Re: The Marshawn Lynch Case--It appears...

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • LifetimeBillsFan
    All-Pro Zoner
    • Aug 2004
    • 4946

    Re: The Marshawn Lynch Case--It appears...

    It appears to me that those who are calling for Marshawn Lynch to talk to the Buffalo PD or the DA or make a statement about the incident that occurred with his SUV haven't watched many episodes of "Law and Order", "The First 48" or "Homicide: Life On The Streets", let alone ever been "Mirandized".

    The Miranda Warning is a statement that the police are required to read/state whenever they place a person under arrest. Part of that warning states: "You have a right to remain silent. Anything that you say can and will be used against you in a court of law...."

    The Miranda Warning also states that you have a right to an attorney. If you ask for an attorney, all questioning by the police must cease until your attorney is present--in order to protect your right against self-incrimination. And, the first thing that any criminal defense attorney will tell his/her client is not to say anything to the police (or anyone else for that matter).

    Why? Because "anything that you say can and will be used against you in a court of law".

    Not "for" you. "Against" you.

    This is the case whether you are innocent or guilty. But, especially if you have done something, anything in violation of the law.

    If you do talk to the police, they can say anything--including lie to you outright--in an effort to get you to make an incriminating statement--that can then be used against you in a court of law.

    If you have any sense at all, you say absolutely nothing unless instructed to do so by your attorney. Why? Because your lawyer is there to represent your interests and can speak for you. Also, because your attorney knows the law and you do not. Because your lawyer knows what can be said without incriminating you and how to say it and you do not. And, because "anything that you say can and will be used against you in a court of law".

    In order for you to be convicted of a criminal offense, the police and DA must have sufficient proof to convince a judge or a jury of your peers (usually drawn from the local community) that you committed the offense that they allege "beyond a reasonable doubt". The burden of proof in a civil case being, "by a preponderance of the evidence", is not as great.

    In most states, NY State being one I believe, there is a requirement of pre-trial "discovery" placed on the prosecution. That is a requirement that the prosecution must show the defense all of the evidence that it intends to present at trial before the trial begins.

    "Discovery" gives the defense attorney a chance to not only see the evidence, but be in a position to advise his/her client as to whether the prosecution has a strong enough case to be likely to get a conviction. In which case, the attorney may advise his/her client to accept a plea arrangement with the DA that avoids a trial and, usually, will result in a lesser charge and/or sentence than would likely be the result if the case were to go to trial.

    Whereas the police can lie or say anything that they want during an interview or interrogation, the law does not allow the DA's office to hide or lie about the evidence that it has and intends to use at trial during the "discovery" phase of a criminal proceeding. If the DA's office does lie or deliberately attempt to deceive the defense during "discovery", any conviction obtained as a result can be overturned on appeal and the attorneys involved risk being censured. So, it is not something that the DA's office is likely to attempt to do, particularly in a high-profile case.

    So, how does all of this apply to the Marshawn Lynch case?

    First of all, it appears that Lynch immediately did the smart thing and "lawyered up". That means that the Buffalo police cannot interview or interrogate him unless his attorney is present. Apparently it took his attorney a couple of days to arrive in Buffalo.

    Second, it appears that Lynch's attorney gave Marshawn the advice that any good criminal attorney would give him, telling him not to speak with anyone about the incident. Why? Because "anything that he says can and will be used against him in a court of law"!

    Third, it appears that Lynch is following his attorney's advice and not saying anything.

    Fourth, Lynch is under no obligation to speak with the police or the DA's office voluntarily, with or without his attorney present. Because--do I have to say it again?--anything that he says can and will be used against him in a court of law. If the police want to interrogate him, they can formally invite his attorney to bring him in or they can simply bring him in themselves. But, they cannot ask him to answer any questions without his lawyer being present.

    Fifth, it appears that Lynch's lawyer does not want Marshawn to talk with the police, who can lie through their teeth if they want to about what they have on Marshawn, until he has first discussed the case with the DA and at least informally discovered what the police and the DA have on Lynch at this point. Apparently, Lynch's attorney spoke with DA Clark on Friday and will be meeting with him again (Monday, I believe the Buffalo News reported).

    Now, let me stop here for a moment to comment:

    1.) Whether he was driving the SUV that hit the woman or not, there are a lot of reasons why Lynch and his attorney may not want him to meet with the police or even issue a statement before it is absolutely necessary. Remember, anything that he says can and will be used, if not against him, against someone else. Also, the police can say whatever they want to him to induce him to say something that can then be used against him--or someone else.

    2.) So, why should Lynch say anything to the police or to anyone at this point? For PR's sake? If Lynch was anywhere near that SUV that night--whether he was the driver, a passenger, or loaned the car to someone else--forget about PR: Lynch's public image is going to be damaged no matter what, this is an issue of someone possibly going to jail and/or being sued for a lot of money. Any attorney worth his salt would tell Marshawn to keep his mouth shut and issue no statements whatsoever until absolutely necessary. Whatever repairs can be made to his public image can be made afterwards--and are more likely to be made if he is able to play football and not while spending time in jail or on the suspended list.

