Page 11 of 11 FirstFirst ... 91011
Results 101 to 105 of 105

Thread: Ben's attorney says no sexual assault, "completely innocent"

  1. #101

    Re: Ben's attorney says no sexual assault, "completely innocent"

    Quote Originally Posted by kindlecatsb'ng
    http://kdka.com/kdkainvestigators/Ben.Roethlisberger.Bodyguards.2.1549219.html


    Am not sure how this bodyguard business works with elite athletes, but it would seem to add credibility to have police officers as part of his bodyguards. Don't know if others saw this article.
    Nah, he's still doing it wrong. He should just stay home studying the bible if he's not playing football.

  2. #102
    Pro Bowler eniparadoxgma's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Lexington, Kensucky
    Posts
    2,118

    Re: Ben's attorney says no sexual assault, "completely innocent"

    Quote Originally Posted by SteelAbility
    I put the rolly eyes in to indicate that you are twisting the obvious (unnecessary risk) into my usurping the right to declare what's risky and what's not. Read effeminate or whatever you want into it. IT'S YOUR OPINION RIGHT? I find twisting people's words be very impolite myself.
    There apparently is no "obvious" here. That's kind of what we're debating I believe: What is an "unnecessary" risk? And I'll say this once: I'm not deliberately twisting anyone's words. If you think I'm misinterpreting what you're saying then by all means clarify, okay?
    "If I don't screw this girl then picking up AIDS from her is impossible. If I do and she has AIDS, then I introduce a chance of picking it up as compared to laying off."
    How about:

    "If I don't have sex ever, then picking up AIDS is impossible. If I do have sex and the girl I have sex with has AIDS, then I introduce a chance of picking it up as compared to laying off."

    Or

    "If I never leave my house except in a protective man-sized hamster ball, then getting hurt, picking up an STD, or being accused of sexual assault is close to impossible. If I do walk around in public without being encased in a large clear sphere then I introduce a chance of something bad happening as compared to staying in my friggin ball."

    Which part of what I'm questioning here don't you understand? You're trying to state what an unnecessary risk is and I'm asking why you get to decide where the line is drawn. Why aren't athletes forced to stay in their homes so they never get hurt?

    You have the benefit of hindsight to say that "Ben put himself in a bad situation" because apparently some chick had the ability to accuse him of sexual assault. I'm fairly certain a girl can accuse him of sexual assault if he's not even there. It's more likely to have credibility if he was in a 20 foot distance of the girl, but there doesn't actually have to be something illegal happening for him to be accused. You apparently have a problem with him going to a club for his birthday (or am I twisting your words or whatever here?) because you see it as an unnecessary risk. I'm saying that I don't consider it an unnecessary risk. Regardless of how much money he paid a girl to be quiet, regardless of whatever contract might be signed, regardless of whether or not said girl was his girlfriend, whether he was in his own house or a club, he can still be accused of sexual assault I believe.

    Thanks for twisting my words again. That was very helpful. What I said was that girl (at a bar) who throws herself at guys is more likely. Impolite gesture #2.

    Okay...you're not saying a girl in a bar has a higher risk of having AIDS but a girl that throws themselves at a celebrity while they're in a bar does? I stand corrected... I don't see the big difference here but okay.
    I'm saying unprotected sex with strangers introduces the RISK of picking up AIDS. What's so hard to understand about that?
    Unprotected? I don't recall that being part of your "example".

    Regardless, I really don't see your point here. Ben should get married and be monogamous so that he doesn't have a greater chance of catching an STD? Should this be in his contract? How about you try to clarify exactly what your point with this whole "girl with STD" thing is so I don't accidentally "twist your words" again and make you break out new font colors.

    Third time you twisted my words. Do you understand the difference between definitively asserting that she has AIDS and saying there is a CHANCE she has AIDS? Apparently not.
    Why yes, I actually do understand the difference. Thanks for asking.

    How about you try again to make your point since it's apparently lost on me.
    <a href=http://www.planetsteelers.com/forums/image.php?type=sigpic&userid=6892&dateline=1331316420 target=_blank>http://www.planetsteelers.com/forums...ine=1331316420</a>

  3. #103
    Pro Bowler eniparadoxgma's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Lexington, Kensucky
    Posts
    2,118

    Re: Ben's attorney says no sexual assault, "completely innocent"

    Quote Originally Posted by feltdizz
    Nice try... LOL!!!

    Blame everyone but Ben may work on the field but off the field his "choices" are what caused this.
    Not sure if you know, but I'm not the type to "blame everyone but Ben" on or off the field. I have no agenda of the sort here.

