Beasley animal cruelty charge dismissed...

[SugarCC]

According to Trey Wallace Twitter. Looks for him to rejoin team.

 

[LittleVol]

Good.

 

[RockyTop140]

Assuming they found evidence that it wasn’t him?

 

[VolnJC]

 

[jpope9]

Assuming they found evidence that it wasn’t him?

wasn't he said she said?

 

[stevenrich2003]

No Kibbles and Vick to see here. Good.

 

[sona]

wasn't he said she said?

Early on the accusors said there was video but I don't think it ever materialized. Probably didn't exist.

 

[unfrozencvmanvol]

Assuming they found evidence that it wasn’t him?

Probably girlfriends' friends worked it out between them, somebody paid the vet bill and since the kitten was alright the prosecution found themselves without cooperative witnesses. Good for Beasley that this doesn't go on his record though and hope he learns something from the whole thing. The posters who defend animal abuse like it's not a big deal still disgust me, you know who you are.

 

[PlanetVolunteer]

Bring the boy back

 

[unfrozencvmanvol]

Assuming they found evidence that it wasn’t him?

No, just not enough evidence to convict. You don't have to prove people innocent. They are presumed innocent under the law.

 

[dobre_shunka]

Assuming they found evidence that it wasn’t him?

Maybe it was Salter.

 

[unfrozencvmanvol]

Maybe it was Salter.

The animal was actually injured when Salter heard catnip was some good chit and attempted to roll him up in a blunt and smoke him.

 

[SayNoToJorts]

UT/Kentucky gameday signs writing themselves this year...

 

[Hacksaw]

No, just not enough evidence to convict. You don't have to prove people innocent. They are presumed innocent under the law.

This sounds like the most likely explanation, but do you know it for a fact or are you guessing?

 

[unfrozencvmanvol]

This sounds like the most likely explanation, but do you know it for a fact or are you guessing?

That's just a statement of the law. We don't prove people innocent, they're presumed to be. When a prosecutor dismisses something he/she acknowledges that the evidence is not sufficient to convict.

 

[Tin Man]

In a deposition, somebody testified that the critter was from Alabama?

 

[Hacksaw]

That's just a statement of the law. We don't prove people innocent, they're presumed to be. When a prosecutor dismisses something he/she acknowledges that the evidence is not sufficient to convict.

No, I meant the "not enough evidence to convict" part. RockyTop140 suggested exonerating evidence may have come to light and you said no, that they just didn't have enough evidence to convict. They are two different explanations for why the charges may have been dismissed. I just wanted to know if you knew it for a fact or you were just assuming a lack of evidence.

 

[TheBigOne10]

Another LB. Thank goodness. The defense may actually not be too atrocious after all.

 

[unfrozencvmanvol]

No, I meant the "not enough evidence to convict" part. RockyTop140 suggested exonerating evidence may have come to light and you said no, that they just didn't have enough evidence to convict. They are two different explanations for why the charges may have been dismissed. I just wanted to know if you knew it for a fact or you were just assuming a lack of evidence.

No, I was just saying generally prosecutors don't exonerate people, regardless of what their unproven suspicions may or may not be. I despise animal cruelty, however the State dropped it's case, I consider Beasley innocent.

 

[CJBlaze]

Still wish they would have kicked him off the team.He won't play much hopefully.

 

[Vol Main]

No, I was just saying generally prosecutors don't exonerate people, regardless of what their unproven suspicions may or may not be. I despise animal cruelty, however the State dropped it's case, I consider Beasley innocent.

With an asterisk.

 

[unfrozencvmanvol]

With an asterisk.

No asterisk. It's just very difficult to prove anyone is innocent if they had opportunity, i.e., were or could have been at the scene. You are rarely going to have completely exonerating evidence in that situation. It's why those accusations against that Supreme Court justice a few years ago were so terrifying to true civil libertarians regardless of party affiliation. "So and so raped me 40 years ago, I don't remember exactly where, I don't remember exactly when". That's impossible to defend against as far as proving innocence, which was the standard they were trying to enforce. The only way to prove you didn't do it was if you weren't alive then, which the justice unfortunately was.

 

[Vol Main]

No asterisk. It's just very difficult to prove anyone is innocent if they had opportunity, i.e., were or could have been at the scene. You are rarely going to have completely exonerating evidence in that situation. It's why those accusations against that Supreme Court justice a few years ago were so terrifying to true civil libertarians regardless of party affiliation. "So and so raped me 40 years ago, I don't remember exactly where, I don't remember exactly when". That's impossible to defend against as far as proving innocence, which was the standard they were trying to enforce. The only way to prove you didn't do it was if you weren't alive then, which the justice unfortunately was.

Beasley is legally innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt in a court of law. Public opinion is not a court of law. People are free to draw their own conclusions from the reported information. You are free to say no asterisk, and I'm not telling you what to do, but I am at liberty to say innocent with an asterisk.

 

[jarnol32]

Still wish they would have kicked him off the team.He won't play much hopefully.

Do you enjoy watching Tennessee lose football games?

 

[CINCYVOL]

Still wish they would have kicked him off the team.He won't play much hopefully.

unless you were actually there, you really don’t know what happened. Every story has three sides; your side, my side, and what really happened. Perception is not reality.