    3.) While Marshawn is keeping his mouth shut and not talking to the police or the DA, his attorney is talking to the DA. And, they are not talking about the weather in Buffalo at this time of year. If he is doing his job as well as he appears to be from what has been reported, Lynch's lawyer is talking with the DA about what the police have on his client, what kind of charges they want to file, and perhaps even about a possible plea arrangement that might allow his client to avoid jail time and a suspension by the NFL commissioner (he may even be making discreet inquiries about how the NFL office would react to Lynch pleading out to various charges).

    These being lawyers and, in the case of the DA, politicians, there may even be some discussions about how much publicity the DA wants to get out of this case and what would be the best settlement for the DA politically as well.

    4.) The Bills may not have said anything publicly about the incident or Marshawn's involvement, but they have millions of dollars invested in him and in any other players who may have been with him. That being the case, you can bet that they have been talking, behind the scenes, with the DA and Lynch's lawyer as well. The last thing the Bills want to see happen is Lynch being taken on a "perp walk" in front of the local media or have their lockerroom atmosphere destroyed because Lynch names a fellow teammate as the one driving the car or says that it was the teammates who were his passengers who urged him to flee the scene of the accident, etc.

    As it stands now, without any tests proving that he was legally impaired by alcohol at the time of the accident, at worst, Marshawn Lynch stands to be charged with a single count of leaving the scene of an accident if the police and DA can produce enough evidence that he was the driver. It is a Class A misdemeanor that can possibly be pled down to a lesser charge as a first offense. No jail time. Probably no suspension by the NFL as a first offense, either.

    Yes, his reputation and public image will be harmed. Yes, his character will be called into question. But, those are things that can be repaired, at least somewhat, and often are forgotten if not repeated. Yes, he will likely be sued by the woman who was injured and will probably have to pay her a hefty amount of cash. But, money can be replaced. Time cannot.

    If Lynch says anything more than he has before he is charged (or afterwards for that matter), if he agrees to meet with the police and refuses to answer their questions, etc., he would be opening himself--and/or possibly a couple of his teammates as well--up to a variety of other charges that could cost him FAR more than what he stands to lose at this point. Depending on who else may have been in his SUV when it struck the woman, that could also have a disastrous impact on the Bills lockerroom as well.

    I think it is safe to say that Lynch, his attorney, the Bills and even the DA and Buffalo Police Department know this. And, they are going to try to resolve this case in a way that will allow all of the parties involved to come out of it with the least amount of damage and the most amount of favorable publicity that they can.

    Now, undoubtedly, there are some who will question whether this is "right" or not. "Right" has nothing to do with it. It isn't about what is "right" or moral. It is about the law and how the application of the law works in this country and in the State of New York.

    Bills fans can question what is right or wrong in this instance. They can debate whether Lynch was driving or not; whether he was legally impaired or drunk at the time of the accident; who was in the car with him; why he didn't stop after hitting the woman, if he was driving; etc., etc., etc. None of that matters.

    Cold as it may sound, the only thing that matters is what the Buffalo PD and the DA's office can prove in a court of law and what they cannot. And, as Marshawn Lynch's attorney undoubtedly knows, it does not behoove Lynch to say or do anything that would give them anything more that they can use against him in a court of law than they are able to get from other sources.

    Like it or not--and you may very well not like it at all--that is how the law works. And, it is before the law and not the court of public opinion that this case will ultimately be resolved.
    Those who do not learn from the past are doomed to repeat it. And, thus it was that they surrendered their freedom; not with a bang, but without even a whimper.
  • Night Train
    Retired - On Several Levels
    • Jul 2005
    • 33117

    #2
    Re: The Marshawn Lynch Case--It appears...

    Originally posted by LifetimeBillsFan
    it is before the law and not the court of public opinion that this case will ultimately be resolved.


    A week has passed and they still can't figure out if he should be charged with even a misdemeanor ?

    Yeah. I'm real worried. Nice try, chicken littles.
    Anonymity is an abused privilege, abused most by people who mistake vitriol for wisdom and cynicism for wit

    Comment

    • Jan Reimers
      Thank You, Terry and Kim, for Saving the Bills. Now, Work on the Sabres.
      • May 2003
      • 17353

      #3
      Re: The Marshawn Lynch Case--It appears...

      Maybe you guys are right. Why help the Keystone Kops and DA Frank (Hang 'em High) Clark?
      Should have known, way back in 1960 when we drafted Richie Lucas Number 1, that this would be a long, hard ride. But who could have known it would be THIS bad?

      Comment

      • YardRat
        Well, lookie here...
        • Dec 2004
        • 86189

        #4
        Re: The Marshawn Lynch Case--It appears...

        "Right" has nothing to do with it. It isn't about what is "right" or moral. It is about the law and how the application of the law works in this country and in the State of New York.
        Although your post is spot on from a practical standpoint, I couldn't agree less.

