The Dallas Mavericks: Boy, these cats sure miss Dirk Nowtizki, don't they? The Mavericks started the game on fire, hitting eight of their first 10 shots and scoring 30 points in the first quarter. Their offense kinda slogged off after that, especially during their 15-point third quarter. Add that to the fact that they couldn't contain Kevin Durant (28 points on 11-for-22 shooting).
Said Mavs coach Rick Carlisle: "We struggled defensively in the second half, we struggled on the boards, and [the Thunder's] second-chance points were our undoing down the stretch."
That's four losses in Dirk's six missed games. Next up: The Orlando Magic.
More bad news: The Mavs are 35 games into their season but have played only 14 road games. This means their schedule is backloaded with road games, which could put a pretty big damper on any hopes of beating out the Spurs or Lakers in the race for homecourt advantage in the playoffs.
The Denver Nuggets: The Purple Paupers enter last night's game with a league-worst record of 7-25. What's more, they were the only team in the Association that was winless against winning teams.
Well, now they have a victory over a winning team and the Cavaliers (8-27) are stuck with the NBA's worst record. All thanks to the Enver Nuggets.
How soft were the Nuggets on defense last night? Let me put it this way: If I'm ever forced to jump out of a helicoptor while firing my machine gun at an oncoming horde of the undead during the inevitable zombie apocalypse, I hope I land on Enver's D. Either that or Pau Gasol. Okay, or maybe Scarlett Johansson.
Anyway, let's get you the numbers. The Kings finished with 122 points on 56 percent shooting. Furthermore, they shot 50 percente from downtown (9-for-18) and 83 percent on the foul line (25-for-30). According to the Basketball-Reference box score, their Effective Field Goal Percentage was 62.2 and they had an Offensive Rating of 126.8.
More numbers: The Kings had 27 fast break points and scored 27 points off 23 forced turnovers. Tyreke Evans went berzerk (29 points and a season-high 12 assists) and the Sactowners went on a 23-2 run in the second half on their way to a 20-point win that probably had Carmelo Anthony doing a Google search for houses in New York after the game.
Remember: In their last game, the Nuggets suffered a double-digit loss to the Clippers.
Said 'Melo: "We're just frustrated right now. I know I am after these two losses against two teams that we should have beat. Tonight was an embarrassing loss; that's all I have to say about it."
Added Denver coach George Karl: "I'm kind of blown away with our performance. My team, since I've been in Denver, has often bounced back from tough losses. But tonight we did not do it. Sometimes we need to think about playing harder. When you have 12 assists, 23 turnovers, no steals, that tells you you are not active enough."
How bad was this loss? Here's how bad: Jeffrey Morton of Denver Stiffs sounds like he needs to be talked out of drinking paint thinner:
I've never been so disappointed with this Nuggets team. I'm done with the hyperbole and the words. You all saw what happened. There's no reason for losing like this, and the lack of explanation is what hurts the most. The Nuggets looked lifeless for three quarters. For nearly one quarter they played on fire. The only thing I can think of is maybe the Carmelo situation is getting to them? Maybe not. Honestly I don't care anymore.Damn. Imagine how bummed out he's going to be when 'Melo leaves.
Melo didn't play badly. Nene was one of the few bright spots...but the rest of the team played like they wanted to be anywhere but Sacramento this evening. That's not what a professional sports team does.
It's not about having "hope". It's knowing what your team is. It's knowing what your team can accomplish. That's what makes this even more disheartening. My only hope is that the Nuggets can right this ship before it takes we as Nuggets fans down with it.
At any rate, the Nuggets officially qualifty for a little Michael Ray Richardson quotage:
Reporter: What do you think is happening to the team?The Cleveland Cavaliers: As noted, now the league's worst team.
Richardson: The ship be sinking.
Reporter: How far can it sink?
Richardson: Sky's the limit.
Donald Sterling: Newsflash: Sterling is a shitty owner and a racist. This news just blew my socks off. Seriously. No matter what MythBusters tells you.
Amar''''''e Stoudemire, quote machine: Not that Suns fans need any more reasons to be depressed, but, well, here you go:
Stoudemire's wish was to stay in Phoenix but left over a chasm in guaranteed money. He took a maximum-level, five-year $99.7 million contract that is fully guaranteed over the Suns' five-year, $96.6 million offer with about $56 million guaranteed. The remainder of the Suns' deal would have kicked in if he played a comparably low minute total in his third and fourth years.Bonus video: Basketbawful reader kazam92 left this link with the comment "Charles Barkley is the fuckin man." Indeed he is.
