CockyTalk

Welcome to Cockytalk!

Thank you for visiting our forum. As a guest, you have limited access to view some discussion and articles. By joining our free community, you will be able to view all discussions and articles, post your own topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload photos, participate in Pick'Em contests and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free, so please join our community today!!

If you have any problems registering or logging in, please contact our Admins. Thanks!

Go Back   CockyTalk > Gamecocks Sports > The Cock Pit

Today's Top 10
Posters (by posts)Threads (by views)Newest Posts Gamecock Headlines 
NineInchSpurs
WeStill0wnUSC
Badazcock
Pty23
rabid cock
markymark550
Goofyboy
2000grad
ZenUSC
gromweat
Well, as it turns ou (2529)
Luginbill says ECU s (2406)
What the heck is up (1908)
Next years RB situat (1713)
ECU fan here (1425)
So, Vanderbilt is ne (1365)
Davis dinged up agai (1227)
Freaky Coincidence o (1103)
Defensive stand-arou (964)
Quarles is a Colt! (731)
Davis dinged up again?
2014 Atlanta Braves Seaso
So, Vanderbilt is next
Well, as it turns out, we
Gamecocks 247 sports
New Photos by Travis Bell
For the love of God! -- P
Robin William's fakes dea
No Gurley near the goal l
What the heck is up with


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 04-16-2014, 05:18 PM   #61
gamecock88
All Everything
 
gamecock88's Avatar
 
Male

Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: SC
Posts: 3,005
CockyCash: 200
gamecock88 is USC mascot materialgamecock88 is USC mascot materialgamecock88 is USC mascot materialgamecock88 is USC mascot materialgamecock88 is USC mascot materialgamecock88 is USC mascot materialgamecock88 is USC mascot materialgamecock88 is USC mascot materialgamecock88 is USC mascot materialgamecock88 is USC mascot materialgamecock88 is USC mascot material
Default Re: Kelcy and Vic questioned for night club assault

Quote:
Originally Posted by sc455 View Post
Just gonna say it...if kq is so distressed about his draft stock he should not have been with vic, and probably chaz, at a nyc club at 3 am..these guys never learn.
True. Wasn't Connor Shaw and Bruce Ellington in NYC as well? Connor was probably back in the hotel doing push ups. Bruce probably found a pick up game of basketball.....
gamecock88 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 04-16-2014, 05:20 PM   #62
henmania
Game MVP
 
henmania's Avatar
 
Male

Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Georgia
Posts: 1,736
CockyCash: 500
henmania rules the CockPithenmania rules the CockPithenmania rules the CockPithenmania rules the CockPithenmania rules the CockPithenmania rules the CockPithenmania rules the CockPithenmania rules the CockPithenmania rules the CockPithenmania rules the CockPithenmania rules the CockPit
Default Re: Kelcy and Vic questioned for night club assault

Quote:
Originally Posted by sc455 View Post
Just gonna say it...if kq is so distressed about his draft stock he should not have been with vic, and probably chaz, at a nyc club at 3 am..these guys never learn.
From what I have heard, Kelcy wasn't there. Chaz evidently was. There is a statement from the police that Chaz was attacked outside the club. Vic, on the other hand, can't seem to get his act together. His agent knew what he was dealing with and should have locked him down.
henmania is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-16-2014, 06:15 PM   #63
fridayserv
Recruit
 
fridayserv's Avatar
 
Male

Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: aiken
Posts: 221
CockyCash: 500
fridayserv is making other chickens nervousfridayserv is making other chickens nervousfridayserv is making other chickens nervousfridayserv is making other chickens nervousfridayserv is making other chickens nervousfridayserv is making other chickens nervousfridayserv is making other chickens nervous
Default Re: Kelcy and Vic questioned for night club assault

Quote:
Originally Posted by GarnetInChicago View Post
Dude, I get the anger, and it's justified. But don't go spouting off about something you clearly know nothing about. 1) the Constitution has absolutely NOTHING to do with civil suits for defamation, so for God's sake please don't be one of those people who cites the Constitution for just any old purpose that seems to suit their general point; and 2) there is no basis for defamation claim here. The actual statement TMZ made was that a source said they were wanted for questioning. If the source actually said that to TMZ, then that is a TRUE statement and 100% a defense to defamation. Perhaps there might be a claim against the "source," but since TMZ will never be obligated to reveal who that is, this goes nowhere.