        "Right" has everything to do with it, regardless of what any laws or legal procedures dictate. The bastardization of ethics, values, and morals that results from basing their perception on what is 'legal or illegal' is a character flaw of our population in general and a major roadblock to any social/spiritual advancement that we as a society, or even a species, desire to obtain.

        The most unfortunate outcome of this incident would be for a 'guilty' Lynch to ultimately feel vindicated from or justified for his actions just because he was found 'innocent' or his legal team was able to plea bargain out of a charge.

        Somebody was driving that SUV. Somebody struck a pedestrian, and then left the scene with total disregard for that person's welfare, possibly even life. Somebody was 'wrong', and I don't give a damn whether or not a court of law finds that person innocent or guilty or whether the actions were deemed legal or illegal-it doesn't change what actually happened.
        YardRat Wall of Fame
        #56 DARRYL TALLEY
        #29 DERRICK BURROUGHS#22 FRED JACKSON #95 KYLE WILLIAMS

        Comment

        • LifetimeBillsFan
          All-Pro Zoner
          • Aug 2004
          • 4946

          #5
          Re: The Marshawn Lynch Case--It appears...

          Originally posted by YardRat
          Although your post is spot on from a practical standpoint, I couldn't agree less.

          "Right" has everything to do with it, regardless of what any laws or legal procedures dictate. The bastardization of ethics, values, and morals that results from basing their perception on what is 'legal or illegal' is a character flaw of our population in general and a major roadblock to any social/spiritual advancement that we as a society, or even a species, desire to obtain....
          I was addressing the issue as a legal matter, not a moral or ethical one. Specifically, the many posts here wondering why Lynch has not spoken with the police or issued a statement in an effort to "clear his name", etc. and why he has not done so.

          Sadly, when it is a choice between doing the "Right" thing and doing the most expedient or that which will protect or promote oneself or self interest, human beings have always tended to do the latter far more often than the former. History is replete with examples of this from the earliest times to the present (one could say that, in many instances, history is merely the recounting of such instances).

          As far as this being a new phenomenon, an increasingly common phenomenon or something that is even a roadblock to the spiritual/social advancement of our society/species, those are all things that could easily be debated, but such a discussion undoubtedly be better suited to a different forum (and I would venture, minds more facile and knowledgeable than mine, to be sure!) than this one.

          Originally posted by YardRat
          The most unfortunate outcome of this incident would be for a 'guilty' Lynch to ultimately feel vindicated from or justified for his actions just because he was found 'innocent' or his legal team was able to plea bargain out of a charge....
          It would be most unfortunate, indeed, if Lynch and any of the others who may have been present were to feel "vindicated" or in any way "justified" were this matter to be treated mildly by the legal system. But, without really knowing the individuals involved, it is a stretch to assume that Lynch or any of the others would feel that his or their actions were "vindicated" or "justified". None of us here knows that such would be the case (or that it wouldn't).

          Nor should we assume that Lynch or the others present will necessarily go unpunished, even if the legal system were to give just Lynch what would amount to a "slap on the wrist". Beyond the cost of an attorney, whatever fine and other other punishment may be deal out by the court, and however much Lynch may end up having to pay to the woman in a civil suit, along with lost endorsement monies, you can rest assured that Lynch and those who may be suspected of having been with him will come under increased scrutiny from not only the police, but their employer (specifically the Buffalo Bills) and the NFL, as well as others. If they are not directly punished for this offense under the law, they will nevertheless have a major "strike" held against them in other ways, particularly should any of them make any kind of similar "mistake" (?) in the future.

          IMHO, if the outcome of the legal matter should make anyone involved--other than the woman who was struck by the SUV--feel "vindicated" or "justified" about anything, then that person would be making a grave error in judgement that will ultimately come back to haunt him in the future.

          Originally posted by YardRat
          Somebody was driving that SUV. Somebody struck a pedestrian, and then left the scene with total disregard for that person's welfare, possibly even life. Somebody was 'wrong', and I don't give a damn whether or not a court of law finds that person innocent or guilty or whether the actions were deemed legal or illegal-it doesn't change what actually happened.
          There is no doubt that someone did something very "wrong" here. I never indicated that I did not feel that what was done by the driver of the SUV--and his passengers--was not "wrong". Nor did I make even the slightest effort to excuse that "wrong". What the driver of the SUV and his passengers did, in hitting the woman, leaving the scene, possibly driving under the influence, etc., was unquestionably "wrong".

          Nor should there be any doubt that whoever did this "wrong" (be it Lynch or someone else who was driving--and I am not, by any means, saying that it was not Lynch) will have to answer for it. In addition to whatever penalties the legal system, both criminal and civil, may levy, along with the lost income from endorsements, lesser contract offers, perhaps an unpaid suspension or even lost career years, greater scrutiny from the police and employer, etc., etc., there will certainly also be other penalties as well.

