Jump to content


Pejorative Miscreant

Member Since 01 Dec 2008
Offline Last Active Today, 04:16 AM
-----

#2953662 I laugh

Posted by Pejorative Miscreant on Yesterday, 10:15 PM

SF Douche Nozzle just got called for inappropriate language after getting picked.  I Laugh at Kaperprick




#2952773 BROWNS BEAT THE SAINTS HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Posted by Pejorative Miscreant on Yesterday, 06:21 PM

Dat Dog Bite Doh! Ya Maan. He Bite!!!


#2947912 National Interest in Hardy just ended....

Posted by Pejorative Miscreant on 13 September 2014 - 09:42 PM

I was spanked as a kid and it was accepted as a general form of punishment much more than it is today.  One night after having a few my dad spanked me a bit too hard and left a couple marks that lasted a day or two.  (based on accounts from my mom cause I dont even remember).  Dad never, spanked me or my siblings after that.  Point is, I understand corporal punishment for kids but there are limitations.  Rational adults know where the limit is and realize if they've crossed it.  In hindsight, dad moved past that point and never went there again just in case.

 

I have spanked "one quick swat on the bum" here and there but it is more of an attention getter than something that hurts and certainly nothing that leaves marks or causes suffering.  Seen comments where there was blood in this case which really goes over the top for any child IMO. 




#2945571 Apparently ESPN's Outside the Lines did a hit piece on Greg Hardy this mo...

Posted by Pejorative Miscreant on 12 September 2014 - 01:21 PM

[quote name="coralreefer_1" post="2945307" timestamp="1410536357"]Yet how many people get a jury trial? Does the guy driving down to the game busted with a bag of weed get a jury trial?

Answer: if he wants one he is entitled to it.


The guy who drives drunk doesnt get a jury trial, nor the guy caught drag racing on the interstate.

Answer: if he wants one he is entitled to it.

Point is, the law is handed out and accepted in MANY cases when a jury is not present. To say that Hardy isn't guilty until tried by his peers is the same as saying everyone else is not guilty until determined by their peers.

This statement is absurd. If a defendant accepts the deal from the bench trial and decides not to appeal to a higher court he assumes a position of being guilty. If a person decides to proceed with a jury trial that person is given a trial de novo which means a new trial as if the one that happened before it never took place.

I realize that facts muddy the water of your argument but I thought I might let you know just in case you missed the other 50 threads with this posted in it.


/quote]


#2945518 Lions week! Detroit "Bout to get Rocked" City

Posted by Pejorative Miscreant on 12 September 2014 - 12:52 PM

Need to bump this thread back up.  Took a backseat to the media frenzy and never got its proper due.




#2945022 A Douche is Born

Posted by Pejorative Miscreant on 12 September 2014 - 07:22 AM

Most people use a taxidermist prior to mounting wild animals.  I guess Kaep has a different perspective.




#2945003 MSNBC Morning Joe: Hardy, Panthers and the War on Women

Posted by Pejorative Miscreant on 12 September 2014 - 07:05 AM

Why didn't they say this last week then? Nothing has changed in his case. 

 

Cant believe you would be so insensitive and make a rational and coherent statement during a time when everyone is in such a frenzy to blindly overreact and make snap decisions and judgements without considering facts.

 

But since you ask I will tell you what has changed.

 

...

 

(sounds of crickets chirping)....

 

Hmmm...

 

Thats all I got.

 

The one thing that did change was that a video was released of Ray Rice doing something that he admitted and plead guilty to. 

 

I pretty much don't care about anything MSNBC says.




#2944132 So apparently Detroit media is turning "Donkey Kong Suh" into a racia...

Posted by Pejorative Miscreant on 11 September 2014 - 04:49 PM

so Cam, "How long have you been a black quarterback?"


Cam is actually a White overweight female school bus driver.


Sent from my iPad using CarolinaHuddle


#2942938 I'll reconsider JR....I'll reconsider

Posted by Pejorative Miscreant on 11 September 2014 - 04:54 AM

And the point of this thread is....? You're an "All-Pro"...I expected better from you


Point of this thread is to retrospectively take a look at a few other threads.


Sent from my iPad using CarolinaHuddle


#2942419 How Should We As Panthers Fans Respond To Domestic Violence?

Posted by Pejorative Miscreant on 10 September 2014 - 10:01 PM


How do you feel we should respond?