The very best thing anyone could hope for here is that everyone just ignores the article. Any attention paid to it is a boon for TMZ since speculation and scandal are how they get paid.
In general I don't respond to uneducated comments, but Here is the answer for you.

"The First Amendment (Amendment I) to the United States Constitution prohibits the making of any law respecting an establishment of religion, impeding the free exercise of religion, abridging the freedom of speech, infringing on the freedom of the press".

If a suit was filed the defense by TMZ would be based on the 1st Amendment of the United States Constitution. Let me make it clear for you. Defamation suits happen all the time. The number one defense is Freedom of the press to present the news, the loophole is the UNNAMED SOURCE. Maybe you should go online and read it before making crazy comments. Even better read the 1964 case with the Court’s decision in New York Times Co. v. Sullivan.
fridayserv is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-16-2014, 07:39 PM   #64
GarnetInChicago
シカゴのカキ
 
GarnetInChicago's Avatar
 
Male

Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Chicago
Posts: 5,331
CockyCash: 45500347
GarnetInChicago is USC mascot materialGarnetInChicago is USC mascot materialGarnetInChicago is USC mascot materialGarnetInChicago is USC mascot materialGarnetInChicago is USC mascot materialGarnetInChicago is USC mascot materialGarnetInChicago is USC mascot materialGarnetInChicago is USC mascot materialGarnetInChicago is USC mascot materialGarnetInChicago is USC mascot materialGarnetInChicago is USC mascot material
Default Re: Kelcy and Vic questioned for night club assault

Quote:
Originally Posted by fridayserv View Post
In general I don't respond to uneducated comments, but Here is the answer for you.

"The First Amendment (Amendment I) to the United States Constitution prohibits the making of any law respecting an establishment of religion, impeding the free exercise of religion, abridging the freedom of speech, infringing on the freedom of the press".

If a suit was filed the defense by TMZ would be based on the 1st Amendment of the United States Constitution. Let me make it clear for you. Defamation suits happen all the time. The number one defense is Freedom of the press to present the news, the loophole is the UNNAMED SOURCE. Maybe you should go online and read it before making crazy comments. Even better read the 1964 case with the Court’s decision in New York Times Co. v. Sullivan.
I'm uneducated and crazy? You're welcome to challenge my view of the law, but how about holding off on the ad hominem attacks as a way of challenging my comments? For your information, I am certainly not uneducated and in general I stand by my prior statement that there is zero basis for a defamation claim here. I also stand by my assertion that your citation to the Constitution here is inappropriate and a point that does not even need to be addressed in light of the fact that TMZ's "statement" under the requisite elements for a defamation claim is a true one, that they were wanted for questioning.

Your citation to Sullivan completely misses the mark. The Sullivan court was asked to address one simple question: "We are required in this case to determine for the first time the extent to which the constitutional protections for speech and press limit a State's power to award damages in a libel action brought by a public official against critics of his official conduct." And the Court held: "We hold that the rule of law applied by the Alabama courts is constitutionally deficient for failure to provide the safeguards for freedom of speech and of the press that are required by the First and Fourteenth Amendments in a libel action brought by a public official against critics of his official conduct."

The entire policy basis underpinning Brennan's majority opinion was that it was necessary to protect the press from governmental restriction on free speech in the interest of an ability to have an open and critical dialogue about our government and its officials, even where those opinions may be unpopular and even where they may occassionally be erroneous: "Thus, we consider this case against the background of a profound national commitment to the principle that debate on public issues should be uninhibited, robust, and wide-open, and that it may well include vehement, caustic, and sometimes unpleasantly sharp attacks on government and public officials."

And this is precisely the reason why I stated that your citation to the Constitution was inappropriate. Yes, the First Amendment affords the freedom of the press. It is well-established, though, that this does not extend to permitting the press to make untrue statements. Either the statement in the TMZ article is true (in which case it is simply not defamation) or it is untrue. The First Amendment only pertains to the governmental interference with speech, and has nothing to do with conduct by private parties. So even if the TMZ statement is untrue and there might be grounds for a libel suit, the First Amendment would have nothing to do with it.

(Sullivan does also stand for the proposition that where it is a public figure claiming defamation, then "actual malice" becomes a part of the requisite elements to prevail and the claim. So to the extent a public figure is seeking to claim defamation, my earlier point about not needing "actual malice" is mistaken. Again, though, I do not think Kelcy and Vic qualify as public figures thought they might be seen as limited public figures.)