          Whoever was driving the SUV and everyone in the vehicle at the time that it hit the woman is going to have to live with the fact that, not only did they hit the woman and could have killed her, but that they chose to drive away, most likely to save themselves from what they perceived to be stiff punishment. Now, to be sure, some people are able to bear such things more easily on their consciences than others. But, no one can escape from such a thing entirely forever.

          And, even if the individuals involved are not haunted by their callous disregard for another human being's life and their own personal cowardice, they still, in the words of the old "Hebrew National" commercials, "must answer to a higher power".

          Unless you believe in absolute predestination, if you believe in a higher power and that human life has a purpose, then it also follows that you must believe that you are responsible, at least in part, for your life and the things you do, choices that you make, in life. If you believe that, then, you must accept that every person will ultimately be held accountable for his or her life and will have to "answer to" that higher power.

          If that is the case, then, you must have faith in that higher power. Faith that no act or action, "right" or "wrong" goes unnoticed. Faith that all, not just some, will be held accountable. Faith that "right" will ultimately be rewarded and "wrong" will ultimately be punished (or forgiven--and if forgiven by that higher power, who are we to argue?). Faith that, regardless of what happens here in this life, ultimately justice will be done.

          Some do not believe in a higher power or even karma and for them there can be little solice when injustice triumphs, as it so often has and does, in the course of human existence. Far more, however, have little or no faith in that higher power to mete out ultimate justice and are only satisfied if they can see some retribution in the form of punishment on this mortal plane.

          Personally, I have faith that ultimately justice will be done and that the "wrong" committed here will be fully punished (and the victim fully compensated), if not immediately and within our legal system (which I doubt will be the case), then, ultimately and by a much more powerful, more omniscient and intelligent, higher authority. There is no doubt in my mind that this will ultimately happen, without question.
          Those who do not learn from the past are doomed to repeat it. And, thus it was that they surrendered their freedom; not with a bang, but without even a whimper.

          Comment

          • imbondz
            Democrats are people too
            • Jan 2003
            • 26041

            #6
            Re: The Marshawn Lynch Case--It appears...

            Originally posted by LifetimeBillsFan
            I was addressing the issue as a legal matter, not a moral or ethical one. Specifically, the many posts here wondering why Lynch has not spoken with the police or issued a statement in an effort to "clear his name", etc. and why he has not done so.
            but it is a moral and ethical issue first, that's why the law is involved.
            My faith doesn’t make me perfect, it makes me forgiven.

            Comment

            • patmoran2006
              Ole' Ralphie SCROOGE
              • Dec 2005
              • 19840

              #7
              Re: The Marshawn Lynch Case--It appears...

              I've never been mad at him for not talking to the police. I agree anything he says could lead to more trouble, especially if he's caught in a lie.

              What Im pissed about is the simple fact he hit a chick with his car, and he took off. It's not just a legal thing to me.. It's a moral thing to me. I thought Lynch was better than that.


              Join the BSD FB page by CLICKING HERE

              Follow us on twitter by CLICKING HERE

              Comment

              • yordad
                Registered User
                • Dec 2007
                • 11867

                #8
                Re: The Marshawn Lynch Case--It appears...

                Hey, all of a sudden I'm all for utilitarianism. But, LTBF is spot on, IMO. 100%.

                I am disappointed in Lynch personally too. But, I hope he can get out of this without losing time (on the field). He may have acted like an ***, but you and I didn't. And, I think you and I deserve to have him on the field.

                Lets just egg his car or something. Sentence served.
                "Heck, now I am glad his overrated arce made the pro bowl, else we would have only got a 3rd." ~ yordad

                "I've just been hit with a piece of sky. " ~ yordad

                "Forgive my opinion, but...." ~ yordad

                "Warning: I might be hammered." ~ yordad

                "I don't care if the word is "your" or "you're", so buzz off. Its (it's) a frickin(') message board." ~ yordad

                Comment

                • LifetimeBillsFan
                  All-Pro Zoner
                  • Aug 2004
                  • 4946

                  #9
                  Re: The Marshawn Lynch Case--It appears...

                  Originally posted by imbondz
                  but it is a moral and ethical issue first, that's why the law is involved.
                  The law is a reflection of the Social Contract. But, because it is written and executed by human beings, it is not necessarily moral or ethical, just the most expedient expression of controlling the interaction of individuals and groups within the the society.

                  For example, slavery is not moral or ethical, but through most of human history and in most societies it was legal. It may be moral and ethical to free slaves and work for the elimination of slavery, but in most of those societies where slavery was legal, when it was legal it was also illegal to attempt to free a slave (unless you owned that slave and even then it was frowned upon or even not possible to do so in some of those societies) or advocate an end to the instititution of slavery (which would have been viewed as inciting slave rebellion).

                  And, being written and applied by humans, it is seldom perfect, as a codification of morals and ethics, in its execution.

                  That being said, this incident has both a moral/ethical component and a legal component. My original comments were addressed to those people who did/do not fully understand the legal component and how that has impacted Lynch's silence since the incident occured.

