The Unknown Poster

Well I don't know you're a pedo either but I wouldn't just assume you were. You don't know Jackson was but you assume he was? Do you assume everyone is until you have solid evidence to the contrary? I assume you didn't even bother reading what I wrote. Again, how is Jackson like Polanski? One was acquitted and there was overwhelming evidence he was extorted. The other admitted freely that he did it and fled the country to avoid jail time. What don't you understand? I think child rapists should be consequenced. I think people who are not child rapists shouldn't be. Pretty simple really. Here is some details about the Polanski case: According to Geimer's testimony to the grand jury, Polanski had asked Geimer's mother (a television actress and model) if he could photograph the girl as part of his work for the French edition of Vogue,[13] which Polanski had been invited to guest-edit. Her mother allowed a private photo shoot. Geimer testified that she felt uncomfortable during the first session, in which she posed topless at Polanski's request, and initially did not wish to take part in a second, but nevertheless agreed to another shoot. This took place on 10 March 1977, at the home of actor Jack Nicholson in the Mulholland area of Los Angeles. At the time the crime was committed, Nicholson was on a skitrip in Colorado, and his live-in girlfriend Anjelica Huston who was there, left, but later returned while Polanski and Geimer were there. Geimer was quoted in a later article as saying that Huston became suspicious of what was going on behind the closed bedroom door and began banging on it, but left when Polanski insisted they were finishing up the photo shoot.[14] "We did photos with me drinking champagne," Geimer says. "Toward the end it got a little scary, and I realized he had other intentions and I knew I was not where I should be. I just didn't quite know how to get myself out of there."[15] In a 2003 interview, she recalled that she began to feel uncomfortable after he asked her to lie down on a bed, and described how she attempted to resist. "I said, 'No, no. I don't want to go in there. No, I don't want to do this. No!', and then I didn't know what else to do," she stated, adding: "We were alone and I didn’t know what else would happen if I made a scene. So I was just scared, and after giving some resistance, I figured well, I guess I’ll get to come home after this".[16] Geimer testified that Polanski provided champagne that they shared as well as part of a quaalude,[17] and despite her protests, he performed oral, vaginal, and anal sex acts upon her,[18][19] each time after being told 'no' and being asked to stop. Polanski stated that he did not drug Geimer, that she "wasn't unresponsive", and that she did not respond negatively when he inquired as to whether or not she was enjoying what he was doing.

I think it would be hard for Ladd to come back. It was HIS team and if he came back it wouldn't be his team anymore. 3 year deal max.

Some interesting thoughts from Elliot Friedman http://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/nhl/30-thoughts-matthew-tkachuks-draft-stock-gaining-momentum/

Yeah on paper it makes sense. Pens are good and deeper than they were. Malkin would restock the cupboard for years and probably keep them a contender until Crosby is done. But it seems too difficult of a deal to get done. Id like to see Malkin as a bonafide leader on a team and see if he has a higher gear

I disagree with this SPORTSNET: Nick Kypreos believes Evgeni Malkin is playing his final games with the Pittsburgh Penguins, suggesting he could be traded this summer. Kypreos believes there couldn’t be a better time for the Penguins to trade him. Doug MacLean suggests Malkin would look good in Montreal or Vancouver, while Kypreos believes Malkin could “slide right in there” with Jaromir Jagr. He also believes the Penguins have to shed salary this summer. When asked about moving goaltender Marc-Andre Fleury, Kypreos replied, “expansion will look after that.”

And....? He only wanted to operate when he thought his rich pals would grease some palms. When there was a risk of prison, he took off. Does having a lousy life beforehand give him one free child raping?