Maybe now YOU ought to go read a few more cases, like Braden v. News World Communications, Inc., where the court held in a private libel action against the press that the reliance on a single, biased source did not constitute a reckless disregard for the truth (which is the standard under the elements for a claim short of that limited "actual malice" exception for public figures). Apart from the bias element, which would make that fact pattern more egregious than this one, the question here is pretty similar - would TMZ's reliance on a single unnamed source subject TMZ to liability for libel? Apparently not, because the claim would fail to establish the second element of the claim regarding reckless disregard (and of course I've already stated that I believe the claim would fail under the first element - that the statement be untrue).

Last edited by GarnetInChicago; 04-16-2014 at 07:56 PM.
GarnetInChicago is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-16-2014, 08:32 PM   #65
ReCOCKulous
Master Debater
 
ReCOCKulous's Avatar
 
Male

Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Columbia
Posts: 730
CockyCash: 500
ReCOCKulous is USC mascot materialReCOCKulous is USC mascot materialReCOCKulous is USC mascot materialReCOCKulous is USC mascot materialReCOCKulous is USC mascot materialReCOCKulous is USC mascot materialReCOCKulous is USC mascot materialReCOCKulous is USC mascot materialReCOCKulous is USC mascot materialReCOCKulous is USC mascot materialReCOCKulous is USC mascot material
Default Re: Kelcy and Vic questioned for night club assault

Boom! Lawyered?
__________________
The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants.
Thomas Jefferson

Are you ready for the revolution?
ReCOCKulous is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-16-2014, 09:18 PM   #66
Transmaniacon
Any Major Dude
 
Transmaniacon's Avatar
 
Male

Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Charleston
Posts: 418
CockyCash: 500
Transmaniacon is USC mascot materialTransmaniacon is USC mascot materialTransmaniacon is USC mascot materialTransmaniacon is USC mascot materialTransmaniacon is USC mascot materialTransmaniacon is USC mascot materialTransmaniacon is USC mascot materialTransmaniacon is USC mascot materialTransmaniacon is USC mascot materialTransmaniacon is USC mascot materialTransmaniacon is USC mascot material
Default Re: Kelcy and Vic questioned for night club assault

I hate to get in the middle of this legal argument, but to the extent GiC is suggesting that Sullivan, Gertz, and their progeny don't place constitutional limitations on the scope of defamation law, that is just wrong (to be clear, I'm responding o his 4th paragraph). That is precisely what those opinions do. Before those cases, the First Amendment didn't protect untrue statements. After those cases, it did. That is, the First Amendment precludes liability for untrue statements made in relation to public figures (and perhaps even non-public figures involved in matters of public concern) if the publisher did not know the statements were false or had a reckless disregard for their truth.

To be fair, GiC seems to acknowledge this standard but doesn't concede the implication that the constitution thereby protects some untrue (otherwise defamatory) statements. That's all I wanted to make clear.
Transmaniacon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-16-2014, 09:34 PM   #67
bcolinc
Blue Chip
 
bcolinc's Avatar
 
Male

Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Salt Lake City, UT
Posts: 612
CockyCash: 500
bcolinc is crowing loudlybcolinc is crowing loudlybcolinc is crowing loudlybcolinc is crowing loudlybcolinc is crowing loudlybcolinc is crowing loudlybcolinc is crowing loudlybcolinc is crowing loudlybcolinc is crowing loudlybcolinc is crowing loudlybcolinc is crowing loudly
Default Re: Kelcy and Vic questioned for night club assault

My head hurts. F$&@ reading!!!
__________________
bcolinc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-16-2014, 10:13 PM   #68
Goofyboy
2nd Team All-SEC
 
Goofyboy's Avatar
 
Male

Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Sumter
Posts: 2,890
CockyCash: 500
Goofyboy is USC mascot materialGoofyboy is USC mascot materialGoofyboy is USC mascot materialGoofyboy is USC mascot materialGoofyboy is USC mascot materialGoofyboy is USC mascot materialGoofyboy is USC mascot materialGoofyboy is USC mascot materialGoofyboy is USC mascot materialGoofyboy is USC mascot materialGoofyboy is USC mascot material
Default Re: Kelcy and Vic questioned for night club assault