                  Let me say again that, by stating what the legal aspects are, I am in no way attempting to minimize the moral or ethical aspects. Nor am I saying that people should not be morally or ethically outraged by what happened.

                  All I was attempting to point out was that there are legal reasons why Lynch, probably on the advice of his attorney, has chosen to keep silent and not to meet yet with the Buffalo PD. Whether you choose to see the fact that Lynch has seen fit to take advantage of his legal rights and protections in this instance as being moral or immoral or ethical or not ethical, I leave entirely up to you.

                  If you choose to be angry or upset with Marshawn and/or his lawyer on moral and ethical grounds, over what happened and/or how they are handling it in the legal sense, far be it from me to object.
                  Those who do not learn from the past are doomed to repeat it. And, thus it was that they surrendered their freedom; not with a bang, but without even a whimper.

                  Comment

                  • FinFaninBuffalo
                    Registered Fish
                    • Aug 2006
                    • 597

                    #10
                    Re: The Marshawn Lynch Case--It appears...

                    I have no problem with Lynch protecting himself. I'd do the same thing. The problem that I have is that, IMO, the police intentionally let Lynch flee the scene. As I understand it, the accident was witnessed by an off duty police officer that works that district often. How does Lynch not get stopped before he gets home? How many other lives were risked because Lynch's car was recognized? At 3:30am, an SUV hits a pedestrian in an area full of bars. That natural assumption is that the driver is drunk. Why the F*** is this guy allowed to drive home?

                    What if the woman had died? The police would have screwed up an homicide investigation.

                    To everyone complaining that Lynch is getting tried in the press, give me a break. You or I would have been arrested that night and been given a breathalyzer test. There would be no doubt.
                    Last edited by FinFaninBuffalo; 06-07-2008, 05:30 PM.

                    Comment

                    • FatalShot
                      Registered User
                      • Nov 2007
                      • 69

                      #11
                      Re: The Marshawn Lynch Case--It appears...

                      So...much...text!

                      Comment

                      • Confused
                        All-Pro Zoner
                        • Jun 2007
                        • 2479

                        #12
                        Re: The Marshawn Lynch Case--It appears...

                        I have a record as long as my arm. In hindsight, my record would only be as long as my forearm if I had kept my GD mouht shut. period. Attaboy Marshawn.

                        Comment

                        • Mr. Miyagi
                          Lecter's Little *****

                          • Sep 2002
                          • 53616

                          #13
                          Re: The Marshawn Lynch Case--It appears...

                          Originally posted by hoofhearted
                          I have a record as long as my arm. In hindsight, my record would only be as long as my forearm if I had kept my GD mouht shut. period. Attaboy Marshawn.
                          So, tell us more, hoof.

                          Comment

                          • PECKERWOOD
                            Defies all logic
                            • Oct 2006
                            • 13170

                            #14
                            Re: The Marshawn Lynch Case--It appears...

                            Originally posted by LifetimeBillsFan
                            It appears to me that those who are calling for Marshawn Lynch to talk to the Buffalo PD or the DA or make a statement about the incident that occurred with his SUV haven't watched many episodes of "Law and Order", "The First 48" or "Homicide: Life On The Streets", let alone ever been "Mirandized".

                            The Miranda Warning is a statement that the police are required to read/state whenever they place a person under arrest. Part of that warning states: "You have a right to remain silent. Anything that you say can and will be used against you in a court of law...."

                            The Miranda Warning also states that you have a right to an attorney. If you ask for an attorney, all questioning by the police must cease until your attorney is present--in order to protect your right against self-incrimination. And, the first thing that any criminal defense attorney will tell his/her client is not to say anything to the police (or anyone else for that matter).

                            Why? Because "anything that you say can and will be used against you in a court of law".

                            Not "for" you. "Against" you.

                            This is the case whether you are innocent or guilty. But, especially if you have done something, anything in violation of the law.

                            If you do talk to the police, they can say anything--including lie to you outright--in an effort to get you to make an incriminating statement--that can then be used against you in a court of law.

                            If you have any sense at all, you say absolutely nothing unless instructed to do so by your attorney. Why? Because your lawyer is there to represent your interests and can speak for you. Also, because your attorney knows the law and you do not. Because your lawyer knows what can be said without incriminating you and how to say it and you do not. And, because "anything that you say can and will be used against you in a court of law".

                            In order for you to be convicted of a criminal offense, the police and DA must have sufficient proof to convince a judge or a jury of your peers (usually drawn from the local community) that you committed the offense that they allege "beyond a reasonable doubt". The burden of proof in a civil case being, "by a preponderance of the evidence", is not as great.

                            In most states, NY State being one I believe, there is a requirement of pre-trial "discovery" placed on the prosecution. That is a requirement that the prosecution must show the defense all of the evidence that it intends to present at trial before the trial begins.

                            "Discovery" gives the defense attorney a chance to not only see the evidence, but be in a position to advise his/her client as to whether the prosecution has a strong enough case to be likely to get a conviction. In which case, the attorney may advise his/her client to accept a plea arrangement with the DA that avoids a trial and, usually, will result in a lesser charge and/or sentence than would likely be the result if the case were to go to trial.