    I thought my point valid...and still do.
    <a href=http://www.planetsteelers.com/forums/image.php?type=sigpic&userid=6892&dateline=1331316420 target=_blank>http://www.planetsteelers.com/forums...ine=1331316420</a>

  4. #104
    Legend hawaiiansteel's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Hawaii 5-0
    Posts
    16,046

    Re: Ben's attorney says no sexual assault, "completely innocent"

    Harris: Roethlisberger's troubles give Steelers pause

    By John Harris, PITTSBURGH TRIBUNE-REVIEW
    Tuesday, March 9, 2010


    Steelers director of football operations Kevin Colbert has been fond of saying that drafting a quarterback isn't in the team's plans.

    You couldn't blame Colbert for having second thoughts.

    Maybe the Steelers should consider selecting a quarterback in next month's NFL Draft, or signing a veteran signal-caller -- just in case.

    Because when it comes to Ben Roethlisberger, you never know.

    Of course, the second incident in less than a year linking Roethlisberger with a sexual assault may turn out to be a false alarm if an investigation by Georgia law enforcement officials exonerates him.

    But that doesn't mean life should return to normal as Roethlisberger and the Steelers know it.

    How much, the Steelers have to be asking, is enough?

    Roethlisberger isn't just any quarterback. He's the Steelers' franchise quarterback who won a pair of Super Bowls in his first six NFL seasons. He signed a $102 million contract two years ago, making him the face of the franchise.

    That means Roethlisberger is the Steelers' most important player by virtue of his mega-salary and the position he plays on the field.

    When people think of the Steelers, they naturally think of Roethlisberger.

    What some of them are thinking right now isn't pretty or nice.

    A picture taken of Roethlisberger -- wearing a shirt emblazoned with the devil on the night he was accused of sexually assaulting a 20-year old college student last week in Milledgeville, Ga. -- spoke a thousand words.

    It was in stark contrast to the image Roethlisberger portrayed upon joining the Steelers as the No. 11 pick in the 2004 draft -- one of a humble young man from a good Midwestern family who points skyward after touchdown passes as a way of honoring his maker.

    Yes, Roethlisberger is entitled to live the way he pleases and see who he wants socially.

    It's his life, his business.

    However, it stops being his exclusive business when those alleged indiscretions have a negative impact on the Steelers, who have made him exceedingly rich and famous.


    "The allegations are the allegations. It's the fact of the matter of getting yourself in that situation where the allegations come out," said Pittsburgh-based agent Ralph Cindrich, who has represented hundreds of NFL players in a career spanning more than three decades, including Steelers linebacker James Farrior.

    "In my view," Cindrich said as to what he thinks Roethlisberger's next step should be, "you drop what you're doing, you get over to the Steelers offices and you apologize to the Rooney family, the head coach and every one of your teammates."

    It's trying times like these when the Steelers must consider if the hefty cost of doing business with Roethlisberger is worth it.

    This must surely feel like deja vu to the Steelers' brass, who I'm certain had a serious heart-to-heart discussion with Roethlisberger last offseason after a woman charged him with sexual assault at a Lake Tahoe hotel and casino.

    Roethlisberger strongly denied those allegations.

    On Monday, Roethlisberger's new criminal defense lawyer, Edward T.M. Garland -- who defended Ray Lewis of the Baltimore Ravens against murder charges in 2000 -- said Roethlisberger is innocent of all charges.

    Even if Roethlisberger isn't charged by police, the Steelers should be concerned enough to examine their quarterback situation more closely.

    Remember, the civil case against Roethlisberger in Nevada is still pending.

    Are the Steelers thoroughly convinced that these two incidents are isolated -- or exhibit a disturbing pattern of behavior displayed by the highest-paid player in franchise history?

    Has Dennis Dixon, who started one game in his first two seasons, shown enough to be considered a suitable replacement if legal problems derail Roethlisberger? How comfortable are the Steelers with Dixon leading the offense?

    I'm all for the Steelers not rushing to judgment against Roethlisberger. But the NFL is a business, and, like it or not, the Steelers have to prepare for the unknown.

    Sending a strong message of disapproval to Roethlisberger by acquiring another quarterback could be the best way to get his attention.

  5. #105
    Legend hawaiiansteel's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Hawaii 5-0
    Posts
    16,046

    Re: Ben's attorney says no sexual assault, "completely innocent"

    Agent: Colon didn't witness alleged assault

    Posted by Gregg Rosenthal on March 10, 2010


    The agent for Steelers tackle Willie Colon says his client was with Ben Roethlisberger last week, but not at the time when the quarterback admittedly engaged in "sexual conduct" with the woman alleging he assaulted her.

    "Willie, although he was in the building, had no knowledge of the incident and his name
    should not be brought up about this incident again," Linta said. "The first knowledge he had was when he was stopped when leaving the place to be asked some questions."

    It's unclear if Colon will be interviewed again by police.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •