Discussion in 'Chargers Fan Forum' started by eldwin, Sep 3, 2006.
Leisure, I insult because I care. :icon_tease:
Yeah..., more likey the idiot missed any vital organs.:icon_banana:
Let me ask you this: Why didn't the LONE RANGER call for back-up?
Clearly no need for backup...Barney Fife still had two full clips to empty...
:lol: - So do I
LOL.. Too funny O' !:icon_toast:
1) That's a BB gun Quote from off duties officer quoting Foley clearly indicates Foley doubts officer being a real cop.
2) The suspect then stopped his vehicle at the intersection of Treadwell Drive and Travertine Court in Poway, with the officer behind them. The suspect got out of his car and again approached the officer's car. The officer backed his car up, then drove around the suspect, up Travertine Court, which is a cul-de-sac.
This behavior by the police officer indicates a early decision not to escalate the situation and indicates he doesn't know the streets but he clearly changes his mind about waiting for back up to arrive by stopping his vehicle in the cul-de-sac and once again brandishing his gun.
Keep in mind that we are talking after 3:30 in the morning and it is very dark. Limited visibility with dim street lighting and car head lights in play.
The officer fired a warning shot into some bushes.
This is a trigger incident becuase the firing of the policeman's weapon results in what unfolds in a instant.
As a result of the off duty non uniformed policeman driving his personal vehicle failing to recognize that Foley did not see him as being a real cop and waiting for uniformed police officers in marked police cars we now have a potential tragedy.
Foley in response to the off duty police officers firing shots at his girlfriend attacks in stead of running .
Now this part sounds like some BS given how fast everything had to have happened and the fact that it is very dark.
I am sorry I just don't buy that Foley is doing anything with his waist band as shots are being fired and speeding cars are rocketing by other than making a b- line at the off duty cop who having committed to the use of deadly force on the girlfriend now is doing exactly that with Foley.
Foley may have been under the influence but this shoot was a very poor one.
The police officer should have taken down the car tag numbers and radioed them in and hung back until the cavalry got there.
Another thing to remember. The street lights in Poway are the dim red streetlights to minimize interfearance with Palomar Mountain.
My bet is the young women saw a couple of muzzle flashes and heard the gunshots ring out and had no idea at what or whom the policeman was firing at.
I would expect that her fear was that she or Steve were under fire and her reactions indicate that is indeed what she believed.
I don't expect her lawyers will have a difficult time convincing a jury either.
I wonder if that was the day that you bounced between the GN and the RWA threads pimpin Rep for the kids...I think you even wanderes down to the Pads to beg Rep for the kids from Darth!!:icon_rofl:
Somma those were purty long!!:lol: :icon_rofl:
At least three words!
Thats some good **** right there!!:icon_eek: :icon_mrgreen: :lol: :icon_rofl: :icon_toast:
Overkill...only needed three letters!!:icon_eek: :icon_mrgreen: :lol: :icon_rofl:
Yeah, but everyone was a tight *** about padding!:icon_sad:
I agree. SD County can compound and multiply the award if they charge Foley with ANY crimes (including the ones he's probably guilty of, DUI, etc).
The cop needs to be charged with AT A MINIMUM aggravated assault.
They better have done a drug and alcohol screening on him AS SOON AS POSSIBLE.
A good lawyer is going to rape this rookie off duty cop, the City of Coronado, and SD County.
I fixed it for the SD Sheriff's office. No charge.
SAN DIEGO (Sept. 5, 2006) -- An off-duty Coronado police officer who shot Chargers linebacker Steve Foley was identified as Aaron Mansker, who has been with the force since August 2005.
When my old college roommate got hired by a local California Police Dept, he had a ONE YEAR probationary period. That city would NOT allow probationary officers to ride SOLO when on duty.
This so-called "officer" needs the book thrown at him.
Coronado Cops are the worst. They write about 50 % of the tickets for the entire County, and Coronado is not that big. I can just about say that every morning, I see one out there writing someone a ticket.
I drive 25 MPH wich is the Coronado limit, and I do come to a complete stop at lights and stop signs. I do not give them a chance to give me one!