                            Whereas the police can lie or say anything that they want during an interview or interrogation, the law does not allow the DA's office to hide or lie about the evidence that it has and intends to use at trial during the "discovery" phase of a criminal proceeding. If the DA's office does lie or deliberately attempt to deceive the defense during "discovery", any conviction obtained as a result can be overturned on appeal and the attorneys involved risk being censured. So, it is not something that the DA's office is likely to attempt to do, particularly in a high-profile case.

                            So, how does all of this apply to the Marshawn Lynch case?

                            First of all, it appears that Lynch immediately did the smart thing and "lawyered up". That means that the Buffalo police cannot interview or interrogate him unless his attorney is present. Apparently it took his attorney a couple of days to arrive in Buffalo.

                            Second, it appears that Lynch's attorney gave Marshawn the advice that any good criminal attorney would give him, telling him not to speak with anyone about the incident. Why? Because "anything that he says can and will be used against him in a court of law"!

                            Third, it appears that Lynch is following his attorney's advice and not saying anything.

                            Fourth, Lynch is under no obligation to speak with the police or the DA's office voluntarily, with or without his attorney present. Because--do I have to say it again?--anything that he says can and will be used against him in a court of law. If the police want to interrogate him, they can formally invite his attorney to bring him in or they can simply bring him in themselves. But, they cannot ask him to answer any questions without his lawyer being present.

                            Fifth, it appears that Lynch's lawyer does not want Marshawn to talk with the police, who can lie through their teeth if they want to about what they have on Marshawn, until he has first discussed the case with the DA and at least informally discovered what the police and the DA have on Lynch at this point. Apparently, Lynch's attorney spoke with DA Clark on Friday and will be meeting with him again (Monday, I believe the Buffalo News reported).

                            Now, let me stop here for a moment to comment:

                            1.) Whether he was driving the SUV that hit the woman or not, there are a lot of reasons why Lynch and his attorney may not want him to meet with the police or even issue a statement before it is absolutely necessary. Remember, anything that he says can and will be used, if not against him, against someone else. Also, the police can say whatever they want to him to induce him to say something that can then be used against him--or someone else.

                            2.) So, why should Lynch say anything to the police or to anyone at this point? For PR's sake? If Lynch was anywhere near that SUV that night--whether he was the driver, a passenger, or loaned the car to someone else--forget about PR: Lynch's public image is going to be damaged no matter what, this is an issue of someone possibly going to jail and/or being sued for a lot of money. Any attorney worth his salt would tell Marshawn to keep his mouth shut and issue no statements whatsoever until absolutely necessary. Whatever repairs can be made to his public image can be made afterwards--and are more likely to be made if he is able to play football and not while spending time in jail or on the suspended list.

                            3.) While Marshawn is keeping his mouth shut and not talking to the police or the DA, his attorney is talking to the DA. And, they are not talking about the weather in Buffalo at this time of year. If he is doing his job as well as he appears to be from what has been reported, Lynch's lawyer is talking with the DA about what the police have on his client, what kind of charges they want to file, and perhaps even about a possible plea arrangement that might allow his client to avoid jail time and a suspension by the NFL commissioner (he may even be making discreet inquiries about how the NFL office would react to Lynch pleading out to various charges).

                            These being lawyers and, in the case of the DA, politicians, there may even be some discussions about how much publicity the DA wants to get out of this case and what would be the best settlement for the DA politically as well.

                            4.) The Bills may not have said anything publicly about the incident or Marshawn's involvement, but they have millions of dollars invested in him and in any other players who may have been with him. That being the case, you can bet that they have been talking, behind the scenes, with the DA and Lynch's lawyer as well. The last thing the Bills want to see happen is Lynch being taken on a "perp walk" in front of the local media or have their lockerroom atmosphere destroyed because Lynch names a fellow teammate as the one driving the car or says that it was the teammates who were his passengers who urged him to flee the scene of the accident, etc.

                            As it stands now, without any tests proving that he was legally impaired by alcohol at the time of the accident, at worst, Marshawn Lynch stands to be charged with a single count of leaving the scene of an accident if the police and DA can produce enough evidence that he was the driver. It is a Class A misdemeanor that can possibly be pled down to a lesser charge as a first offense. No jail time. Probably no suspension by the NFL as a first offense, either.

                            Yes, his reputation and public image will be harmed. Yes, his character will be called into question. But, those are things that can be repaired, at least somewhat, and often are forgotten if not repeated. Yes, he will likely be sued by the woman who was injured and will probably have to pay her a hefty amount of cash. But, money can be replaced. Time cannot.

                            If Lynch says anything more than he has before he is charged (or afterwards for that matter), if he agrees to meet with the police and refuses to answer their questions, etc., he would be opening himself--and/or possibly a couple of his teammates as well--up to a variety of other charges that could cost him FAR more than what he stands to lose at this point. Depending on who else may have been in his SUV when it struck the woman, that could also have a disastrous impact on the Bills lockerroom as well.