 

I think about this issue and believe the best course of action would be to take a couple weeks and suspend football.  During that hiatus we should simply use that time to start threads about Hardy, Ray Rice, Domestic Violence, the Constitution, Due Process and Roger Goddell.  Doesn't matter if its recycled or has been stated or implied in 20 or so previous threads.  Lets just start a new one.  I even think we should have a Hardy.bot virus like program that will automagically start a new thread after the previous thread gets more than 12 posts.  Not a lot of logic will need to go into the *.bot because the threads started by real people contain very little logic within themselves. 

 

Now if you will excuse me, this one has reached its max and it is my duty to start another one.




#2942269 Going after hardy now is basically a witch hunt

Posted by Pejorative Miscreant on 10 September 2014 - 08:42 PM

yeah baby another Hardy thread


Suggest we lock all and pin a generic thread to post in. It's really all the same.

Person 1. Hardy was convicted.

Reply. no it was a bench trial

Person 1. But he was convicted and that's all that matters

Reply: no. Sites lawyer/constitution

Person 1. But a conviction is a conviction

Insert random comment guy: you rush to judgement

Insert random comment guy 2: you like hardy and defend him even if he was convicted.

Insert random comment guy 3: Alice, you suck and the Taints are 0-1. Oh wait , wrong thread

Repeat all ad nauseam and also in next thread


Sent from my iPad using CarolinaHuddle


#2941240 No sign of Hardy at practice today!

Posted by Pejorative Miscreant on 10 September 2014 - 01:48 PM

Greg Hardy opted for a bench trial.

Sorry kiddo, still guilty and due process accounted for.


Perhaps in your mind that is the case but in the real world it's not that cut and dry. Opting for the bench proceeding first does not mean he waived his right to a trial by a jury of his peers. That might be convenient for your argument but it's fiction.

Not like reality = Make poo up.

And for the record if he is actually found guilty by a jury of his peers, then I hope he is punished to the max.


Sent from my iPad using CarolinaHuddle


#2941076 No sign of Hardy at practice today!

Posted by Pejorative Miscreant on 10 September 2014 - 12:47 PM

I also know this girl tangentially and friends of friends say she's not lying.

 

Makes sense to me then.  I've been pushing for a 28th amendment that supersedes the 6th amendment and overrides due process in the event someone has an acquaintance and friends of friends can vouch for someone.




#2940557 Until found guilty by a jury of your peers.

Posted by Pejorative Miscreant on 10 September 2014 - 06:51 AM

No. No it doesn't at all. The conviction is perfectly constitutional. Have you ever been to traffic court? Bench verdicts all day. One presiding judge. It's all within your grasp. If you decide you want a jury trial at any point in the process you can demand one and be granted one. The same applied for Hardy in this case. His lawyers didn't advise him to take this route obviously because a jury trial is an arduous and time consuming process and with the high amount of public interest it would have the potential to become a spectacle. Make no mistake that his lawyers and handlers were well aware of their ability to have it decided by a jury but there was no reason to take that route until appeal in case the judge found the accuser's case so frivolous that it was tossed out immediately. Plus, in a jury trial the really dirty truth starts to emerge. Character witnesses. Lots of personal dirty laundry to air. Far more than you'd see in a traditional misdemeanor filing.

Hardy's camp was banking on the fact that she had taken illicit drugs was reason enough to dismiss all charges despite the preponderance of evidence. That they would view her as a money grabbing drug addict and dismiss her case. That gamble didn't work out in Hardy's favor and he got slapped with a guilty verdict. Everything from this point forward is predicated on the fact that he's guilty under the law.



So due process has been served? The answer is no.
Does Hardy have a right to have a trial by jury and has he exercised that right? The answer is yes. Has Hardy been given a trial by jury? No.

Agree that the lawyer team took this route for a reason but the legal process is still ongoing and no punitive measures can be exercised by the State until the process is complete. I know that doesn't mean the league or the Panthers could not take action but if they do and Hardy is found innocent when due process is carried out it could create a quandary for the team and/or NFL.

I do like how you equated this description to getting a speeding ticket. I think that puts this "conviction" in context.


#2935341 Star and Short

Posted by Pejorative Miscreant on 07 September 2014 - 09:16 PM

Yeah that roughing the Qb call was bullshit and should have got the D off the field then.

 

This was the tipping point in the game IMO.  let the Buc back in.  Even Rhonde said it was a bad call.  Dude is a homer but he was honest. 






Shop at Amazon Contact Us: info@carolinahuddle.com