Rule, still freaking out, huh? What are you going to do when they pair Rindo with Varli, and survival data really spikes? It's going to happen. Oh, you probably think Varli is a farce as well.
By the way, we are back above $20 again and climbing. I would advise you start buying, but I hear you don't take good advice.
"Going to see them whip up on Bucs in FL 12/21. Go Pack Go! "
I was in the stands the last time the Pack got surprised by the Bucs and their creamsicle colors.
Rodgers is a far better QB today. May have to go to this game with my Pack fan neighbor and my Pack fan son. For the Bucs, it's all about first round picks now.
Hey, but the TB lightning is doing rather well, they just swept the Rangers, and they are passing the puck better than they ever have, and currently sharing the top spot with Montreal. Go Lightning!
fugkyouhonkey, may want to hear about this, as it may support his thesis that the company has been sold in principle, months ago.
Dude, you are thick. No need for the jury, if no crime was committed. The grand jury, decided not to charge Wilson, for he had, in the grand jury's opinion, not committed a crime. End of story. Criminally and legally speaking. And Holder has nothing on Officer Wilson. So don't go there.
Really? I am not wrong, you are wrong, MBB, and I have fully supported my assertions. And you have nerve. Pot calling the kettle black, regarding name calling. I actually use name calling when appropriate. This was an appropriate time to do so.
MBB, Would you like me to start listing all the "name calling you have employed with so many on this board?
"raysfrom98, I never said anything about charging anyone with a crime. " Oh really?
"Would there have been the same violent community reaction if a jury of their peers had found Officer Wilson innocent of whatever charges the prosecutor could have brought against him?"
First of all, the answer is yes, they would have rioted. Secondly, and more importantly, to get Officer Wilson to court, and judged by a jury (other than a grand jury), Officer Wilson would need to be charged with a crime. So if you insist that he should have gone to trial before a jury of his peers, then you are, by default, suggesting he be charged with a crime. Knowing full well, at this time, that the Officer is innocent of such a crime on the day in question. That makes you a zealot, MBB.
mbb, You suggested there should have been a trial, did you not?
That is the job of the Grand Jury, in this case, because of prosecutor's discretion . So again, your point is moot.
"rays, did he make the correct choice? Would there have been the same violent community reaction if a jury of their peers had found Officer Wilson innocent of whatever charges the prosecutor could have brought against him?"
You would charge an innocent man with a crime and put him through a trial for the reasons you state above?
WOW! If you think like that, then you would be dangerous with even a little power, and a poor leader of men.
I know precisely how it works MBB. To go to trial, you would need to charge someone with a crime. So I ask again, Why do you want to charge this innocent man/officer with a crime?
yes, we all know he could have taken other options, (OPTIONS) only it would have been stupid to do so.
Why do you wish to charge an innocent man?
Discretion you idiot, the prosecutor has the discretion. And he made the correct choice. Again, you just want an innocent cop charged for political gain. You are a Putz.
"could have" MBB, "could have", only he did not choose to prosecute, he chose to leave that up to a grand jury, as it is the prosecutors discretion as to whether the use of grand jury, or not. A discretion usually enacted when a case is of high profile or has the potential for political impropriety, or even the appearance of impropriety. It was the smart thing to do. Unless you want to charge an innocent man for political gain.
"A grand jury is a legal body that is empowered to conduct official proceedings to investigate potential criminal conduct and to determine whether criminal charges should be brought. A grand jury may compel the production of documents and may compel the sworn testimony of witnesses to appear before it. "
"Grand juries perform both accusatory and investigatory functions. The investigatory functions of the grand jury include obtaining and reviewing documents and other evidence and hearing the sworn testimony of witnesses that appear before it. The grand jury's accusatory function is to determine whether or not there is probable cause to believe that one or more persons committed a certain offense within the venue of the district court."
That is what a Grand Jury is for MBB. "determination as to credible evidence"
Wrong? No, I, we were not wrong. You forget, most of us started purchasing Celldex long ago, even when it was floundering in the $2s. Most of us have done exceedingly well with Celldex, and will continue to do so into the future, not withstanding most of 2014. However, 2014 is not over, and it is looking good for longs. But you Rule, you will have an abrupt end to your gaming when your broker calls an end to your bet against Celldex. I suspect that is about to happen sooner rather than later. For now, we just watch time, as "it is just a matter of time", time enough for more of your ridiculous claims of Celldex failures, while Celldex keeps marching toward ultimate success
"And, we have a justice system that says a grand jury decides whether there is enough evidence to proceed to trial."
Did you you get that MBB? Short, sweet and to the point. Thanks minnesotafarmcountry.
MBB, I will tell you what is wrong with putting the officer through a trial. There wasn't, never was, never will be, never could be any credible evidence to justify putting the officer through a trial. The same could not be said for the perp that robbed a store, strong-armed a clerk, and viciously attacked a 28 year old, upstanding police officer, causing the officer to fear for his life.
In fact many of the so called witnesses need to be prosecuted for their obviously and intentionally false testimony. There were a lot of laws violated around this incident, but none by the young officer. He did his job appropriately.
Would you have a man charged with a crime he did not commit, to satisfy the disgusting practice of
race-baiting, for what amounts to political racism against a white officer? Apparently, you would.