                            I think it is safe to say that Lynch, his attorney, the Bills and even the DA and Buffalo Police Department know this. And, they are going to try to resolve this case in a way that will allow all of the parties involved to come out of it with the least amount of damage and the most amount of favorable publicity that they can.

                            Now, undoubtedly, there are some who will question whether this is "right" or not. "Right" has nothing to do with it. It isn't about what is "right" or moral. It is about the law and how the application of the law works in this country and in the State of New York.

                            Bills fans can question what is right or wrong in this instance. They can debate whether Lynch was driving or not; whether he was legally impaired or drunk at the time of the accident; who was in the car with him; why he didn't stop after hitting the woman, if he was driving; etc., etc., etc. None of that matters.

                            Cold as it may sound, the only thing that matters is what the Buffalo PD and the DA's office can prove in a court of law and what they cannot. And, as Marshawn Lynch's attorney undoubtedly knows, it does not behoove Lynch to say or do anything that would give them anything more that they can use against him in a court of law than they are able to get from other sources.

                            Like it or not--and you may very well not like it at all--that is how the law works. And, it is before the law and not the court of public opinion that this case will ultimately be resolved.
                            Sweet, I just finally read my first book!

                            Comment

                            • acehole
                              Registered User
                              • Jan 2006
                              • 4877

                              #15
                              Re: The Marshawn Lynch Case--It appears...

                              I agree...but those are the guys who usually are guilty.


                              Originally posted by LifetimeBillsFan
                              It appears to me that those who are calling for Marshawn Lynch to talk to the Buffalo PD or the DA or make a statement about the incident that occurred with his SUV haven't watched many episodes of "Law and Order", "The First 48" or "Homicide: Life On The Streets", let alone ever been "Mirandized".

                              The Miranda Warning is a statement that the police are required to read/state whenever they place a person under arrest. Part of that warning states: "You have a right to remain silent. Anything that you say can and will be used against you in a court of law...."

                              The Miranda Warning also states that you have a right to an attorney. If you ask for an attorney, all questioning by the police must cease until your attorney is present--in order to protect your right against self-incrimination. And, the first thing that any criminal defense attorney will tell his/her client is not to say anything to the police (or anyone else for that matter).

                              Why? Because "anything that you say can and will be used against you in a court of law".

                              Not "for" you. "Against" you.

                              This is the case whether you are innocent or guilty. But, especially if you have done something, anything in violation of the law.

                              If you do talk to the police, they can say anything--including lie to you outright--in an effort to get you to make an incriminating statement--that can then be used against you in a court of law.

                              If you have any sense at all, you say absolutely nothing unless instructed to do so by your attorney. Why? Because your lawyer is there to represent your interests and can speak for you. Also, because your attorney knows the law and you do not. Because your lawyer knows what can be said without incriminating you and how to say it and you do not. And, because "anything that you say can and will be used against you in a court of law".

                              In order for you to be convicted of a criminal offense, the police and DA must have sufficient proof to convince a judge or a jury of your peers (usually drawn from the local community) that you committed the offense that they allege "beyond a reasonable doubt". The burden of proof in a civil case being, "by a preponderance of the evidence", is not as great.

                              In most states, NY State being one I believe, there is a requirement of pre-trial "discovery" placed on the prosecution. That is a requirement that the prosecution must show the defense all of the evidence that it intends to present at trial before the trial begins.

                              "Discovery" gives the defense attorney a chance to not only see the evidence, but be in a position to advise his/her client as to whether the prosecution has a strong enough case to be likely to get a conviction. In which case, the attorney may advise his/her client to accept a plea arrangement with the DA that avoids a trial and, usually, will result in a lesser charge and/or sentence than would likely be the result if the case were to go to trial.

                              Whereas the police can lie or say anything that they want during an interview or interrogation, the law does not allow the DA's office to hide or lie about the evidence that it has and intends to use at trial during the "discovery" phase of a criminal proceeding. If the DA's office does lie or deliberately attempt to deceive the defense during "discovery", any conviction obtained as a result can be overturned on appeal and the attorneys involved risk being censured. So, it is not something that the DA's office is likely to attempt to do, particularly in a high-profile case.

                              So, how does all of this apply to the Marshawn Lynch case?

                              First of all, it appears that Lynch immediately did the smart thing and "lawyered up". That means that the Buffalo police cannot interview or interrogate him unless his attorney is present. Apparently it took his attorney a couple of days to arrive in Buffalo.

                              Second, it appears that Lynch's attorney gave Marshawn the advice that any good criminal attorney would give him, telling him not to speak with anyone about the incident. Why? Because "anything that he says can and will be used against him in a court of law"!

                              Third, it appears that Lynch is following his attorney's advice and not saying anything.

                              Fourth, Lynch is under no obligation to speak with the police or the DA's office voluntarily, with or without his attorney present. Because--do I have to say it again?--anything that he says can and will be used against him in a court of law. If the police want to interrogate him, they can formally invite his attorney to bring him in or they can simply bring him in themselves. But, they cannot ask him to answer any questions without his lawyer being present.

