Bonnie Bernstein Explains Ray Lewis’s Crimes With An Unfortunate Parable

What if the DA thought/knew all 3 committed murder, but there was no way to prove that beyond a reasonable doubt. They'd have no case. The better result would be to get 2 convicted using testimony from the third, which is what the DA tried (and failed) to do. Maybe Lewis was the easiest to flip, who knows.

My actual issue is how ESPN/media is propping him up to be a saint. All day on ESPNews they've been playing a clip of one of his teamates calling him a great man and a role model. Even if he didn't actually committ he murder, his group got into a brawl and thought it was ok to stab two people to death. He then lied (and instructed others to lie) to the police. Somehow, after all of that, he is now supposed to be a great role model and some "leader of men"? I'm not buying it.

 

But that's exactly my point. If you're clean, you don't need to settle. There's nothing. The plaintiff would know that. You would know that. The attorneys would know that. The judge would know that. The suit would be without merit and not advance. Ray Ray settled because his hands were dirty. So rather than take the time and extra cost, he settled. We'll never know, but I guarantee that part of the confidentiality agreement his attorney insisted on (to protect Ray) was that he admitted some sort of guilt to the family. He probably didn't admit to murder. But I bet he not only settled, but the family wanted him to admit his role in the crime. He then probably admitted what he had to in court but under the agreement that it wouldn't leave the courtroom. I used to see this stuff all the time.

 

I agree. The people tried for murder are grown ass men. And if Lewis actually paid someone for murder; there would be more to this than we even discussed. But the truth is; Lewis made a bad decision on whom he hung out with then. I've had friends like that; who almost got me for a criminal charge. And sometimes you are just guilty by association.

 

What planet do you live on man? Do you know where most these pro athletes come from? Even if Lewis was innocent this time; I could bet a million bucks he had a history of some violent act in his lifetime. Why bring up shit like that? Why not settle to avoid being thrown in the mud? Look at what they can find with Presidential canidates; whom were raised knowing that their life would be under a microscope.

 

Question. Do you think Bill Clinton is a good man? Do you think he's a role model?

 

He's guilty because he had blood on his suit, according to every witness there. He's guilty because he told everyone to lie.

 

I'm not talking about Bill Clinton. And I don't equate lying to cover up murder and lying to cover up an affair (or affairs) are similar things.

I do, however, believe that as the President of the USA, he had responsibilities (including not lying under oath) and he failed them and he should have suffered the consequences. His standards and morals as President should be far higher than the common man.

 

Exactly. And Lewis, without a doubt, was the easiest to flip. He was known. He had money. He was a respected professional athlete.

 

We could spend days discussing this, so I will limit myself to one observation. If you rob a bank and they put you on trial for arson, you are likely to be acquitted.

Simpson was acquitted of commiting the murder with his own hands. He was never charged, or even seriously investigated, for hiring someone to do it.

 

I was pulled over for speeding by a undercover agent. Because he didn't have a citation book; he radio'd a traffic cop to come and write me a ticket. I contested the ticket; saying that the traffic cop is using the testimony from the undercover, but the undercover wasn't in court to be able to be cross examined. The judge striked the testimony and I was found innocent of the speeding ticket. By the way, I was speeding and I got away.

But does that mean everyone is guilty, but just found a way to beat the system? Who knows what really happened. All those testimonies are heresay because none actually testified what they told the police. Therefor, how can you expect it to be true if you can't prove it to be true?

There is a thin line in this system, but the system works most the time. And just because you have money, doesn't always guarantee you will beat the case. OJ is one exception; but I can give you hundreds of people with money that actually were found guilty.

Do you remember the Menendez brothers?

 

I wasn't asking you brother. I am asking a die hard left winger. One that looks up to Clinton.

 

I must have missed that time when he and his entourage got into a brawl and 2 men were stabbed to death. Thanks for bringing that to my attention.

But do I think he is someone to aspire to be like? I'm guessing not, but was does that have to do with the media propping Lewis up? A bad person who finds god (since he talks about god being good all the time I'm guessing that is why he's been suddenly deemed a role model) is still a bad person in my eyes. I know you and others disagree with that, but that is my position.

 

Does commiting the crime with your own hands versus paying someone else make any difference in the guilt?

And furthermore, if you used proceeds from endorsements to pay a hit man.... are we all technically guilty for buying the products that paid the endorsement fees to the athlete, who then used said proceeds to pay a hit man to commit murder?

 

And his friends were not going to flip on him. You know, the whole "snitches get stitches" motto...except when you have money. Then it's all good.

 

Not sure when I've once even typed his name on this board, but ok.

 

Pretty simple. Clinton is valued by media as one of the best presidents of all time. Saying that he was a great leader of this country and forget the lying under oath and cheating on his wife. So when you say something like "ESPN honoring Lewis for what he's done for football"; well sir, it's just as relevant as MSNBC exhaulting Clinton for what he's done for this Country.

 

You just supported what I've been saying all along. The system is flawed. This "free system". It isn't all about the money, and I agree with you on that. It wasn't all about money with Casey Anthony. As you showed in your example, there are so many technicalities that allow the guilty to walk (like my examples of Richard Sherman and Ryan Braun).

 

Every democrat loves Clinton. He is like the Regan of left wingers.

 

Yes you are correct; but I also said that just because you have money doesn't mean you can be innocent even if you are guilty; i.e. Menendez bros.