Wow! A hijack pissing contest. The thread wasn't going anywhere on topic anyway, i guess.
Goofyboy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-16-2014, 11:31 PM   #69
GarnetInChicago
シカゴのカキ
 
GarnetInChicago's Avatar
 
Male

Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Chicago
Posts: 5,331
CockyCash: 45500347
GarnetInChicago is USC mascot materialGarnetInChicago is USC mascot materialGarnetInChicago is USC mascot materialGarnetInChicago is USC mascot materialGarnetInChicago is USC mascot materialGarnetInChicago is USC mascot materialGarnetInChicago is USC mascot materialGarnetInChicago is USC mascot materialGarnetInChicago is USC mascot materialGarnetInChicago is USC mascot materialGarnetInChicago is USC mascot material
Default Re: Kelcy and Vic questioned for night club assault

Quote:
Originally Posted by Transmaniacon View Post
I hate to get in the middle of this legal argument, but to the extent GiC is suggesting that Sullivan, Gertz, and their progeny don't place constitutional limitations on the scope of defamation law, that is just wrong (to be clear, I'm responding o his 4th paragraph). That is precisely what those opinions do. Before those cases, the First Amendment didn't protect untrue statements. After those cases, it did. That is, the First Amendment precludes liability for untrue statements made in relation to public figures (and perhaps even non-public figures involved in matters of public concern) if the publisher did not know the statements were false or had a reckless disregard for their truth.

To be fair, GiC seems to acknowledge this standard but doesn't concede the implication that the constitution thereby protects some untrue (otherwise defamatory) statements. That's all I wanted to make clear.
I'm not at all making the assertion those cases don't place Constitutional limitations on the scope of defamation law. In fact, I'm pretty sure that my statements regarding Sullivan made pretty clear that I understand that notion - the potential exists that defamation law could interfere with the First Amendment freedom of the press and that is being curtailed by those decisions.

I'm saying though, that is only pertinent where you're dealing with public figures. The point I was trying to make in this whole exchange is that those limitations have nothing to do with the type of libel claim that Kelcy and Vic might try to pursue.

(I also originally had written 2 more paragraphs to my prior post that went on a bit more about the qualified privilege for anonymous sources, but I was just tired of making the argument. In there I had included a quote pertaining to the fact that ever erroneous statements could be protected in statements by the press involving public figures due to the important interest in protecting the free dialogue and critique of our government. If it was not clear in my last message, I do agree with that notion. Again, though, that is only relevant where you are dealing with defamation cases brought by public figures. Based on your first paragraph, it does not really seem that we are disagreeing.)

Last edited by GarnetInChicago; 04-16-2014 at 11:42 PM.
GarnetInChicago is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-16-2014, 11:49 PM   #70
sc455
1st Team All-American
 
sc455's Avatar
 
Male

Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: south carolina
Posts: 13,565
CockyCash: 23088816
sc455 is USC mascot materialsc455 is USC mascot materialsc455 is USC mascot materialsc455 is USC mascot materialsc455 is USC mascot materialsc455 is USC mascot materialsc455 is USC mascot materialsc455 is USC mascot materialsc455 is USC mascot materialsc455 is USC mascot materialsc455 is USC mascot material
Default Re: Kelcy and Vic questioned for night club assault

/\ nobody cares.
sc455 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-16-2014, 11:58 PM   #71
GarnetInChicago
シカゴのカキ
 
GarnetInChicago's Avatar
 
Male

Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Chicago
Posts: 5,331
CockyCash: 45500347
GarnetInChicago is USC mascot materialGarnetInChicago is USC mascot materialGarnetInChicago is USC mascot materialGarnetInChicago is USC mascot materialGarnetInChicago is USC mascot materialGarnetInChicago is USC mascot materialGarnetInChicago is USC mascot materialGarnetInChicago is USC mascot materialGarnetInChicago is USC mascot materialGarnetInChicago is USC mascot materialGarnetInChicago is USC mascot material
Default Re: Kelcy and Vic questioned for night club assault

Quote:
Originally Posted by sc455 View Post
/\ nobody cares.
You're right, wrong place for that debate. Sorry for hijacking the thread. Just wanted to say I didn't see much recourse in lawsuit form for whatever harm might befall these guys because of this article.
GarnetInChicago is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-17-2014, 07:51 AM   #72
mike1520
Blue Chip
 
mike1520's Avatar
 
Male

Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Manassas
Posts: 602
CockyCash: 2000
mike1520 is sharpening his clawsmike1520 is sharpening his clawsmike1520 is sharpening his clawsmike1520 is sharpening his claws
Default Re: Kelcy and Vic questioned for night club assault

I'm I the only guy enjoying this debate, I should have focused on law.