I havent recollected all the details. But I know the original instance of allegations came from the father of a boy after he demanded Jackson sign a $20 million production agreement. The father was an aspiring screen writer. He had earlier suggested Jackson build him a new house. He became somewhat estranged from the boys mother (they were divorced) and as the mother and boy began getting more attention from Jackson than the father, he grew angry. He was on tape as telling people if he didnt get what he wanted that he would destroy Jackson and that he hired a nasty lawyer for that reason. When asked if it would negatively impact his son, he said he didnt care. It was about how he felt snubbed by Jackson. So after threatening extortion, he met with Jackson (lawyers were there) and hugged Jackson (hardly the actions of a man who thinks he molested his on) and tried to negotiate the $20 million deal. Jackson refused and instead an offer was made to finance one script. A counter offer of three scripts was made and again Jackson refused. An investigator questioned the by who denied anything went on at all. The basis for the extortion was the father's lawyer presented a hypothetical scenario to a shrink, basically that an adult male showered a boy with gifts, had sleep overs etc and the shrink said hypothetically it would present the potential for abuse. The father used that hypothetical "report" to threaten Jackson. He also added details from his son that his son denied every saying. The father then essentially kidnapped the child. He had not been interested in his son for years until Jackson got involved and then suddenly he wanted to be involved, bragged to friends about knowing Jackson etc. He plotted to get the kid away from his mother (because the kid was saying nothing went on and the mother trusted Jackson). He made a deal with the mother for one week visitation and then never gave the kid back. Once he had the kid sheltered, he then administered a drug (he was a dentist) and got the kid to "admit" to abuse. Many experts said the drug used was too likely to present false allegations and coercion and couldnt be trusted. The father, by the way, had been suspended and sued as a result of being a lousy dentist. He was nearly $70,000 behind in child support which his ex eventually forgave. The lawyer he hired was also behind in child support despite having a seemingly successful practice. When sued, he transferred his assets into Panamanian companies to hide them. Very shady character. As a recall, this was the case where jackson was actually never charged with anything. It was so obviously a set up. The problem is, he went along with his handlers who suggested paying the guy to go away. That created a scenario where people could try for their own pay days. Certainly Jackson's odd behavior didnt help. Once he had been attacked, he should have made sure he was never alone with a child again. But part of Jackson's own mental issues stemming from his childhood was that he simply trusted everyone and wanted to be around kids to enjoy a childhood he never had. Jackson was his own worst enemy. But I dont believe for a second he was a pedo. For that to be true then it means he was accused multiple times where most of those accusations were lies and extortion and coincidentally one happened to also be true? Not likely. Anyway, I disgress. Jackson is an interesting case and if we want to discuss it, perhaps mods could split off. Ill say this, I vividly recall when this came to light and I was 100% convinced of Jackson's guilt like many people. But then as I got older, I actually read more about the case. He didnt do anything. Polanski on the other hand admitted it, agreed to plead guilty and then skipped town. Again, look how many people turned on Jackson with overwhelming evidence he was set up. And yet how many of those same people defend Polanski and blame the 13 year old who was boozed and drugged.

I realise you wont relent in the face of facts because you've taken a position and wont give it up, but Jackson was an attempted extortion. Please tell me what that has to do with Polanski ADMITTING to sex with a 13 year old girl and then fleeing before sentencing.

I cant believe Brandon and I are in complete agreement here! lol The murder of his wife is a relevant point to a degree, in that I think part of why so many excuse Polanski's behavior is because they feel sorry for him. A lot of arm chair shrinks claim the murder messed him up and basically he was mentally ill at the time of the rape and otherwise wouldnt have done it. Ofcourse, being sad isnt an excuse. But if he was mentally ill, that is a relevant point, except not one that was ever presented and even so doesnt remove him from any consequences. I'd suspect he gets a very light sentence if he ever does return to Cali. Due to his age and the victim not wanting to proceed. Although you never know. If I recall, there had been an effort a few years ago to make a deal with the DA to wrap the case up with Polanski escaping any serious consequences inr return for going back to Cali and the DA refused. So there is some desire to make him pay. I was speaking with someone last night about this and the difference between how Hollywood treats Polanski and Cosby and was asked "do you think race plays a part". Very interesting...

I will enjoy Thriller. Do a little research. And regardless, its a moot point. Jackson went to court, was acquitted. There is no comparison to the Polanski trial. Its not a hill to die on. In fact you're the one seemingly brushing off Polanski who admitted to it and then fled the country while crucifying Jackson who was acquitted. Not the same at all. I'd suggest starting a new thread on Jackson if it means that much to you. And then we can debate things such as: The whole molestation thing began when a father of one of the kids Michael befriended tried to extort Michael. Those are facts. There were witnesses and tape recordings. The guy demanded a $20 million production deal with Jackson (among other things) "or else". Jackson refused and the guy went nuts saying if he didnt get what he wanted out of the relationship he was going to destroy Jackson. It was extortion. But this isnt about him at all. Its about an admitted child rapist who might finally be looking at consequences and the people who defend him because he's a famous, talented, white director.

So....regardless of whether anything actually happened? Dont use the non-evidence in Jackson to minimize the fact Polanski admitted to it. Thats all Im saying. They are very different. By the way Jackson stayed, went to trial and was acquitted. Polanski didnt. He admitted it and fled the consequences to live a life high on the hog in France.

Because Vince showed up at the police station with a mysterious briefcase. Once a worker, always a worker In a homicide case that has been the subject of speculation, rumors and outrage for more than three decades, it was ruled on 6/1 that Jimmy Snuka will not stand trial in the death of Nancy Argentino in 1983. Judge Kelly Banach ruled that the 73-year-old Snuka was mentally incompetent to stand trial in the controversial case. Banach noted that “Justice suffers when it is delayed,” but felt Snuka was not faking dementia. “I don’t believe he’s faking it,” she said from the bench. “No offense, but I don’t think he’s smart enough to fake it.” This means, that if Banach rules he can’t stand trial, the case could be stalled indefinitely. By state law, a defendant can’t be prosecuted if they suffer from a mental disorder that prevents them from understanding court proceedings.

If try to trade Toby, hope Morrissey arrives and make your top four Trouba-Buff and Morrissey- Myers.

The other option is only protecting 8 skaters total (if I recall). So four D and four F. Which stinks. They could also trade one of the three NMC D men. Or make a deal with Vegas to not pick a guy left exposed which would be Trouba so that would be a heck of a deal.

According to General Fanager it kicks in this upcoming season and the expansion draft would be next summer so the NMC would be in play conditional on whatever decision the NHL makes with regards to NMC's

Disagree. If she was 15 and paid off you'd feel differently I bet. He thumbed his nose because he was rich. Should be prosecuted. Iso - you speak about Jackson like you know. He was acquitted. So much info out there about how he was screwed. I wasn't there but people are innocent until proven otherwise and he never was. I don't believe for a second he abused a child. Moot point to our topic anyway.

Number 1 would be ideal or existing teams but the nhl won't want that. Number 2 is more likely to be demanded by the PA.

Has it not already been established that NMC's will HAVE to be protected as their contracts prohibit movement...? Makes sense to me.

That's not true. The case against Jackson was extremely controversial with no evidence whatsoever. There are some good books on that subject. Totally different case. Polanski actually HAD sex with a 13 year old girl after giving her drugs and booze and admitted it. Its not like he's "accused" and the victim wont coperate and the evidence is old and unclear. He fled prior to sentencing. He's guilty. Instead of going to jail he went to France. He deserves to be brought back and sent to jail.

Will have to protect Full No Movement Clauses. General Fanager lists Myers as having a NMC so there is confusion. Also lists Enstrom and Buff with NMC's. So if thats true, all three must be protected.

He was charged already. I think statute only refers to the time you have to charge the person. He was charged with multiple counts and agreed to a plea to unlawful sex with a minor. He fled prior to the judge rendering his decision on the plea and sentencing. He did so because he hoped to get probation but his lawyer felt the judge was going to throw the book at him. So no statute. He admitted to it and never served his time. Not sure if he can also be charged with leaving the US over this...I dont recall how he left.

Big kid. But he shoots the wrong way! Talent Analysis Nogier is a no-nonsense, stay-at-home defender. While there is not much of an offensive component to his game, he uses size and strength to defend in his own end. An injury during his second season in junior hockey has slowed his development a bit but he is once again back on the ice and logging a lot of ice time. As with many players his size, skating and mobility will constantly be a challenge. Future Nogier appears healthy once again following his shoulder surgery and is back with Saskatoon for his third WHL season in 2014-15. One of the younger teams in the league, the Blades have struggled early in the year and as a result Nogier was sporting one of the worst plus-minus marks in the league. A bit of a projection when he was selected by the Jets in the 2014 NHL Draft, his upside is that of a Dan Girardi-type defender who blocks shots and prevents opponents chances. Read more at http://www.hockeysfuture.com/prospects/nelson-nogier/#j74WhhzPrJK4mKxp.99

Well the good news is, in this case they WANT to prosecute. The only people against it are Polanski's rich Hollywood friends that think they know better. The guy is an admitted child rapist and a fugitive. Bill Cosby had his shows pulled, events cancelled and everyone turned their backs. But Polanski still works and makes millions, wins awards and is beloved. Insane. The idea he's paid his dues by being "forced" to live in the lap of luxury in France is ludicrous. The fact he may (and should) go to Jail in his 80's is no one's fault but his. This girl was 13 years old. Its not even borderline...its not like oh she was 16 or 17 and its legal in many places. 13 years old and he plied her with booze and drugs. And years later paid her off. And good for her for getting the money but good for prosecutors for still wanting to see justice served.

It will be really interesting to see what happens with Carolina. The lawsuit by the sons might force it. I guess it depends if the sons care about the team. if they win the lawsuit and are awarded $100m+ in damages, they could take the Hurricanes off their dad's hand but I'd suspect that results in a sale. The issue becomes whether there is anyone in Carolina that wants to buy the team. Plus the Hurricanes operate the arena so it could end up the same way as the Thrashers where not only do you have to buy the team, you have to pay the sellers to play in their building. Looking forward to Vegas. I could definitely see flying down to watch the Jets play though I prefer Vegas in the summer.

I dont think if they were called Bears or anything else it would cause people to suddenly forget about the Jets 1.0 players. Thats the real stupidity of how the NHL handles relocations is that the history *should* stay with the city or at least be transferred back if the city regains a franchise and wants it back. Some would say it doesnt matter at all. But realistically it does from a marketing perspective. The Jets are going to star marketing the former Jets shortly and its silly that the franchise records, ring of honour etc are in Arizona. And from that perspective Arizona shouldnt want it anyway. I strongly believe it "wasnt always" Jets as you say. I agree Jets is the name that made the most sense but I know Moose was strongly considered. I think Zinger even confirmed that he wanted to keep the Moose name. Bears came out due to Chipman's love of the Bears. Not sure they'd get that one past the Bruins though. Had also heard that Chipman didnt feel any emotional connection to "Jets" but made the decision based on the overwhelming desire of Winnipeggers. He has said he would only consider it if the name could actually connect to Winnipeg in a meaningful way and not just be the name the first owner chose because he liked the New York Jets. And thus, the deal with the Air Force for the logo.