                              Fifth, it appears that Lynch's lawyer does not want Marshawn to talk with the police, who can lie through their teeth if they want to about what they have on Marshawn, until he has first discussed the case with the DA and at least informally discovered what the police and the DA have on Lynch at this point. Apparently, Lynch's attorney spoke with DA Clark on Friday and will be meeting with him again (Monday, I believe the Buffalo News reported).

                              Now, let me stop here for a moment to comment:

                              1.) Whether he was driving the SUV that hit the woman or not, there are a lot of reasons why Lynch and his attorney may not want him to meet with the police or even issue a statement before it is absolutely necessary. Remember, anything that he says can and will be used, if not against him, against someone else. Also, the police can say whatever they want to him to induce him to say something that can then be used against him--or someone else.

                              2.) So, why should Lynch say anything to the police or to anyone at this point? For PR's sake? If Lynch was anywhere near that SUV that night--whether he was the driver, a passenger, or loaned the car to someone else--forget about PR: Lynch's public image is going to be damaged no matter what, this is an issue of someone possibly going to jail and/or being sued for a lot of money. Any attorney worth his salt would tell Marshawn to keep his mouth shut and issue no statements whatsoever until absolutely necessary. Whatever repairs can be made to his public image can be made afterwards--and are more likely to be made if he is able to play football and not while spending time in jail or on the suspended list.

                              3.) While Marshawn is keeping his mouth shut and not talking to the police or the DA, his attorney is talking to the DA. And, they are not talking about the weather in Buffalo at this time of year. If he is doing his job as well as he appears to be from what has been reported, Lynch's lawyer is talking with the DA about what the police have on his client, what kind of charges they want to file, and perhaps even about a possible plea arrangement that might allow his client to avoid jail time and a suspension by the NFL commissioner (he may even be making discreet inquiries about how the NFL office would react to Lynch pleading out to various charges).

                              These being lawyers and, in the case of the DA, politicians, there may even be some discussions about how much publicity the DA wants to get out of this case and what would be the best settlement for the DA politically as well.

                              4.) The Bills may not have said anything publicly about the incident or Marshawn's involvement, but they have millions of dollars invested in him and in any other players who may have been with him. That being the case, you can bet that they have been talking, behind the scenes, with the DA and Lynch's lawyer as well. The last thing the Bills want to see happen is Lynch being taken on a "perp walk" in front of the local media or have their lockerroom atmosphere destroyed because Lynch names a fellow teammate as the one driving the car or says that it was the teammates who were his passengers who urged him to flee the scene of the accident, etc.

                              As it stands now, without any tests proving that he was legally impaired by alcohol at the time of the accident, at worst, Marshawn Lynch stands to be charged with a single count of leaving the scene of an accident if the police and DA can produce enough evidence that he was the driver. It is a Class A misdemeanor that can possibly be pled down to a lesser charge as a first offense. No jail time. Probably no suspension by the NFL as a first offense, either.

                              Yes, his reputation and public image will be harmed. Yes, his character will be called into question. But, those are things that can be repaired, at least somewhat, and often are forgotten if not repeated. Yes, he will likely be sued by the woman who was injured and will probably have to pay her a hefty amount of cash. But, money can be replaced. Time cannot.

                              If Lynch says anything more than he has before he is charged (or afterwards for that matter), if he agrees to meet with the police and refuses to answer their questions, etc., he would be opening himself--and/or possibly a couple of his teammates as well--up to a variety of other charges that could cost him FAR more than what he stands to lose at this point. Depending on who else may have been in his SUV when it struck the woman, that could also have a disastrous impact on the Bills lockerroom as well.

                              I think it is safe to say that Lynch, his attorney, the Bills and even the DA and Buffalo Police Department know this. And, they are going to try to resolve this case in a way that will allow all of the parties involved to come out of it with the least amount of damage and the most amount of favorable publicity that they can.

                              Now, undoubtedly, there are some who will question whether this is "right" or not. "Right" has nothing to do with it. It isn't about what is "right" or moral. It is about the law and how the application of the law works in this country and in the State of New York.

                              Bills fans can question what is right or wrong in this instance. They can debate whether Lynch was driving or not; whether he was legally impaired or drunk at the time of the accident; who was in the car with him; why he didn't stop after hitting the woman, if he was driving; etc., etc., etc. None of that matters.

                              Cold as it may sound, the only thing that matters is what the Buffalo PD and the DA's office can prove in a court of law and what they cannot. And, as Marshawn Lynch's attorney undoubtedly knows, it does not behoove Lynch to say or do anything that would give them anything more that they can use against him in a court of law than they are able to get from other sources.

                              Like it or not--and you may very well not like it at all--that is how the law works. And, it is before the law and not the court of public opinion that this case will ultimately be resolved.
                              Hated by the stupid..
                              Loved by their moms.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X