Started By
Message
Posted on 2/24/16 at 10:07 pm to cajunbama
round as the top of
tea cups, white as creamer in
coffee – boobs are sweet.
tea cups, white as creamer in
coffee – boobs are sweet.
Posted on 2/24/16 at 10:11 pm to Vols&Shaft83
He's went across the middle, he's done its over. RIP Bitch!
Posted on 2/24/16 at 10:11 pm to cajunbama
Til the morrow, sugar nips
Posted on 2/24/16 at 10:12 pm to ABearsFanNMS
quote:
He's went across the middle
"Over the middle", dumbass.
Posted on 2/24/16 at 10:14 pm to Vols&Shaft83
So Bitch can levitate....good to know. Can he walk on water also?
Posted on 2/24/16 at 10:16 pm to ABearsFanNMS
He doesn't appear buoyant.
Posted on 2/24/16 at 10:31 pm to Volatile
Good opportunity for Tennessee to get rid of Butch Jones
Posted on 2/25/16 at 12:20 am to sodacitynate
quote:
I don't see an actual denial in there.
Exactly. That is what I would say if it were true. If it was not true I would deny it word for word and not in a general sense like this.
Posted on 2/25/16 at 12:28 am to CNB
quote:
He mad
He should be. He's being crucified by lawyers trying this in the press to get a settlement AND while guys like Stoops (hardly alone) let a player who broke a girl's jaw remain on the team, Jones has kicked off players with no charges filed for just the hint of that player hitting his girl. AND he did this looooong before there was a spotlight on him or UT.
No good deed goes unpunished.
Posted on 2/25/16 at 4:22 am to Prof
quote:
while guys like Stoops (hardly alone) let a player who broke a girl's jaw
All kidding aside, it is shocking no one in the media will do a story on all of the players Stoops brought to OU after they violently assaulted women.
Posted on 2/25/16 at 8:01 am to Volatile
Butch is accusing this kid of perjuring himself in a Federal court.
OK - maybe he thinks that's fair play because: no hard evidence to refute his (Butch's) position?
But consider: filing a deposition in a Federal court is pretty serious business. Is this the kind of kid who would knowingly perjure himself for some kind of retribution or simply not understand the nature of such an action could mean?
Do you think he might ask his dad for advice before proceeding in a legal matter such as this?
His Dad - Capt. Dexter Bowles
Pic of his dad in action
OK - maybe he thinks that's fair play because: no hard evidence to refute his (Butch's) position?
But consider: filing a deposition in a Federal court is pretty serious business. Is this the kind of kid who would knowingly perjure himself for some kind of retribution or simply not understand the nature of such an action could mean?
Do you think he might ask his dad for advice before proceeding in a legal matter such as this?
His Dad - Capt. Dexter Bowles
Pic of his dad in action
Posted on 2/25/16 at 8:04 am to Knight of Old
(no message)
This post was edited on 2/25/16 at 8:05 am
Posted on 2/25/16 at 8:09 am to Knight of Old
So you're implying that because he's father is law enforcement he wouldn't lie under oath.
Posted on 2/25/16 at 8:10 am to Realistic Ag
Quick move there chief.
Posted on 2/25/16 at 9:06 am to Patton
quote:Not exactly what I'm implying. What I'm implying is that this is circumstantial evidence that could (should) lead one to consider it's far less probable.
So you're implying that because he's father is law enforcement he wouldn't lie under oath.
Do you really think the kid didn't consult his father? If he did, would you consider it more or less probable that his father gave him any advice? If he did, would you consider a successful and eminent law enforcement officer working in a front line unit more or less likely to give spurious advice?
I mean, I guess you take an angle that, on average, DIV-I head football coaches have far more integrity than first-responder law enforcement so let's tip all scales in that direction.
My angle is that there's circumstantial evidence (his upbringing) saying he's more likely to tell the truth than not.
Posted on 2/25/16 at 9:15 am to Knight of Old
quote:
Not exactly what I'm implying. What I'm implying is that this is circumstantial evidence that could (should) lead one to consider it's far less probable.
Why? I don't know anything about his father. His career choice doesn't tell me anything about his character. I can't make the leap that his son is probably honest because he is a Cop.
quote:
Do you really think the kid didn't consult his father?
Why would you assume I think that? I'm sure he did.
quote:
If he did, would you consider it more or less probable that his father gave him any advice?
I'm sure he did
quote:
If he did, would you consider a successful and eminent law enforcement officer working in a front line unit more or less likely to give spurious advice?
I'm sure his father gave him whatever advice he thought was best for his son.
im not going to assume this kid is above lying under oath because of what his father does for money, however noble it may be.
quote:
I guess you take an angle that, on average, DIV-I head football coaches have far more integrity than first-responder law enforcement so let's tip all scales in that direction.
This is absurd. Why are you assuming what I take angles on? You gathered all this based off one sentence I posted?
quote:
My angle is that there's circumstantial evidence (his upbringing) saying he's more likely to tell the truth than not.
We have no idea what his upbringing was like. Assuming it was great because his father is law enforcement doesn't hold a lot of water.
This post was edited on 2/25/16 at 9:21 am
Posted on 2/25/16 at 9:19 am to Volatile
That was carefully worded. He didn't actually deny saying what the kid accused him of saying. Instead, Butch says he never "attempted to belittle or demean a young man" and a bunch of other stuff that is very "squishy" and open to interpretation. It's not really a denial of the facts alleged, but a rebuttal of the intent/motive being assigned to him. That's two very different things.
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News