I know Coronado well. Dad was born and raised there, and his Dad owned the only off base gas station on the island (Texaco) until the 60's. We sold my G'mas house there in 1990. I spent LOTS of time on Coronado. Almost got arrested once on the beach in high school (drinking :icon_mrgreen: )
The surf on The Strand sucked back in the day...can't imagine its gotten better with time.
I ran away from home before the Bridge was built, and as a result, I've only been on it twicet.
But as a young'un, what a treatta ride the ferryta get to and from Coronado.
Y'all oughtta get Shammie ta tell y'all about the night he and Trumpie were walkin on the Brigde.
BTW, how manya y'all had y'alls Proms at Hotel Del Coronado??:icon_shrug: :icon_huh:
POSTED 10:16 a.m. EDT, September 6, 2006
NFLPA EXPECTS TO LOSE ON BONUS FORFEITURE ISSUE
A league source tells us that, although the NFL Players Association has taken the position that the Term Sheet negotiated in March restricts the forfeiture of signing bonuses, options bonuses, and roster bonuses, the NFLPA expects to ultimately concede that the limitations apply only to signing bonuses.
The problem, as we understand it, is that the non-economic portions of the Term Sheet were drafted by the union as a proposal, with an expectation that there would be further negotiation and refinement. But when NFLPA Executive Director Gene Upshaw took the position that the entire document had to be accepted by a date certain or the union would proceed to 2007 without a salary cap, the fact that the non-economic terms hadn't been fully and completely defined got lost in the wash.
As a result, when the NFL agreed to the proposal, the NFLPA and the NFL thereafter realized that the Term Sheet was, from either side's perspective, far from ideal.
The NFL owners, as we previously have explained, realized that too much was given up regarding the new rules unrelated to how much money will be diverted to player salaries. The union, in turn, determined that the language would have been far more precise if the contents of the Term Sheet were actually going to be the official language of the revised agreement between the parties.
Apparently, the fact that the Term Sheet hadn't been fully refined is one of the primary reasons for the fact that, on the eve of a new NFL season, the revised CBA has not yet been issued. As we understand it, negotiations regarding the parameters of the non-economic terms have continued and, at least for now, it appears that when the dust settles the union will agree that only signing bonuses are subject to the new restrictions on forfeiture.
This means that, as to roster bonuses and option bonuses, teams still have the ability to individually negotiate forfeiture provisions based on, for example, a holdout or absences resulting from motorcycle accidents.
For signing bonuses, the forfeiture provisions are restricted to the unallocated portion of the signing bonus in the event of a voluntary retirement, or 25 percent of the signing bonus allocation for a given year if the player engages in intentional action that prevents him from practicing or playing (or 1/17th of the signing bonus allocation for each game missed due to such conduct, whichever is greater).
As a practical matter, this means that virtually all of the first-round draft picks from 2006 are operating exclusively under the old rules, since few of them received a traditional "signing bonus." If their contracts were drafted to include broad forfeiture language as to option bonuses and roster bonuses, they will not be protected by the new restrictions.
It also means that the Vikings likely will be able to recover the $1 million roster bonus paid to receiver Koren Robinson, despite prior our prior statements to the contrary (which included some misguided-in-hindsight criticism of FOX's John Czarnecki). The Vikes beefed up the contract to contain forfeiture provisions for the roster bonus, and those provisions apparently have survived.
Finally, the ultimate outcome of the issue means that a team like the Steelers can still impose stiff penalties for, say, a certain quarterback who might be tempted to ride a certain two-wheeled motorized vehicle without a certain plastic shell on his head.
Bottom line -- both sides screwed the pooch on this one. The NFL was so obsessed with the money aspects of the deal that they set themselves up to get hosed on the non-economic terms. But the NFLPA likewise missed its opportunity to drive a knife (is it too early to say "serrated tail barb"?) into the heart of the owners on a wide range of issues by not realizing that the league was so focused only on the dollars.
Bye Bye $1.65 million.
NFL obsessed with money? Naw, that's not true right? :icon_tease:
It seems surreal we are 5 days away from football .....
I love and hate the anticipation.
It is like being on the verge of an orgasm but you just can't quite "release" just yet. :icon_mrgreen:
surf still sucks and is poluted from the tiajuana slews and the navy base there, plus colder water from the bay channels
Separate names with a comma.