Scruit

5x Oh well, you didn't die, I guess.

Well, maybe if we can field a team of eligible players next year then maybe we can keep our wins.

Stay within the facory load ratings for towing capacity and tongue weight and you should be fine. You are well withint he load rating at 1800 vs 3500. If you are new to towing, research the correct driving style and especially acquaint yourself with the concepts of trailer sway and how to prevent/react to it... And how to correctly control speed on long/steep downhills (lower gear, not brakes)

Wait, Do you support Emus or Eagles. Make your mind up.

I heard that vacating the 2010 wins and self-imposed probation was part of a proposal by OSU to the NCAA, a plea-bargain of sorts. NCAA may or may not accept. Still, it's probably pretty close to what the NCAA are gonna do anyway.

Nancy Grace is stepping on thin ice. She is goign on record stating that Casey anthony is "Guilty". According to the court system, she is NOT guilty. That is defamation. She then went on to say that Casey Anthony killed her daughter. Again, defemation, unless it can be proven (or more accurately, defamation IF Casey sues and the judge agrees by preponderance of the evidence that the statement defamed her) "Nasty Face" argued she has a right to free speech. But, being a former prosecutor, should know the subtle differences between free speech and slander. What she CAN say; "I believe that Casey Anthony should have been found guilty". She cannot say; "Casey Anthony IS guilty." Ok: "I am convinced that Casey Anthony killed the girl". Not ok: "Casey Anthony DID kill the girl. Of course, being a former prosecutor, I'm sure she knows how close she can get to that line of defamation. In order for Casey Anthony to win a defmation suit she;d have to prove to a judge that is was "more likely than not" (preponderance) that she DID NOT kill her daughter. NOT GUILTY and INNOCENT are not the same thing. I doubt that she could ever meet even the lower prepoderance standard trying to proce she didn't do it (failing some sudden admission from her father) BUT the word "Guilty" is black and white, so it would be easier to convince a judge that calling her "Guilty" after being found not guilty is defamation. I love law. It's like real life but you are not allowed to care about people's emotions.

Exactly. I'm 90% sure she killed the girl, and I'm 100% sure that bad things went on in that family. People are screaming about justice for the girl... Well, that would require that we do away with "beyond reasonable doubt", and then where is the justice for everyone else in the country? I had a debate on this yesterday with a guy who kept syaing; "but she killed her". "How do you know?" Finally he admitted he didn't know, but he believed it, and he couldn't prove it, but was pretty sure. I asked if he'd like to go to jail because someone is "pretty sure" HE comitted some crime. he didn't like that idea. Then he said; "It's just like OJ - he killed his wife..." "*sigh* How do you know?"

Not one person has said M80 yet. I am disappointed.

The verdict was correct. The prosecution was bunk.

In honor of Baby Ben...

Congratulations. You're doomed.

At least Nickelodeon has Kitty Katswell. Or.. err... so I'm told by my son, who watches Nickelodeon. Errr... Yeah, let's go with that.

The state of Florida wants to sue her for the cost of prosecution. This is BS. If you are acquitted then you WON. The winner of a case does not pay costs. They DO deserve to be repaid for any expenditures directly associated with following up on the four lies that she was convicted of, however she should not have to pay back the cost of the murder prosecution because she was not convicted. This would be the cost of searching fort the girl and the cost of verifying her employment, searching for the non-existent nanny etc. It's like if I sue you for a car accident, but the judge rules that it was not your fault. I cannot then sue you for the cost of unsuccessfully suing you... See what I mean? (well, I can, but there's no way in hell that I'd win.) Also, the Texas company that provided search and rescue for the girl SHOULD get paid back because they wasted money because of her lie.

Florida seems to average about 85% time served. (Cali is usuall much lower. Ohio prisoners server their fll sentence due to "Truth In Sentencing") So if she is the average prisoner then she'd serve 41 months, meaning she'd go free about Thanksgiving time. Florida time served cite: http://www.dc.state.fl.us/pub/timeserv/monthly/

The 4 seperate charges stuck. 1 year for each of the charges, *consecutively*, with credit for time served. She has 3 years served. She owes 1 year. The jail will have their "early release" protocols, so she may still go free in the next few days.