Back on topic:

According to the espn article that was posted earlier in the thread all parties are innocent and they simply witness another group of people beating a man.
mike1520 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-17-2014, 08:03 AM   #73
yazoo
1st Team All-SEC
 
yazoo's Avatar
 
Male

Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Tryon, NC
Posts: 4,197
CockyCash: 1813
yazoo is USC mascot materialyazoo is USC mascot materialyazoo is USC mascot materialyazoo is USC mascot materialyazoo is USC mascot materialyazoo is USC mascot materialyazoo is USC mascot materialyazoo is USC mascot materialyazoo is USC mascot materialyazoo is USC mascot materialyazoo is USC mascot material
Default Re: Kelcy and Vic questioned for night club assault

Quote:
Originally Posted by mike1520 View Post
I'm I the only guy enjoying this debate, I should have focused on law.

Back on topic:

According to the espn article that was posted earlier in the thread all parties are innocent and they simply witness another group of people beating a man.
No, you're not the only one. Some people just want to complain when they cannot understand an issue by saying disrespectful comments like, "nobody cares." Those were some interesting, well-written posts on the first amendment and law on defamation. If you don't care about the law, fine. A lot of people find it a fascinating subject.
__________________


Shaq Attack
yazoo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-17-2014, 08:47 AM   #74
sc455
1st Team All-American
 
sc455's Avatar
 
Male

Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: south carolina
Posts: 13,565
CockyCash: 23088816
sc455 is USC mascot materialsc455 is USC mascot materialsc455 is USC mascot materialsc455 is USC mascot materialsc455 is USC mascot materialsc455 is USC mascot materialsc455 is USC mascot materialsc455 is USC mascot materialsc455 is USC mascot materialsc455 is USC mascot materialsc455 is USC mascot material
Default Re: Kelcy and Vic questioned for night club assault

Quote:
Originally Posted by yazoo View Post
No, you're not the only one. Some people just want to complain when they cannot understand an issue by saying disrespectful comments like, "nobody cares." Those were some interesting, well-written posts on the first amendment and law on defamation. If you don't care about the law, fine. A lot of people find it a fascinating subject.
that spat should have been dealt with privately..private messaging has its place. Has zero to do with content or depthness. Gic got it..
sc455 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-17-2014, 09:42 AM   #75
MWard
1st Team All-SEC
 
MWard's Avatar
 
Male

Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Charlotte
Posts: 4,454
CockyCash: 94340
MWard is USC mascot materialMWard is USC mascot materialMWard is USC mascot materialMWard is USC mascot materialMWard is USC mascot materialMWard is USC mascot materialMWard is USC mascot materialMWard is USC mascot materialMWard is USC mascot materialMWard is USC mascot materialMWard is USC mascot material
Default Re: Kelcy and Vic questioned for night club assault

Quote:
Originally Posted by Goofyboy View Post
Wow! A hijack pissing contest. The thread wasn't going anywhere on topic anyway, i guess.
I'm just surprised it got to 4 pages and all they are being looked at is as witnesses....
__________________
"to be honest with you, if you just graded it out, we won in every phase of the game,” Swinney said. “We lost on the scoreboard."
LOLOLOLOLOL

-Abo Swinney, April 23, 2014

http://espn.go.com/blog/ncfnation/po...steve-spurrier
MWard is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-17-2014, 01:44 PM   #76
GamecockUltimate
BIGGER. STRONGER.LONGER
 
GamecockUltimate's Avatar
 
Male

Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Club Fields
Posts: 5,256
CockyCash: 219000
GamecockUltimate is USC mascot materialGamecockUltimate is USC mascot materialGamecockUltimate is USC mascot materialGamecockUltimate is USC mascot materialGamecockUltimate is USC mascot materialGamecockUltimate is USC mascot materialGamecockUltimate is USC mascot materialGamecockUltimate is USC mascot materialGamecockUltimate is USC mascot materialGamecockUltimate is USC mascot materialGamecockUltimate is USC mascot material
Default Re: Kelcy and Vic questioned for night club assault

