Page 3 of 10 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 100
  1. #21
    NodakPaul's Avatar
    NodakPaul is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Location
    West Fargo, ND
    Posts
    17,602
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Guilty Before Proven Innocent?

    "kevoncox" wrote:
    "NodakPaul" wrote:
    And on the same not, Vick was not protested to the point that it was impossible for him to get a jury.
    I don't think it even made it to jury selection, and even if it did, the press coverage and protests were no where near the point that it would compromise selection.
    Are you serious? Where you in the US last summer? Did you watch the news last summer. It was the only story on espn.

    And back to your remarks about Vick being guilty, come one man there is a difference between being guilty and pleading guilty. That's as basic as it gets.
    Yes I am serious.


    I was in the US all summer, and I watched the news every day.
    ESPN is not news.
    It is sports news, and believe it or not, a lot of people in the nation don't get their news solely from ESPN like you do.
    Yes, the Vick story received a lot of attention, but no where near the level it would need to compromise jury selection.
    OJ Simpson got a helluva lot more media attention when he was arrested for murder... yet somehow, somehow, they managed to put together a jury.
    Your original quote was [quote author=kevoncox]Before his trial even began, he was targeted by PETA and protested to the point where it was immpossible for him to get a even jury.[/quote]
    That is so far from the actual that it isn't even funny.
    It's sad that you really think this way.

    And then you say that there is a difference between pleading guilty and being guilty, yet in the very next post you assert that McKinnie is innocent solely because he plead not guilty.
    Never mind the multiple eye witnesses and police report...
    :

    In fact, getting back to Vick pleading guilty, trying to assert that he was still in some way innocent is beyond asinine.
    In fact (and green dot me if you need to) that is literally the stupidest fricken thing I have heard here on PP.O.
    Dog fighting equipment, rape stands, and dog corpses were found on Vick's property.
    There were eyewitnesses to Vicks presence during dog fights.
    Two of the material witnesses testified under oath that Vick bankrolled the operation, was present at multiple dog fights, and took part in executing dogs himself.
    Vick himself admitted to the crimes, plead guilty, and offered full disclosure of his involvement in the dog fighting ring.

    That's as basic as it gets.
    Zeus wrote:
    When are you going to realize that picking out the 20 bad throws this year and ignoring the 300 good ones does not make your point?

    =Z=

  2. #22
    kevoncox's Avatar
    kevoncox is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    5,910

    Re: Guilty Before Proven Innocent?

    "Zeus" wrote:
    "kevoncox" wrote:
    "Zeus" wrote:
    "kevoncox" wrote:
    "Zeus" wrote:
    [quote author=kevoncox link=topic=43926.msg756250#msg756250 date=1207751138]
    WHy are NFl players treated in the media and public's eyes as guilty before proven innocent.
    Many of you are big time Vikings fans but we immediately belived that MAC was guilty.

    People immediately believed that Vick was guilty. Before his trial even began, he was targeted by PETA and protested to the point where it was immpossible for him to get a even jury.

    I just don't understand why we can blame Mac and believe he is guilty when we haen't even heard his side of the story. And you all call yourselves Viking fans..for shame!!!
    Guilt or innocence in terms of a court (which is where you're going) is very different from "Did he do something wrong or not."

    Clearly, McKinnie left a club mad - AND THEN CAME BACK SWINGING.
    There are NUMEROUS eyewitness reports of this.
    I don't see how that's in dispute - and under NO circumstances to I view that to be acceptable conduct.
    I wouldn't if you were a buddy of mine, let alone the starting LT for the town's number 1 sports team.
    He plead not guilty. Les atleast hear his side of the story? Has anyone heard his side of the story?
    He said he didn't do it. Lets just wait till we hear why?

    But...nope. Lets rush to pass judgement. :
    Of course he pled Not Guilty.
    Everyone pleads Not Guilty.
    And everyone in prison is innocent.

    I don't care "why".
    That's not the point.
    There's no "why" that explains leaving and then coming back to get into a fight.
    How do you know? We don't. Again, you're proving my point. You are jumping to conclusions and saying nothing he can say will explain it. Why not wait for the explination before we cast him aside. This is why i questioned someones fanhood(love the commercial).

    Innocent people please not guilty. Do you always throw the baby out with the bath water?
    I'm proving your point?
    Whew....that's an interesting intepretation.

    What explanation can justify hitting someone in the head with a velvet-rope pole?
    You seem to believe that McKinnie is going to offer up some fantastic story for why what all the witnesses and police are reporting was okay.

    Again - you don't get it at all, so I'll go slowly - the NFL does not care if he is innocent or guilty.
    What a court says in a trial is immaterial to them - because he has ALREADY damaged the league and the Minnesota Vikings by being involved AT ALL.

    As to me - I just want him gone because he's a big statue who struggles to pass-block speed-rushing ends.
    I think he's an idiot for getting involved in what seems to be an average of one block-headed encounter with the police each year.
    Somehow, Matt Birk has been on this team twice as long and hasn't crossed that line once.

    =Z=
    [/quote]

    I'm positive that Mac's suspension is based on his if he is found guilty or innocent. It's the same reason that the league typically waits for the judicial system to run it course. If they don't the NFLPA will step in and a lawsuit. Every quote from almost every team official has been always been, "We'll wait to gather some more info"

    http://www.startribune.com/sports/vikings/12523011.html

    I think the duke case is a great example. In the court of public opinion they were found guilty, however when it came to light they were innocent.
    I just don't think you get it. If you have a problem with Mac's play then that is fine but to declear the man guilty without hearing his side of the events is foolish. No other word but foolish. Plenty of witnesses and police officers have sent innocent people to jail. All i say is let's hear his side of the events before passing judgement and that I would think a fan like yourself would feel the same way!!

  3. #23
    kevoncox's Avatar
    kevoncox is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    5,910

    Re: Guilty Before Proven Innocent?

    "ultravikingfan" wrote:
    "kevoncox" wrote:
    "ultravikingfan" wrote:
    Go back an answer your other thread (where you got your jiggly butt handed to you) first.

    Please list me the names of members who said he was guilty?
    Please do so...I am dying to see this.

    While you are on your high horse, maybe you can post some guidelines on being a Viking Fan since you seem to be one and some of us apparently are not.

    [size=13pt]Fun how 1 person does something and he gets....[/size]

    BTW, didn't you mean "Funny"?
    I meant Funny but
    said fun...it happens to be all the time...
    Moving on, the fact that LT is a draft need and the fact the everyone( almost everyone) on this board believes he would will be suspended kinda points to the fact that they believe he's guilt...don't you think?
    I knew it.
    Way to dodge the question.
    You said nothing about suspension in your initial rant.


    Let me refresh your memory:

    Many of you are big time Vikings fans but we immediately belived that MAC was guilty.
    If you are going to blast away, you'd better keep your ducks in a row.
    Or you are going to be pummeled by the likes of Zeus and Caine.

    Please answer me this, who here said he was guilty?
    Who?


    And you all call yourselves Viking fans..for shame!!!
    And who the floop are you to be defining what a Viking fan is?


    I can tell you one thing you are not...good at debate.
    You're right. I'm not good at debating so let me connect the dots for you.

    1) People on the board are asking for us to draft a new LT because Mac is going to be suspended.(I'm not talking about those that never mentioned us drafting a new LT until he got in trouble and are now saying they don't like him because of his slow feet and problems with pass rushers
    :.)

    2) Mac will only be suspended if he is found guilty of these charges. He isn't as big of a problem as say Chris Henry and Pacman. His story hasn't really been picked broadcasted by the media. He got a couple of blurbs on Espn but nothing like those two other players and or Odell.

    3)If you belive that he will be suspended then you belive that he will not be found not guilty. Hence you are passing judgement on him before even hearinghis side of the story. I think the fact that he plead not guilty is enough to atleast here what he has to say about his innocent. What if he is innocent? I wasn't there and neither were you all....So again I say, stop passing judgement on a Viking and I call your fanhood( not just you a lot of people on this board) in to question....
    For shame
    ;D


  4. #24
    jessejames09's Avatar
    jessejames09 is offline Ring of Fame
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    4,233

    Re: Guilty Before Proven Innocent?

    "kevoncox" wrote:
    "Zeus" wrote:
    "kevoncox" wrote:
    "Zeus" wrote:
    "kevoncox" wrote:
    [quote author=Zeus link=topic=43926.msg756294#msg756294 date=1207755016]
    [quote author=kevoncox link=topic=43926.msg756250#msg756250 date=1207751138]
    WHy are NFl players treated in the media and public's eyes as guilty before proven innocent.
    Many of you are big time Vikings fans but we immediately belived that MAC was guilty.

    People immediately believed that Vick was guilty. Before his trial even began, he was targeted by PETA and protested to the point where it was immpossible for him to get a even jury.

    I just don't understand why we can blame Mac and believe he is guilty when we haen't even heard his side of the story. And you all call yourselves Viking fans..for shame!!!
    Guilt or innocence in terms of a court (which is where you're going) is very different from "Did he do something wrong or not."

    Clearly, McKinnie left a club mad - AND THEN CAME BACK SWINGING.
    There are NUMEROUS eyewitness reports of this.
    I don't see how that's in dispute - and under NO circumstances to I view that to be acceptable conduct.
    I wouldn't if you were a buddy of mine, let alone the starting LT for the town's number 1 sports team.
    He plead not guilty. Les atleast hear his side of the story? Has anyone heard his side of the story?
    He said he didn't do it. Lets just wait till we hear why?

    But...nope. Lets rush to pass judgement. :
    Of course he pled Not Guilty.
    Everyone pleads Not Guilty.
    And everyone in prison is innocent.

    I don't care "why".
    That's not the point.
    There's no "why" that explains leaving and then coming back to get into a fight.
    How do you know? We don't. Again, you're proving my point. You are jumping to conclusions and saying nothing he can say will explain it. Why not wait for the explination before we cast him aside. This is why i questioned someones fanhood(love the commercial).

    Innocent people please not guilty. Do you always throw the baby out with the bath water?
    I'm proving your point?
    Whew....that's an interesting intepretation.

    What explanation can justify hitting someone in the head with a velvet-rope pole?
    You seem to believe that McKinnie is going to offer up some fantastic story for why what all the witnesses and police are reporting was okay.

    Again - you don't get it at all, so I'll go slowly - the NFL does not care if he is innocent or guilty.
    What a court says in a trial is immaterial to them - because he has ALREADY damaged the league and the Minnesota Vikings by being involved AT ALL.

    As to me - I just want him gone because he's a big statue who struggles to pass-block speed-rushing ends.
    I think he's an idiot for getting involved in what seems to be an average of one block-headed encounter with the police each year.
    Somehow, Matt Birk has been on this team twice as long and hasn't crossed that line once.

    =Z=
    [/quote]

    I'm positive that Mac's suspension is based on his if he is found guilty or innocent. It's the same reason that the league typically waits for the judicial system to run it course. If they don't the NFLPA will step in and a lawsuit. Every quote from almost every team official has been always been, "We'll wait to gather some more info"

    http://www.startribune.com/sports/vikings/12523011.html

    I think the duke case is a great example. In the court of public opinion they were found guilty, however when it came to light they were innocent.
    I just don't think you get it. If you have a problem with Mac's play then that is fine but to declear the man guilty without hearing his side of the events is foolish. No other word but foolish. Plenty of witnesses and police officers have sent innocent people to jail. All i say is let's hear his side of the events before passing judgement and that I would think a fan like yourself would feel the same way!!
    [/quote]

    He hit someone with a pole!! If that is true he deserves to be viewed as 'guilty.'

    If somehow he can perform jedi mind-tricks and made it appear as though he's kicking ass with a pole when really, he was helping baby orphan dolphins. Then i will join you on your Wahhmbulence ride.

  5. #25
    pack93z's Avatar
    pack93z is offline Team Alumni
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    2,465

    Re: Guilty Before Proven Innocent?

    "kevoncox" wrote:
    I'm positive that Mac's suspension is based on his if he is found guilty or innocent. It's the same reason that the league typically waits for the judicial system to run it course. If they don't the NFLPA will step in and a lawsuit. Every quote from almost every team official has been always been, "We'll wait to gather some more info"

    http://www.startribune.com/sports/vikings/12523011.html

    I think the duke case is a great example. In the court of public opinion they were found guilty, however when it came to light they were innocent.
    I just don't think you get it. If you have a problem with Mac's play then that is fine but to declear the man guilty without hearing his side of the events is foolish. No other word but foolish. Plenty of witnesses and police officers have sent innocent people to jail. All i say is let's hear his side of the events before passing judgement and that I would think a fan like yourself would feel the same way!!
    The merit of guilt or innocence in the Duke case was quite a bit different, one witness or victim verses a crowd of publicly appointed officials and other common witnesses. But in terms of public opinion I can faintly see your point.

    But I guess I missed where people are burning Mt Mckinny at the stake already, but thinking a suspension is comming is a wise conclusion on a couple different fronts. First, he is a repeat offender, hence the NFL office is going to lay down some type of punishment. Second, the case looks pretty cut and dry in terms of assualt, regardless if it was provoked, he is going to have a hard time justifying a beating with a pole. Even self defense doesn't work, with police on the scene and accounting the situation differently, this isn't a witch hunt, it seems he broke the law and will be held in trial for it.

    Not to mention, as others have, it might be worthy regardless of conviction or not, to start to look at an alternative at left tackle because McKinnie isn't real adapt at moving his feet quick enough in the pass blocking game. ..... Wait on second thought, strike that.. keep him in the starting lineup for KGB and company to run around.
    ;D

  6. #26
    jessejames09's Avatar
    jessejames09 is offline Ring of Fame
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    4,233

    Re: Guilty Before Proven Innocent?

    "kevoncox" wrote:
    "ultravikingfan" wrote:
    "kevoncox" wrote:
    "ultravikingfan" wrote:
    Go back an answer your other thread (where you got your jiggly butt handed to you) first.

    Please list me the names of members who said he was guilty?
    Please do so...I am dying to see this.

    While you are on your high horse, maybe you can post some guidelines on being a Viking Fan since you seem to be one and some of us apparently are not.

    [size=13pt]Fun how 1 person does something and he gets....[/size]

    BTW, didn't you mean "Funny"?
    I meant Funny but
    said fun...it happens to be all the time...
    Moving on, the fact that LT is a draft need and the fact the everyone( almost everyone) on this board believes he would will be suspended kinda points to the fact that they believe he's guilt...don't you think?
    I knew it.
    Way to dodge the question.
    You said nothing about suspension in your initial rant.


    Let me refresh your memory:

    Many of you are big time Vikings fans but we immediately belived that MAC was guilty.
    If you are going to blast away, you'd better keep your ducks in a row.
    Or you are going to be pummeled by the likes of Zeus and Caine.

    Please answer me this, who here said he was guilty?
    Who?


    And you all call yourselves Viking fans..for shame!!!
    And who the floop are you to be defining what a Viking fan is?


    I can tell you one thing you are not...good at debate.
    You're right. I'm not good at debating so let me connect the dots for you.

    1) People on the board are asking for us to draft a new LT because Mac is going to be suspended.(I'm not talking about those that never mentioned us drafting a new LT until he got in trouble and are now saying they don't like him because of his slow feet and problems with pass rushers
    :.)

    2) Mac will only be suspended if he is found guilty of these charges. He isn't as big of a problem as say Chris Henry and Pacman. His story hasn't really been picked broadcasted by the media. He got a couple of blurbs on Espn but nothing like those two other players and or Odell.

    3)If you belive that he will be suspended then you belive that he will not be found not guilty. Hence you are passing judgement on him before even hearinghis side of the story. I think the fact that he plead not guilty is enough to atleast here what he has to say about his innocent. What if he is innocent? I wasn't there and neither were you all....So again I say, stop passing judgement on a Viking and I call your fanhood( not just you a lot of people on this board) in to question....
    For shame
    ;D

    Questioning ones fan hood.. I know webby likes that one. What color dot does that earn you?

  7. #27
    ultravikingfan's Avatar
    ultravikingfan is offline Administrator
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    NE Ohio
    Posts
    24,514

    Re: Guilty Before Proven Innocent?

    "kevoncox" wrote:
    "ultravikingfan" wrote:
    "kevoncox" wrote:
    "ultravikingfan" wrote:
    Go back an answer your other thread (where you got your jiggly butt handed to you) first.

    Please list me the names of members who said he was guilty?
    Please do so...I am dying to see this.

    While you are on your high horse, maybe you can post some guidelines on being a Viking Fan since you seem to be one and some of us apparently are not.

    [size=13pt]Fun how 1 person does something and he gets....[/size]

    BTW, didn't you mean "Funny"?
    I meant Funny but
    said fun...it happens to be all the time...
    Moving on, the fact that LT is a draft need and the fact the everyone( almost everyone) on this board believes he would will be suspended kinda points to the fact that they believe he's guilt...don't you think?
    I knew it.
    Way to dodge the question.
    You said nothing about suspension in your initial rant.


    Let me refresh your memory:

    Many of you are big time Vikings fans but we immediately belived that MAC was guilty.
    If you are going to blast away, you'd better keep your ducks in a row.
    Or you are going to be pummeled by the likes of Zeus and Caine.

    Please answer me this, who here said he was guilty?
    Who?


    And you all call yourselves Viking fans..for shame!!!
    And who the floop are you to be defining what a Viking fan is?


    I can tell you one thing you are not...good at debate.
    You're right. I'm not good at debating so let me connect the dots for you.

    1) People on the board are asking for us to draft a new LT because Mac is going to be suspended.(I'm not talking about those that never mentioned us drafting a new LT until he got in trouble and are now saying they don't like him because of his slow feet and problems with pass rushers
    :.)

    2) Mac will only be suspended if he is found guilty of these charges. He isn't as big of a problem as say Chris Henry and Pacman. His story hasn't really been picked broadcasted by the media. He got a couple of blurbs on Espn but nothing like those two other players and or Odell.

    3)If you belive that he will be suspended then you belive that he will not be found not guilty. Hence you are passing judgement on him before even hearinghis side of the story. I think the fact that he plead not guilty is enough to atleast here what he has to say about his innocent. What if he is innocent? I wasn't there and neither were you all....So again I say, stop passing judgement on a Viking and I call your fanhood( not just you a lot of people on this board) in to question....
    For shame
    ;D

    Here's a 'dot' for you.

    I seem to remember people talking about drafting a LT because of the huge amount of money we are paying him and his lack of production.


    And what is wrong with maybe planning ahead.
    Draft a LT anyways because he may be suspended.
    Oh ya, we are calling him gulity as you said.

    And yes, you are and at debating.
    Now you bring Pacman and Henry into this?
    Who ever said he was as bad as those 2 clowns.

    BTW, those who choose to questions anthers faith and 'fandom' is doomed to fail at PP.O and will be flogged harshly.

  8. #28
    Zeus's Avatar
    Zeus is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Minnesota.
    Posts
    23,937

    Re: Guilty Before Proven Innocent?

    "kevoncox" wrote:
    I'm positive that Mac's suspension is based on his if he is found guilty or innocent. It's the same reason that the league typically waits for the judicial system to run it course. If they don't the NFLPA will step in and a lawsuit. Every quote from almost every team official has been always been, "We'll wait to gather some more info"

    http://www.startribune.com/sports/vikings/12523011.html

    I think the duke case is a great example. In the court of public opinion they were found guilty, however when it came to light they were innocent.
    I just don't think you get it. If you have a problem with Mac's play then that is fine but to declear the man guilty without hearing his side of the events is foolish. No other word but foolish. Plenty of witnesses and police officers have sent innocent people to jail. All i say is let's hear his side of the events before passing judgement and that I would think a fan like yourself would feel the same way!!
    Well, you're absolutely wrong.
    The NFL does NOT need to wait for the courts to rule before suspending a player.
    Neither does a team.
    See:
    Jones, PacMan and his suspension for the 2007 season, even though his case for the Vegas strip-club incident has not yet been tried.

    You seem to believe that the ruling of a court is the end-all for guilt and innocence in this country.
    That's laughable.
    And terribly naive.

    As to how a fan should think:
    I think a fan should judge a player based on his actions, not his slick lawyers.
    McKinnie has had several off-the-field incidents and his on-the-field play in 2007 was below-caliber for the money is he making.
    Fairly simple calculation for THIS "true fan".

    =Z=

    Thanks to Josdin for the awesome sig!

  9. #29
    dcboardr41 is offline Team Alumni
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    3,051

    Re: Guilty Before Proven Innocent?

    lately i look forward to signing onto PPO and seeing a rant by Kevon, i love them <3 lol

    Pissing on the Pack since 08'

  10. #30
    kevoncox's Avatar
    kevoncox is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    5,910

    Re: Guilty Before Proven Innocent?

    "NodakPaul" wrote:
    [quote]
    "kevoncox" wrote:
    "NodakPaul" wrote:
    And on the same not, Vick was not protested to the point that it was impossible for him to get a jury.
    I don't think it even made it to jury selection, and even if it did, the press coverage and protests were no where near the point that it would compromise selection.
    Are you serious? Where you in the US last summer? Did you watch the news last summer. It was the only story on espn.

    And back to your remarks about Vick being guilty, come one man there is a difference between being guilty and pleading guilty. That's as basic as it gets.
    Yes I am serious.


    I was in the US all summer, and I watched the news every day.
    ESPN is not news.
    It is sports news, and believe it or not, a lot of people in the nation don't get their news solely from ESPN like you do.
    Yes, the Vick story received a lot of attention, but no where near the level it would need to compromise jury selection.
    OJ Simpson got a helluva lot more media attention when he was arrested for murder... yet somehow, somehow, they managed to put together a jury.
    Your original quote was "kevoncox]Before" wrote:
    That is so far from the actual that it isn't even funny.
    It's sad that you really think this way.

    And then you say that there is a difference between pleading guilty and being guilty, yet in the very next post you assert that McKinnie is innocent solely because he plead not guilty.
    Never mind the multiple eye witnesses and police report...
    :

    In fact, getting back to Vick pleading guilty, trying to assert that he was still in some way innocent is beyond asinine.
    In fact (and green dot me if you need to) that is literally the stupidest fricken thing I have heard here on PP.O.
    Dog fighting equipment, rape stands, and dog corpses were found on Vick's property.
    There were eyewitnesses to Vicks presence during dog fights.
    Two of the material witnesses testified under oath that Vick bankrolled the operation, was present at multiple dog fights, and took part in executing dogs himself.
    Vick himself admitted to the crimes, plead guilty, and offered full disclosure of his involvement in the dog fighting ring.

    That's as basic as it gets.
    Wow, so you know me so well you can attest to my viewing, listening and reading sources of entertainment. Just like some of your brethren on this site you are assuming. My subscription to the NY times would say you're wrong. As would the fact that i watch both the 10 and 11 oclock news at night. Moving on....

    Lets not put words in my mouth. I said, here is a difference beween pleading guilty and being found guilty. Innocennt people often plead guilty is there is no way to prove their innocence. It happens all the time in the judicial system. The defense is offered a plea deal with basically a slap on the wrist in exchange for a guilty plea. Which would you take. Take a chance on serving 5 years or
    walking out the court room on probation. Your lawyer would probally advise you to take the deal.

    But because you brought up Vick....
    So you don't find a slight conflict of intrest in the federal government using the same indiviuals that they were charging? Back to a plea deal. I'm a low level street thug caught up in these dog fighting charges. The feds offer me a plea deal, I am uneducated and debendent strictly on what my attorney says is in my best interest. The deal calls for me to point fingers at Vick's involvement.
    As Vick you are now in a corner. You purchased the house, you know what was going on in the home but didn't do anything to stop it. It's best to plead guilty.
    I'm not saying that this is what happened. I'm just illustrating how pleading guilty is different then being found guilty.

Page 3 of 10 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. The 12th overall pick has proven value
    By Marrdro in forum Vikings Offseason/Draft/FA Forum
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 03-08-2011, 09:11 PM
  2. Replies: 4
    Last Post: 08-07-2008, 02:12 PM
  3. Former Bengals WR Henry could be innocent
    By singersp in forum General NFL Discussion
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 05-13-2008, 05:10 AM
  4. Point proven again
    By enlvikeman in forum Vikings Fan Forum
    Replies: 35
    Last Post: 10-16-2007, 11:04 AM
  5. Leonard little found innocent
    By muchluv4smoot in forum General NFL Discussion
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 04-05-2005, 09:27 PM

Tags for this Thread

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
  •