For those of you with legal brains... The sentencing hearing is underway. The defense is arguing that the 4 charges she was convicted of (lying to the police) were 4 lies during the same interview adn therefore were part of the same criminal act (all during the same interview) and provided case law they argue supports it. (They provided a case where a man convicted to multiple counts of being an online predator, but the court held that the one conversation that was several hours long was one crime and the counts were collapsed into one) Prosecution says the lies were far enough apart (hours) that they were different crimes. Thoughts? I think they're grasping at straws. The 4 will stand.

On my MSF test the lady in front of me dropped the bike on her emergency braking test. We were told that dropping the bike during the test was instant fail. The two guys teaching the course talked to each other and somehow decided that her test "Hadn't started yet". They gave her another chance and she passed.

Wow. Sorry to hear, but she was obviously loved by many in her life. It's a judgement call - dunno by who (police or funeral home?) but if it it in the interest of safety then the police will provide an escort. I don't know if it is paid for as part of the funeral costs though. Anyone?

I can beat a Ferrari with my '89 park avenue in a speed competition* any day. *Speed competition = how fast hot girls run away from me.

I need to print up a sheet with all the most misunderstood traffic laws. Spout ORC at people. Print up some postcards with ORC numbers and the law (highlight so idiots can understadnd) and hand them to people when they do stupid stuff. Stopped for an oncoming school bus on a 4-lone road? I'll circle "School bus on a 4-lane road" and hand you the card. Then punch you.

I'd have got out and educated them. Not road ragey style, just talked with them. A person in that position needs to know the law. If they won't accept it, then have the school principal explain it to them.

This annoys me too. Bus drivers are not allowed to set kids down on the wrong side of a 4-lane road (divided or not). Only cars in the same direction as the bus have to stop. I often encounter an oncoming school bus that stops on Riverside Drive. Half the time the car in front of me keep going (as they should) and half the time they stop. As above, it's not gonna hold me up long enough to make it worth honking or swerving to get around, but it's still annoying. Another law I wish people stuck with too.. - When you make a turn onto a road with 2 or more lanes in your direction, then... -- If you are in the leftmost lane going into the intersection then you turn into the leftmost lane exiting the intersection (or rightmost lane turn to the rightmost lane). -- If there are two turn lanes and you are in the second turn lane from left (or right) then you turn into the second lane from left (or right). -- If there are road markings directing you which lane to take, follow them. If people followed these rules (like they should) then people from opposing lanes could turn into the same side-street (that has 2 or more lanes) at the same time legally and safely. But people are lazy and turn into the furthest lane because the steering wheel is too hard for poor little arms to turn another 90deg. Or because they see an oncoming car turning too and they don't know the law so they turn into the furthest lane to show the oncoming car who's boss. Finally... Stop signs. Not the usual complaint here. If I approach a stop sign and the car in front of me doesn't stop until his rear bumper is well past the stop line, then guess what... when I stop myself, I'm stopped at the stop line in compliance with the law. I am now free to set off once the intersection clears. Can't count how many people on an intersecting stop sign will see me setting off "early" and race through their own stop sign without slowing to "preserve" the "order". Like they think "If we had both stopped then I woudl be in front of you, so if you run the stop sign then I will run the stop sign too so that I stay in front of you". Well guess what, bub... *I* dind't run the stop sign, the guy in front of me did (and so did you). If you got issues with stop sign violations then go road rage the schmuck in front of me who viloated the stop sign. Don't sit there and expect me to stop twice (once for me and once for the guy in front of me).

In our house we call her Nasty Face. Seems appropriate.

Just like the OJ trial - the media portrayed the accused as guilty, but the evidence just wasn't there, or wasn't presented in a manner that could meet the high standard for conviction. I'd rather see than guilty people walk then innocent people jailed. If we convicted people based upon; "Well, Nancy Grace seemed to think she was guilty" then we'd have a lot of innocent people in jail simply because the crime evokes emotion.

Take the sample test from the BMV. http://bmv.ohio.gov/dl_sample_test.stm If you don't get 100% on this test then you should tear up your license. ( Ok, you're allowed to miss the question about the age of a driver that a parent must sign for. Some of you old farts probably started driving before they had tests. Or roads. Although I got it right )