GIRL who knows if a crime occured does not want the McNulty treatment and does not want to pursue the matter.

If she is forced to testify, an unwilling witness can suddenly "have difficulty recalling events," after all she had a lot to drink. :wink:

When you see her drivin a new Beamer you will know why the prosecution has no case.

At best the prosecution had a "he said she sajd". That is all you need to prosecute and believe me THEY WILL prosecute with no other evidence.

But no "she said", no case.

I am completely and utterly in disagreement with your sentiments.

That is all.

Yes, but you cannot explain "why" can you.

In order to be "completely and utterly in disagreement" with me you must believe that that if the "alleged" victim was insistent on going after Ben she would have been ignored. That is ridiculous. Do you know what a stink she could raise if it looked like the rich famous athlete was "let off" easy. For political reasons alone that would never happen.

Women who were drunk women testify "ALL THE TIME" in these situations. You dont drop a case because you dont believe her because she was drunk. Heck "she was drunk" all by itself can make it criminal.

The credibility of her friends is meaningless without her because they werent in the bathroon. If the accuser insists on pursuing it, her friend can only testify on what they saw, which was not a crime.

Drunk, fake ID doesnt stop it from being prosecuted. The jury would decide whether or not they are credible. Unless he "knows" they are lying the prosecuter will prosecute. His job is not to be judge and jury.

The fact that suddenly the alleged vic does not want to pursue the matter (Payoff) and she is the the only one who "can" testify to a crime if a crime happened, is the only reason the case was dropped.[/quote:t8a0fn1i]

Yes I do know why I'm in disagreement with you, whether it is complete and utter or not.

You're throwing out conspiracy theory (PAYOFF) as fact when it's actually just speculation. It's also speculation that I see no evidence for.

Do I really need to get more in depth than that?

Captain Lemming
04-19-2010, 08:08 PM
Yes I do know why I'm in disagreement with you, whether it is complete and utter or not.

You're throwing out conspiracy theory (PAYOFF) as fact when it's actually just speculation. It's also speculation that I see no evidence for.

Do I really need to get more in depth than that?

That is perfectly reasonable. I do not "know" she was paid.

Throw that out.
She implied that she doesnt want the circus, reasonable considering the McNulty stuff. He said she said, with a very rich defendant, she with almost certainly lose regardles of what the truth is.

My point is her being drunk is not why the prosecution did not run with it. If she wanted to pursue it the DA will not drop the case. He will need to KNOW that it did not happen, before he just throws it out.

Testimony from an alleged victim plus circumstances to make it "possible" is more than enough to move forward.

To drop the case just based on her being drunk with a false ID, he is doing the job of the jury who have the job of determining how "credible" she is.

The repercussions of letting a famous athlete off would be devastating to his career.

It is clear that the DA would love to prosecute, that is what this thread is about.

To say he "could not" for lack of evidence, if he had a willing accuser makes no sense.

eniparadoxgma
04-19-2010, 08:53 PM
Yes I do know why I'm in disagreement with you, whether it is complete and utter or not.

You're throwing out conspiracy theory (PAYOFF) as fact when it's actually just speculation. It's also speculation that I see no evidence for.

Do I really need to get more in depth than that?

That is perfectly reasonable. I do not "know" she was paid.

Throw that out.
She implied that she doesnt want the circus, reasonable considering the McNulty stuff. He said she said, with a very rich defendant, she with almost certainly lose regardles of what the truth is.

My point is her being drunk is not why the prosecution did not run with it. If she wanted to pursue it the DA will not drop the case. He will need to KNOW that it did not happen, before he just throws it out.

Testimony from an alleged victim plus circumstances to make it "possible" is more than enough to move forward.

To drop the case just based on her being drunk with a false ID, he is doing the job of the jury who have the job of determining how "credible" she is.

The repercussions of letting a famous athlete off would be devastating to his career.

It is clear that the DA would love to prosecute, that is what this thread is about.

To say he "could not" for lack of evidence, if he had a willing accuser makes no sense.

Cool. I don't necessarily disagree with anything you just said. My disagreement was referring to the "payoff" theory. There are other reasons for her to have not wanted to go through with it, and being paid off is nowhere near the top of the list from my perspective.