The stipulation addressed the Suns' concerns about Stoudemire's knees and right eye, all of which have had surgeries.
"If they were looking to rebuild and thought I was the guy they wanted to rebuild with, then we could've came to an understanding," Stoudemire said. "But apparently it wasn't that way. It felt like I wasn't wanted. It felt like I wasn't appreciated. I felt like my play on the court was overlooked.
"If you have the best training staff and brag about the situation, my knees really weren't much of a concern. It was something that didn't make him (Managing Partner Robert Sarver) comfortable and he made a decision. I don't want to get involved in an amount-of-minutes situation because it becomes a control issue. You want to be able to play free."
Suns coach Alvin Gentry said Stoudemire was concerned that the Suns were going to remain mostly Steve Nash's team. Home fans chanted "M-V-P" for both players.
"I think he felt like he would like to have a team that was his, that he was the focal point, that it would be basically his team," Gentry said.
Nash said he "foolishly" thought the Suns would re-sign Stoudemire, 28.
"We lost an All-Star power forward and we didn't replace him," Nash said. "We have no real kind of power forward."
Stoudemire said it is hard for him to see Suns fans endure their worst team in seven years.
"We were in the conference finals and had a chance to do something special this season but all of a sudden it went in the opposite direction," Stoudemire said. "It's tough to see because the fans deserve more. They've been loyal. We've been on top so long that they deserve a championship team. But decisions were made and they're going in another direction.
"Last year, the Knicks wanted to be in the Suns' shoes. This year, we're, we're...yeah."
He received little fan disdain for his exit, which could bode well for his reception Friday.
"I don't know how I'll be received," he said. "(Suns analyst) Tom Chambers and Gambo and Ash (KTAR-AM hosts John Gambadoro and Mark Asher) did a great job of talking bad about me while I was there so hopefully that blows over and the fans will appreciate me a little bit more."
Chris's One-Line Lacktion Ledger: In exactly 120 seconds, Donte Greene tossed one celebratory brick for a +1 suck differential.
Labels: Dallas Mavericks, Denver Nuggets, Donald Sterling, Worst of the Night
81 Comments:
Word of the Day
Previous Posts
Bawful After Dark: January 6, 2011Worst of the Night: January 5, 2011
Bawful After Dark: January 5, 2011
Worst of the Night: January 4, 2011
Bawful After Dark: January 4, 2011
Worst of the Night: January 3, 2011
Bawful After Dark: January 3, 2011
Worst of Sunday Night
Worst of the Night: December 30, 2010
Bawful After Dark: December 30, 2010
Links
Archive
January 2005February 2005
October 2005
November 2005
December 2005
January 2006
February 2006
March 2006
April 2006
May 2006
June 2006
July 2006
August 2006
September 2006
October 2006
November 2006
December 2006
January 2007
February 2007
March 2007
April 2007
May 2007
June 2007
July 2007
August 2007
September 2007
October 2007
November 2007
December 2007
January 2008
February 2008
March 2008
April 2008
May 2008
June 2008
July 2008
August 2008
September 2008
October 2008
November 2008
December 2008
January 2009
February 2009
March 2009
April 2009
May 2009
June 2009
July 2009
August 2009
September 2009
October 2009
November 2009
December 2009
January 2010
February 2010
March 2010
April 2010
May 2010
June 2010
July 2010
August 2010
September 2010
October 2010
November 2010
December 2010
January 2011
February 2011
March 2011
April 2011
May 2011
June 2011
July 2011
August 2011
September 2011
October 2011
November 2011
December 2011
January 2012
February 2012
March 2012
April 2012
May 2012
June 2012
July 2012
August 2012
September 2012
October 2012
November 2012
December 2012
January 2013
February 2013
March 2013
April 2013
May 2013
June 2013
July 2013
August 2013
September 2013
October 2013
November 2013
December 2013
April 2014
May 2014
June 2014
July 2014
August 2014
June 2018
July 2022
contact: basketbawful@yahoo.com
some time ago in the comments, there was some discussion about the best internation player to play in the NBA. just a question, what do you guys think about drazen petrovic? shame he died so early.
wv: upercla. FINNALLY. someone has destroyed half of the upper classes
Via The Basketball Jones, Jason Terry Perfects 'Just Chillin' Defense.
Why is it that as soon as a disgraced athlete starts doing well again everyone forgets all about their past transgressions? If Tiger Woods wins a major or two next year no one will be talking about the SUV incident anymore. I understand the whole idea of redemption and remorse and all that, but you HAVE to be a truly monstrous person to enjoy watching two dogs tear each other to shreds. So why is it suddenly okay to defend Michael Vick? He didn't deserve the death penalty, I suppose, but he certainly deserves a hell of a lot more than he got.
This rant is possibly unrelated to Barkley's comments last night, since I don't know if he was just attacking Tucker or if he was in fact defending Vick.
In his opinion this is the best Nuggets team he has ever coached. Looks like he is senile now too.
Dallas is demonstrably better on the road; I think scheduling is the least of their worries.
Talking about imaginary entities is a clear sign of dementia...
(also valid for Santa Claus, Tooth Fairy, VC's toughness, Lebron's humility and Casper the Ghost)
People treat OJ better? Really? Seems to me he's been a complete outcast/laughing stock since the moment he stepped into that white Ford Bronco.
The funny thing is, imagine OJ came back to play football and actually succeeded at it. People would forget about that double-murder pretty quick, I think.
I just hate the way that athletic success is an instant cure-all for all past transgressions.
Why Amar''''e will never win a ring (unless it's a career twilight ring like Payton's).
LOL @ Barkley. Dude is hilarious. I'm glad TNT lets him be himself, because it's a helluva lot more interesting than the sterile ESPN commentary.
I have a few thoughts on this. I'm not defending what Vick did, which was terrible, but let's take a look at what he "got" for what he did. He lost his job. Lost his fortune. Lost his humanity in the eyes of an entire nation and large portions of the world at large. He spent almost two years in a federal prison. Even now, during his "redemption campaign," he's in a financial crisis and his bankruptcy judgement stipulates that most of his money is dispersed before it ever gets to him.
One of the great things about America is that people can actually get a second chance...after they are punished. Vick was prosecuted, convicted, served his sentence and is still paying out the ass. What more can he do?
You're wrong, by the way. The SUV incident will follow Woods forever, just as the dog fighting thing will follow Vick. These things might not receive constant mention in gold roundups or game recaps, but they will stay alive in the mind of people who follow sports. How many times, on this site alone, do people make reference to Kobe's rape trial? A rape for which, I should point out, Bryant was never convicted. But Bryant will always appear guilty in the eyes of the people who hate him.
The problem is, what many people want is for Vick to fail so utterly that all he'll be able to do is curl up and die somewhere, cold and alone, and possibly eaten by dogs. It's not going to happen. He hasn't been "given" a second chance. He served his time. He's still, literally, paying for his crimes. Which, according to America's legal system, means he's earned a second chance. He's making the most of it. What's wrong with that?
I don't know if OJ is treated "better". I think it's more of people usually just ignoring him since he is now a pathetic has-been, whereas Vick is still active and thus actively talked about.
That being said, I do believe our country in general looks down more on animal cruelty than human cruelty. Maybe because human vs human is more of a fair fight? Maybe we have enough humans and not enough animals? Not really sure.
If you're not familiar with him, look him up. He plays (played?) for the St. Louis Rams. He was caught drunk driving on multiple occassions, even killed a mother of young children in a crash (while drunk). Years after killing that woman, he got caught - you guessed it - drunk driving yet again. His suspension? 4 games. Moral outrage from the masses? Non-existant.
Unlike Vick, he did not do hard time (in one of the most notorious prisons in the US, btw), he did not lose out on the ability to play multiple seasons, he did not go bankrupt, he did not gain any type of reputation, and, seeing as though he was caught years later drunk-driving, he didn't learn his lesson either. But football fans ignore this, and zero in on a guy that was into dogfighting.
I think dog-fighting is reprehensible, don't get me wrong, but the puritans out there that think Vick should have lost more and not be given the second chance a murderer like Little got (and a third and fourth cahnce), boggle the mind. People seem to love dogs more than humans. Vick paid his debt. If he slips up again, he doesn't deserve another chance. Until then, get off your high-horse or apply your same line of thinking to other athletes that have committed much worse.
Innocent mother > dogs (at least, she should be).
no, I take that back.
it's a sign of what is so wrong with the paupers. sigh
but I'll take a win on NATIONAL TELEVISION. who again thought these kings were good enough for anything other than Comcast Sports California coverage?!
On top of that, it's not like somebody filmed Vick kicking a puppy or something. It was a full blown dog fighting ring with lots of money involved and his excuse that it was part of his culture growing up comes up short in most people's estimations.
There are incidents in South Carolina of people chaining up defanged, declawed bears and setting dogs loose on them. That riles me up much more than human-on-human violence.
I was just trying to bring up the correlation between celebrity success and popular forgiveness/forgetfulness. OJ still gets shat on because he's a train wreck. Imagine he turned his life around and became a hero again. Some would say he'd never be accepted but if he came back to lead a team to a superbowl you know there would be many who would idolize him (mostly fans of that team, of course).
Kobe is an interesting example. Yeah, people on this site still mention Kobe's rape trial, but that's mainly because this is a place to make fun of athletes who fuck up. When was the last time you heard the rape trial being mentioned in a broadcast or in popular media? I know it doesn't have anything to do with the game itself, and questions of his innocence notwithstanding, it's still an aspect of his character that should not be forgotten.
Hypothetical question: If you were a huge Eagles fan, how would you feel about your son putting a poster of Vick up on his wall? Would you do it yourself? Professional athletes are human and as Chuck has said many times should not be role models, but still people see them as such.
As a sidenote, sites like Basketbawful are key to breaking down the myth of the heroic professional athlete. When all is said and done it's just a game. Life matters, sports don't. No one should ever get any sort of pass just because they happen to be able to run real fast, jump real high, or throw a perfect spiral.
Your absolutely right, the whole Leonard Little thing should have outraged people a lot more than what Vick did. But it didn't because he's not as famous as Vick. And that sucks.
Good call, that's more in line with what I was trying to say. OJ isn't treated "well," but people for the most part just ignore him at least.
Tree -- YES. Leonard Little is exactly the type of thing I'm talking about. Thank you.
FYI guys, I will not be writing a BAD post tonight. Sorry for the short notice. Gotta get some stuff done today since this week hasn't gone as smoothly as I planned.
You do realize that 'human-on-human' violence most often contains one human that is an innocent victim that doesn't understand why they're being treated in that way.
You reside in the group that boggles me: more concerned about bad things being done to animals than bad things being done to people. Adults or not, a victim is a victim. And sorry, a human victim gets my empathy 1000 times out of 1000.
And you have a point - most people would not so easily forgive a rapist or child molester ... because the victims are humans!
To get slightly personal here (in an attempt to highlight the ridiculousness of your post): my 27 year old brother was robbed at gunpoint by some thugs while walking home one night. He never met them before, put up no resistance and gave them everything he had, but they decided - once they had his belongings - that they'd gang beat him. 2 months of rehab and pissing blood later, he finally left the hospital with serious lifelong injuries (not to mention the mental anguish and constant fear he now lives in).
He was an innocent adult victim of 'human-on-human' violence. He also happens to look physically imposing at 6'8" and 250 pds (though he is not/was not ever a fighter). In your twisted rationale, an abused dog deserves more sympathy?!? Really?
I generally agree with the notion he paid his debt, did his time, has little money as is, etc.... the seething hate for him now is frankly overblown
The main reason Kobe's trial is rarely mentioned by the media is because there's a decent-to-good chance he didn't do anything wrong other than cheat on his wife.
Remember the accuser only decided to back out of the trial and make a cash grab after evidence that favored Kobe started coming to light (the semen in her underwear, the fact that she bragged about sex with Kobe immediately afterwards and the slightly damaging fact that she had tried this exact same stunt before). While some of that may or may not have made it into a courtroom, it changed the national dialogue from "Kobe did it, I guarantee it" to "wow, maybe I should just see how this plays out".
And there's also the fact that the other guys were convicted in a court of law and/or admitted that they did everything (a la Tiger) and Kobe never was convicted or confessed. Given that this is still America that earns him a big benefit of the doubt.
One of the humans in human-on-human violence usually being innocent does suck, but I guess I'm just lacking in empathy or something. To answer your last ridiculous question: I never said the dog "deserves" more sympathy, just that I'd be more likely to sympathize with a random dog more than a random person. Again, just my opinion.
For the record, I also believe that Vick has done his time and shouldn't continue to be financially punished or whatever, but I can understand why so many people still hate him.
However, the fact that you are more likley to have empathy for a random dog than a random human makes you part of the problem. If everyone cared more about other people, the world would be a better place. Instead, so many people take your misanthropic opinion that humanity is messed up (I agree) and therefore you don't care.
No matter how you want to sell it, having more concern for a random dog over a random person fits perfectly in the category of "examples of why humanity is so messed up".
Donald Sterling, however, is 77 years old and looks to be in good health. The world sucks sometimes.
Example: as soon as they capped BP oil spill, media stopped talking about it, totally ignoring the fact that millions and millions of gallons of oil are still in the ocean killing who knows how many animals of all kinds. And we'll probably all end up eating the contaminated food and die. I just hope we'll turn into zombies instead.
Comment of the Day.
I just wanted to point out that not only was Kobe not convicted, but the trial actually never happened. The DA dropped the case before it ever went to trial. There were some preliminary hearings, but it was never brought to trial.
I'd say comment of the week, and considering we're only one week into the new year, I guess I'd call it Comment of the Year (To This Point). Knowing our readership, I'm sure it will be outdone, but it's still solid.
I can understand why people get upset over animal cruelty. They are naiive, and have no idea why they are being treated in such a way, and that does invoke a lot of sympathy in people. But, to me, an innocent person being beaten for no good reason, or murdered, or raped, is much, much worse. This is a person that could have a family, could be the breadwinner, an if they are affected, not only does it impact them, but it impacts those around them.
A good example would be a recent story here. A man was bashed in Kings Cross (kind of the seedy club area of Sydney) and was rushed to hospital. According to all reports, the man had done nothing wrong, and had a loving family. Tragically, the man died from the injuries he suffered and nobody knows who is responsible for the beating. To me, to see a family in a situation where the legal system has no idea how to help them, to lose a loving member of a family, is much more depressing to me than dogfighting. That is in no way saying that dogfighting is right, or that it can be allowed, but that bad shit happening to people is worse.
Like I said, this is my opinion and I respect everyone's opinion on this site (even the Laker haters).
And yea, screw Sterling. Poor Blake.
as in
There are few menable to hilariously comment on zombies like Marc d.
Barkley's point is well made: Vick paid his debt to society. So drop it. As some noted, the commentariat doesn't refer to Kobe's rape case any more, nor should they refer to Vick's crime any more. That's where Carlson was out of line, and Barkley was right on call him on it. The fact that Carlson is a prat whose ass was owned by Jon Stewart just makes it, well, a little more tasty.
As for the inconsistencies in sentencing, it's an ugly truth of the justice system; celebrities frequently get away with crimes. And you've only heard of the ones that weren't covered up. Who's to say Little wasn't also busted a couple of times, but the local cops let him go because they're football fans? It's all luck, good or bad. Vick was unlucky in that he was a high profile player whose misdeeds occurred in the wrong place and wrong time for Vick. It happens all the time, to normal folks, celebrities and politicians. Little, on the other hand, got treated with kid gloves. In a fair world, Little would do 15 years, no career, done. But the world ain't fair. And just because Little didn't get suitably punished doesn't mean that Vick should be let off. Two wrongs don't make a right. The appropriate response would be to get worked up about the Little cases of the world, not the Vick cases, no?
But even though I think that Vick deserved his sentence (or maybe a little harsh, a year may have sufficed), I think Barkley is absolutely right to defend him. Vick was punished, let him try to make something of himself again. Kudos for him not being a whiny brat about it. He's manning up and trying to make the best of the mess of his life. I admire that kind of balls in whomever I see it.
Michael Vick has borne the punishment meted to him by the judicial system, and therefore has every right to pursue whatever personal or financial goals he may have. Did he pay his debt to society? I'd have an opinion on that if the phrase "debt to society" meant anything, which it doesn't.
Bottom line is that it would take a lot more than a prison sentance to convince me that somenoe who enjoyed and facilitated dogfights in the past is anything other than a piece of shit.
As for Leonard Little - his story has nothing to do with Michael Vick. Bringing him up is a worthy notion in itself, but a cheap attempt to derail any kind of meaningful dialogue when brought up as an argument regarding Vick's situation. If you care so much about DUIs and other traffic violations that you bring him up at every opportunity than I take my hat off to you, but if you only bring him up in the context of other accused athletes then STFU you hypocritical cocksucker.
Personally, I think the media needs to be taken to task for the way they cover these stories. They lack any kind of moral backbone and would do anything to avoid showing up an athlete for the social menace he might be. And while I don't live in the states, I believe the courts are far to lenient towards reckless drivers in my country and wish the laws were more strict.
But I'm not stupid or dishonest enough to compare vehicular manslaughter to prolonged and premeditated animal abuse and say "look, people care more about animals then humans."
Vick is a piece of Shit. I hope he contracts Ebola and dies of internal hemorraging. Little is a piece of shit too. I hope he suffocates on elephant feces.
But their respective infractions have no bearing on one another. And pretending that they do is dishonest.
And Czernobog, you're mixing several comments together I believe. The Leonard Little story was brought up as a comparison in punishment, public reaction and collective memory, not in the way you insinuate. Adam said he was more likely to sympathize with a random animal than a random human and my little story, though partly conjecture, supports the notion that that feeling may be widespread. No one has connected Vick's crime with Little's crime in the way you have suggested.
But now I feel dumb for postin the video. Mocking bad basketball players has turned into an ethical and moral discussion which won't get anywhere
As a card-carrying nerd, I generally think all jocks are pieces of shit anyway, so, whatever.
None of us are perfect. There will be things we will struggle to forgive, and other things that we individually can not forgive. But I believe a system that allows for maturation and change, that allows for forgiveness after punishment ultimately makes the world a better place.
Only to find out Josh Childress was our starting Center.
And we lost by 25 points.
I mean, are we afraid that playing the optimal lineup but still losing would break all hope, so we throw out this shit instead?
That's true, but it wasn't dropped because the DA thought Kobe was innocent. It happened because Kobe and his accuser reached an out of court settlement and so she chose not to proceed with a trial.
Basically, Mamba paid to make the problem go away. I'm not saying that makes him guilty or innocent, but simply stating that the DA dropped the case misses an important point, don't you think?
You're confusing the criminal and civil cases. Yams was right- the DA dropped the criminal case before it went to trial and there was no settlement or anything- the case was literally dropped. Kobe is not a criminal, or a rapist, or anything, because the state never pressed charges.
The District Attorney handles the criminal case- he dropped that case because he did not have enough evidence to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Kobe committed rape.
The civil case was handled by lawyers for Kobe and that woman. That case never went to trial because they reached an out-of-court settlement.
The most important distinction between the cases is this: the criminal trial involves jail time, the civil case involves money. The criminal trial cannot be "settled out of court", except by way of a plea bargain- but Kobe did not bargain with the DA to plead guilty in exchange for a reduced sentence. The DA dropped the charges altogether. Kobe's attorney and the woman accuser, however, reached an out-of-court settlement in the civil trial for several likely reasons:
1) Kobe probably wanted to stop all the negative press and paying her whatever he did (it was an "undisclosed amount") was worth not having an ongoing trial for the media to chew on
2) Kobe wanted to stop paying lawyer fees and by settling, he ends the suit and stops the slow bleeding of paying lawyers
3) Kobe wanted to move on with his fucking life. Settling the case- even though he didn't do anything- effectively ended that chapter of his life, allowing him to get back to basketball.
4) Juries are unpredictable. In a civil case, the jury may award money to the plaintiff if they are 51% sure that the defendant is liable. Anything can happen at trial, and its a very risky proposition for both sides. That is why less than 5% of all civil cases ever go to trial. They almost always settle out-of-court because the two sides don't want to risk everything by going to trial and putting the decision into the hands of strangers. Furthermore, even if you "win" at trial, you pay through the nose because trials are about the most expensive part of any lawsuit. At some point you have to look at the big picture and ask whether or not it's worth it to go through the hassle instead of just paying some cash and getting it over with- right or wrong. It's, in effect, a business decision.
I don't know what really went on, but these are the common reasons why a person settles out of court.
In any event, settling a civil case DOES NOT IMPLY GUILT. It only shows that you wanted to settle the case. In fact, the word "guilty" only applies to a criminal proceeding. So using it in the civil context is incorrect.
That is why it is a HUGE deal that the DA dropped his case. Any DA would love to put a famous athlete behind bars- that is what they live for. The fact that he didn't have enough evidence to where he felt he could prove his case is very, very telling.
New frontcourt in LA, anyone?
And we have a challenger for Comment of the Year, I see. (Seriously, my nose burns from laughing while drinking root beer now)
According to the link Yams posted, the DA dropped the case because Kobe's accuser didn't want to proceed, and the article further stated that it was assumed she didn't want to proceed because a settlement was close in the civil case.
http://espn-i.starwave.com/media/gettyphoto/2010%5C10%5C12%5CGYI0062026826.jpg
Doc Rivers is showing Von Wafer how to get his next Mario
little's DUI case wasn't premeditated. just someone with problems who got really unlucky. he didn't go out drinking that night thinking,"let's see if i can take out a family tonight." actually, he might have; i don't know him or what's going on inside his mind. but still, it's not like he kidnapped a family and locked them in a cage and then forced them to fight his car.
i absolutely sympathize more with dogs than humans. they have rougher lives. the average dog has to deal with assault, murder, and rape on a regular basis. the average human has never even been in a real fight or had a real threat on their life. go to petsmart and look at their dog hotel and really pay attention. you will see a rape in the corner before long while all the humans are looking at the biggest dog in the middle of the room. you'll also see a couple of willing hook ups and a lot of shit no one else notices.
most humans are completely spoiled. put a dog into a human's body, and it'll do fine. go to some location, push a couple buttons, fetch some shit, suck up to some asshole, go home, sleep. repeat daily. food is everywhere, no physical altercations or rapes to worry about, for the most part, the most stressful thing for a human is getting their feelings hurt or someone having a different opinion from them. put any of you humans into a dog's body and you will be raped and assaulted daily. a dog in a human's body would dominate every sport based on its instincts. a human in a dog's body will be every other dog's bitch.
i am sorry for your brother that was assaulted, but at least that's not everyday life for him. he was in the wrong place at the wrong time and got unlucky. at least he gets to go to the hospital and now he's better. it'll make him stronger. once he conquers his fear, he'll have the instincts of an animal and notice things that 99% of humans do not. he will have problems and completely different priorities from the rest of society now. a lot of shit will be going on inside him that you will have no grasp on. don't let the fear consume him, be supportive and help him through it, now that he's seen what's really important in life (not getting killed), he can get stronger and smarter than ever before.
Correct me if I'm wrong because I'm not 100% on the American legal system, but I thought that in criminal cases the victim can only press charges and after that, it's out of their hands, which would leave the DA with control over whether there is in fact enough evidence to prosecute. I could be totally wrong, though.
As for the Kobe thing, I don't think anyone will truly know what happened. I'd hate to think that my favourite player is guilty of such a thing, and as far as I know there is little evidence to support claims that he is. Adultery? Sure, what superstar athlete isn't? I remember reading somewhere (may have even been this site) that in the 80's Magic Johnson would order a "rainbow", basically 5 or so women each of a different race, after a game. Talk about carefree. I won't even go into how that was probably a bad idea though.
ummmm
In any event, the state does not drop charges because of anything having to do with the civil trial. Would the prosecutor in the OJ criminal case drop the charges because OJ was "close to a settlement" in the civil case? Fuck and no. If the DA can put a rapist or a murderer behind bars, they will do it 100 out of 100 times, regardless of whether or not the defendant is "close to a settlement" in the civil side. In fact, that would be prosecutorial misconduct if they simply dropped a case because of something going on in a civil case. The DA will ONLY drop charges (absent bribery or other underhanded shenanigans) if they don't think they can win the case. Period. Something doesn't jibe with that article.
Anyway fuck it. I'm drunk. Know why?
7-9 SEAHAWKS WON BITCHES!!!
FUCK ALL Y'ALL!! WOOOOOOOOO!!!
The accuser backed out and it was speculated it was because she was close to settlement. My initial suspicion was correct: she knew that she couldn't win the case in a criminal court, the DA knew it, and so they dropped the charges.
It made sense to drop the charges from the "victim"s standpoint because if Kobe was acquitted, it would reduce the amount of $$$ she could get in her civil case. (People would believe that if he wasn't convicted in criminal court, he's not guilty, so why award her money?)
So, it wasn't the DA's call. The DA could give a shit what happened in a civil case. It was the shrewd business acumen of the "victim" who realized she couldn't win the criminal case and she drop the charges and try and make more money, which is what she was after all along.
YAY LEGAL SYSTEM!
"The Mavs are trading baskets a bit right now. They need to continue scoring baskets while stopping the Magic from getting them."
On Dwight Howard getting his 3rd foul: "Ryan Anderson makes 3 point baskets instead of two point baskets, so you have to be careful."
And why do the Mavs need 3 annoucers? The 3rd guy just chimes in with random non-sequitors and is completely useless.
http://twicsy.com/i/WHAew
The evidence that the prosecution had was slight bruising in the genetalia, implying some kind of forced activity. With multiple men's semen found in her underwear, this brings up VERY reasonable doubt that Kobe was not the one to cause the trauma. The fact that she bragged about sex with Kobe (and had people willing to testify about this in court) does not mean anything from a legal sense, but juries tend not to look favorably upon this sort of thing. The delay in reporting, combined with the above facts is a credible defense in and of itself.
Sadly enough, the fact that she tried to extort another man for money with a rape accusation may not have reached trial due to statutes about "not putting the victim on trial" which is horseshit of the highest degree but still was a legal gambit that Kobe's defense team could have tried to play which would have meant more time in court, more legal wrangling, and if Kobe's team had won this motion/series of motions to allow this, her case basically is DOA.
To make a long story short, once things started turning against her, she made the cash grab, Kobe paid her a pittance (a few million dollars) and didn't take the chance of a largely white jury in a white state siding against the famous black athlete and siding with the pretty white blonde girl. The fact that the DA dropped the case means nothing as far as guilt/innocence goes, because without her testimony there is exactly 0.000 chance of a conviction. So buying her silence essentially forces the DA's hand. No accuser, no rape.
The more facts in the case you see, the better Kobe's side looks. As said above though, the chance to give away a small percentage of his net worth to make it all go away (including the legal fees) and not take the chance (however small it may have ended up being) that a jury does something crazy probably seemed like a good idea at the time, something I can't really argue with. As any 1st year law student knows, juries combined of dumb people tend to do some really dumb shit. Whenever 12 morons talk something over, you have no idea what's going to happen. OJ got away after all.
http://blog.lakers.com/lakers/2011/01/08/barnes-suffers-tear-of-lateral-meniscus/?ls=iref:nbahpt2
They're not 3-peating without him.
Joel Anthony had 0 rebounds in 29 minutes - hell, he basically contributed nothing, at least statistically. That is some PhD level Bawful right there.
Also, we should all enjoy this, from the AP recap of the Clippers/Warriors game:
"Los Angeles alternates electrifying alley-oop jams and 3-pointers with boneheaded turnovers and defensive mistakes"
True story.
However, he seems to be a steadyhand when it comes to actually running the offense instead of just freewheeling and jacking up anything and everything (Kobe).
I like Barnes, he is useful but more burn for Walton will be good news for a team trying to right a ship that's been going badly wrong of late.
As for Ron Ron, it's been a season and a 1/3 and I can't decided if I like him as a Laker. Bar Game 7, of course.
Further to what Yams said, Barnes hasn't even been a major contributor this season. He is an OK role player and a streaky shooter. His defense is good, but not great. As much as I love shoveling dirt on the Laker's grave as much as the next guy, I think LA will survive without him. As many people mention regularly around here, Bynum's health is the real key come the playoffs.
In related news: The world is ending.
For the gak-inducing box score:
http://www.eurobasket.com/boxScores/France/2011/0108_2358_423.asp
Actually, you're repeating defense statements, which are interpretations of data and not actual facts. Bruising of genitalia could be EITHER from multiple partners or rough, forced sex from a single partner. The DNA evidence established that she had had sex with one or more other men in an unspecified period that includes well before the alleged assault: consistent with EITHER the defense's interpretation, or consistent with having a boyfriend that she'd had sex with in the previous few days. Assume, for example, that one of our partners were raped (God forbid). Would you want the defense to assume she was a ho because there was evidence of a sexual partner other than the accused? On the flip side, Kobe had her blood on his shirt, consistent with rough and maybe forced sex.
Remember, look at data from both sides, and NEVER take the word of the lawyers who are working the case: they have a strongly vested interest in spinning the outcome. Rape trials are frequently tried in the court of public opinion, massively more so for celebrities.
But the point isn't really misrepresenting the existing data, the point is that you can't really prove rape without a third party witness, particularly if the accused claims consensual sex and has a good reason to be at the scene. It comes down to he said-she said, and that is rarely going to result in a conviction, and often not even in a trial (which is why so many rapes go unreported). That is the case even with an unimpeachable accuser, which clearly wasn't the case here (she had a history of mental health problems and somewhat erratic behavior, though not nearly so much as the Duke lacrosse accuser, with whom the facts are frequently confused in hindsight).
So the upshot is that we can't know, one way or the other. All the external speculation is just hot air (usually true for rape cases, btw). For example, wouldn't you agree that emotionally unstable women are more likely to get themselves into sketchy situations, and thus are more likely to be raped? This isn't a blaming the victim exercise, but just an observation that the good girls are going to have better instincts and habits that enable them to avoid rape better. Some of them will still get raped, but less likely, wouldn't you agree? So then what value is the character defense in a rape trial? Are dumb women or women with poor judgment less worthy to be protected by the law? I don't buy the "she asked for it" argument at all. So that leaves us with a somewhat unstable woman who put herself in a bad situation. Maybe she wanted to have sex with Kobe, but it got too violent or kinky? She has the right to say no there, correct? Maybe she did it and regretted it afterward. Maybe she's just a gold-digger. We can't know, and it behooves us to be rational and fair on the subject, eh?