Quote:
Originally Posted by sc455 View Post
that spat should have been dealt with privately..private messaging has its place. Has zero to do with content or depthness. Gic got it..
boohoo go away, it still applied to the thread.
__________________

for willy
GamecockUltimate is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-17-2014, 01:51 PM   #77
B-G
Bowl MVP
 
B-G's Avatar
 
Male

Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Wall Street
Posts: 2,205
CockyCash: 500
B-G rules the CockPitB-G rules the CockPitB-G rules the CockPitB-G rules the CockPitB-G rules the CockPitB-G rules the CockPitB-G rules the CockPitB-G rules the CockPitB-G rules the CockPitB-G rules the CockPitB-G rules the CockPit
Default Re: Kelcy and Vic questioned for night club assault

So people think this didn't happen? Or Vic's arrest.

Would it be shocking if it didn't?

I'm confused with some peoples views.
__________________
#TeamAPilgrim
B-G is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 04-17-2014, 02:38 PM   #78
BeatBamaTwice
Yes we can!!!
 
BeatBamaTwice's Avatar
 
Male

Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Goose Creek
Posts: 2,759
CockyCash: 200
BeatBamaTwice is USC mascot materialBeatBamaTwice is USC mascot materialBeatBamaTwice is USC mascot materialBeatBamaTwice is USC mascot materialBeatBamaTwice is USC mascot materialBeatBamaTwice is USC mascot materialBeatBamaTwice is USC mascot materialBeatBamaTwice is USC mascot materialBeatBamaTwice is USC mascot materialBeatBamaTwice is USC mascot materialBeatBamaTwice is USC mascot material
Default Re: Kelcy and Vic questioned for night club assault

Up north folks just aren't as friendly. I walked all throughout Times Square and not one person I passed said hi. When I'd say "hi" most looked at me like I wanted something. Maybe it's because there are more of them and there just isn't time. Sounds like Chaz is okay physically. Keeping my fingers crossed that neither he nor Victor are in any trouble. And for the scoreboard, I loved the First Amendment discussion.
__________________
We are Carolina!
BeatBamaTwice is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-17-2014, 06:22 PM   #79
fridayserv
Recruit
 
fridayserv's Avatar
 
Male

Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: aiken
Posts: 221
CockyCash: 500
fridayserv is making other chickens nervousfridayserv is making other chickens nervousfridayserv is making other chickens nervousfridayserv is making other chickens nervousfridayserv is making other chickens nervousfridayserv is making other chickens nervousfridayserv is making other chickens nervous
Default Re: Kelcy and Vic questioned for night club assault

GARNET IN CHICAGO

FOR THE RECORD THERE IS A DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE MERITS OF A CASE AND THE DEFENSE OF THE CASE. MY POINT WAS TO THE DEFENSE BY TMZ BEING BASED IN THE CONSTITUTION. THE REASON COURTS IN CIVIL ACTIONS HAVE TWO PARTIES PRESENT THERE VIEW OF THE LAW IS BECAUSE OF THERE UNDERSTANDING OF THE LAW VS THE FACTS. HERE IS THE FINAL FACT, MY STATEMENT OF UNEDUCATED WAS STRICKLY ON YOUR COMMENT ABOUT THE CONSTITUTION. I DON'T KNOW YOU OR HOW WELL YOU ARE EDUCATED. I SEE NOW YOU MENTION THE 1ST AMENDMENT, I'm GLAD YOU SEE THE CONTEXT OF A CIVIL DEFENSE.
fridayserv is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-17-2014, 11:01 PM   #80
ReCOCKulous
Master Debater
 
ReCOCKulous's Avatar
 
Male

Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Columbia
Posts: 730
CockyCash: 500
ReCOCKulous is USC mascot materialReCOCKulous is USC mascot materialReCOCKulous is USC mascot materialReCOCKulous is USC mascot materialReCOCKulous is USC mascot materialReCOCKulous is USC mascot materialReCOCKulous is USC mascot materialReCOCKulous is USC mascot materialReCOCKulous is USC mascot materialReCOCKulous is USC mascot materialReCOCKulous is USC mascot material
Default Re: Kelcy and Vic questioned for night club assault

Order! Order! Order! Jury, please strike all comments from both counsels. I will hold both of you in contempt.

Thank you Colorado Tech University! Because of you, I knew 12 of the words these law dawgs used.
__________________
The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants.
Thomas Jefferson

Are you ready for the revolution?
ReCOCKulous is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 07:38 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Provided by SLB Development