Saintsfan

Members
  • Content count

    7,738
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

21 Excellent

About Saintsfan

  • Rank
    Wonders why wonder why?

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male

Recent Profile Visitors

11,047 profile views
  1. Unpopular Opinions

    Agreed. I don't get all the hate. Thirded! Decent old style feel without copying anything. All the hate seems to be very petty, numbers too thin, bad word mark etc.
  2. Say it ain't so, Joe

    I can't see that much point, the transcript would be in admissible surely? And as much as it might be something that Fox talking heads can get the,selves into a lather about,if something that was potentially an admission of guilt was aired I would have thought it would make a fair trial and any chance of a conviction virtually impossible.
  3. Unpopular Opinions

    I wouldn't say pullovers should be worn again, but it wouldn't be beyond someone to take design inspiration from that era.
  4. Say it ain't so, Joe

    Yeah, but Paterno's testimony from the Grand Jury transcipts (you know, the ones that most ALL of you have never read) could possibly be read into the court proceedings. Yeah I wouldn't get too excited over this. I think in the absence of any other possible testimony from Paterno, the Grand Jury Testimony may end up being used in some manner. (I don't know the legal technicalities of doing this, but I can't see a moral problem with doing it, and I would imagine the prosecutors don't either, given their decision not to try and get testimony from Paterno in another way in the last couple of months of his life.) Not that I'm excited over it, but I thought there may be some possibility of Paterno's GJT being used as he was never under suspicion and he is reliable figure. I've tried looking up PA law about this situation but have yet to find anything. I do believe Curley's and Schultz attorney's mention that they could not cross examine Paterno on his GJT and there for could not offer rebuttal in defense of Curley and Schultz. The cross examination point is a good one, but remember these are defense attorneys, whose job is to try and get their men off. They are obligated to follow every path that could benefit their clients.
  5. Say it ain't so, Joe

    Yeah, but Paterno's testimony from the Grand Jury transcipts (you know, the ones that most ALL of you have never read) could possibly be read into the court proceedings. Yeah I wouldn't get too excited over this. I think in the absence of any other possible testimony from Paterno, the Grand Jury Testimony may end up being used in some manner. (I don't know the legal technicalities of doing this, but I can't see a moral problem with doing it, and I would imagine the prosecutors don't either, given their decision not to try and get testimony from Paterno in another way in the last couple of months of his life.)
  6. Say it ain't so, Joe

    Actually it applies to everyone. You can say Sandusky is a child-rapist if you like, but then you could say trees are purple, if you wanted, or that OJ Simpson is a murderer. Noone is guilty of a crime until they are convicted of it. In an actual bona fide court of law. OJ Simpson stands as a monument to that. Again none of this is to say Sandusky is innocent, simply that the legal process needs to be allowed to happen and it's best if it happens without an atmosphere of hysteria.
  7. Say it ain't so, Joe

    There is no such presumption in any legal case. I appreciate that there is compelling evidence that Sandusky should indeed be found guilty, but there is no legal presumption of guilt in any case. When setting bail, you can presume if there is a high percentage of conviction. Well for a start, the 8th Amendment protects against excessive bail. So either you don't grant bail or you put stringent conditions on it. (Which is what has been done in this case, as I understand it.) As I understand it, actually its not a presumption of guilt, its whether or not the defendant is considered a high risk of either flight, or of posing a danger to the public. Now you could make a case for saying Sanduskey is a danger to the public, but I within the limits of his bail, which remember bans him even from contact with his grand children, I don't see that really coming into play here. Also remember that any judgement on bail, and refusing it is risky in a trial situation, because it may lead a jury to presume guilt, and if it is judged that is the case, it would not be difficult for the court to rule a miss trial (which is surely not what anyone wants, if the case is such an open and shut case.) So its not a presumption of guilt, its a weighing up of the risk to the public in setting bail.
  8. Say it ain't so, Joe

    There is no such presumption in any legal case. I appreciate that there is compelling evidence that Sandusky should indeed be found guilty, but there is no legal presumption of guilt in any case.
  9. Say it ain't so, Joe

    He's hardly going to be 'walking free' if he is effectively under house arrest. And like it or not the guy still is entitled to a trial, and 'innocent until proven guilty' and all that. Not to pile on, but just can't stop rushing to the Sandusky defense can't you? I am not, nor have I ever on these boards, defended Sandusky. Respecting a man's civil rights is not the same as defending him against the charges that he will face in a court of law.
  10. Say it ain't so, Joe

    He's hardly going to be 'walking free' if he is effectively under house arrest. And like it or not the guy still is entitled to a trial, and 'innocent until proven guilty' and all that.
  11. NFL Merry-Go-Round: Relocation Roundelay

    That doesn't seem such a disinsentive to field mediocre teams though. Then again their is a minimum salary level as well as a cap if I remember correctly? So the CBA kind of acknowledges that!
  12. NFL Merry-Go-Round: Relocation Roundelay

    I've a question on revenue sharing, if all merchandise profits are shared in that way, and other revenues as well, how does it encourage weaker teams to improve? What is their to encourage the Raiders or Rams or Jaguars to improve, given that it's expensive to build an effective team?
  13. NFL Merry-Go-Round: Relocation Roundelay

    I'd love to hear an explanation how playing games in London is great for the city.. I think CVC thinks it can leverage the London exposure into increased tourism from the UK. That is the job of the "Convention and Visitor?s Commission", after all. I don't think it will neccesarily do any harm. But I would have thought the major thing would be more Rams merchandise being sold in the UK. However I am still utterly convinced that the Patriots are a bad choice as first opponent if thats what the NFL and the Rams are after. If it were say the Rams against say the Vikings, Cardinals or Redskins you'd stand half a chance, but the Patriots have a following in the UK. In fairness its not the easiest of schedules to find a better home game to take to Wembley for the Rams. But the Patriots were amongst the worst in terms of drumming up some UK support for the Rams.
  14. Unpopular Opinions

    I am not at all attacking Negro Leagues. But I think my problem is the league whose racist, segragationist policies forced those leagues to exist profitting from the use and sale of jerseys from those teams. Doesn't seem very respectful to me.
  15. Unpopular Opinions

    This. The MLB does the same thing from time to time. And it's just as bad there, even if sometimes it's throwing back to Negro League teams. It needs to stop!!