(realize that some cases have a "more likely than not" standard, rather than "beyond a reasonable doubt". Usually those are civil cases, not criminal...but something to keep in mind)
1. that's ultimately what i'm saying. call it whatever you want to call it. same practical conclusion. different legal conclusion, in a way...but same practical conclusion. 2. it says exactly what you think it says. they likely had their minds made up as they headed into the deliberation room. i don't know all the facts...but from what i read/saw/heard it seems to me the system did a pretty good job here. i don't always think that.
I honestly can not understand how it is that Calvin got off. Now, I've only been casually following the story, but from what I understand the girls had the following going for them: 1. Testimony from five, count them, five "victims." 2. Two of the five could not have been motivated by the money as they were not part of the squabble. 3. Testimony from another witness who said she was told about it by one of the victims years ago, before the money squabble motivation could have come up. 4. Testimony from someone in Child Services or something like that about how they investigated a complaint at the time of the alleged assault. 5. Plenty of character witness on Calvin. 6. They had made their accusations before they lost the money squabble. 7. Evidence that Calvin treated his b*stard children as second-class children. Calvin had: 1. His own insistence that he did not do it. 2. A theory that 3 of the daughters were seeking revenge for him taking their money. The other 2, I don't know how they were accounted for. 3. His legit daughters testifying on his behalf. 4. ... uhh, that's it. I assumed he was sunk. I'm quite surprised that he won this case, even with his fancy NBA lawyer. I won't second-guess his jury (I never do), but it really has me scratching his head. It certainly makes me much less comfortable with "innocent" than I am with "not guilty." Anyway, if he's found not guilty, I don't feel like we should treat him as though he were (even if he is). So, I'm all for bringing him back for broadcasting. But, I won't sign the petition because: 1. These petitions never do anything. 2. The petition says we knew he was innocent all along, which I certainly did not. 3. The petition has grammatical errors. I wouldn't turn in any kind of formal document with a grammar error on it; it's embarrassing. And finally, if he really is guilty, I feel really bad for his daughters. First, he conceives them out of wedlock, treats them as though he's ashamed of them through their whole childhoods, sexually assaults them, takes $50 grand that should be theirs (regardless of this case, I don't see how it is justice that he got that money), and then gets off scott-free for the crimes he committed against them and has Rocket fans everywhere accusing them of being liars. Most of it is still true and still sucks even if he is innocent of the charges, but his actual guilt would make it worse yet.
Uh, last time I checked Rusty Hardin wasn't some fancy NBA lawyer. He's a top notch Texas lawyer. One of the best you can get. And you forgot one other thing Calvin had--witnesses who were liars on the State's side. Even the jurors had a hard time determining when they WERE telling the truth.
Top notch lawyer? Check. Represents players and others affiliated with the NBA? Check. Sounds like a fancy NBA lawyer to me. Don't let the name Rusty fool you.
NBA lawyer--No. Houston Professional athlete lawyer. Yes. I still stand by my original post. http://www.rustyhardin.com/clients_case.asp?page=3
Alright, fine. I hereby officially withdraw my baseless accusation that Rusty Hardin is a "fancy NBA lawyer." Going forward, please understand me to have said, "I'm quite surprised that he won this case, even with his top-notch Texas lawyer."
Well, that's why we have juries sit down and listen to the testimony instead of reading recaps in the paper. The jury is in a better decision to decide the case than me, so I defer to their judgement. But, given what I was reading in the paper, it came as a surprise. The girls must have been terrible on the stand or something. They must have done something terribly wrong to squander the advantage they had from the testimony of 5 alleged victims. If it was one daughter, I'd understand having reservations about her testimony, but 5? This is the sort of case that is determined by credibility on the witness stand. So, I can only guess they did a terrible job of it (even if they were lying).
Since, there was no physical evidence, it's just his word against their words...and who the jury feels is telling the truth. Just watch the daily "judge" shows, most of the time it's just that his word against mine type stuff.
His status won't be evaluated until after the season. He will also be in attendance at tonights game if anyone is interested.
WOOHOOOOOOO Now I agree with the earlier post that he should be named interim head coach calvin in the booth is just as much a coach to this team he is the spirit we need calvin on 24 hours a day
Wow, I had a strong feeling that he was not guilty and I think he deserves to get his job back. I'll love seeing a shot of him at the Rockets game: this made my day to hear this good news
Don't you mean...He is a scorer? And remember boys and girls, a penis is like playing basketball, it dribbles before it shoots. DD
