SunnySixkiller

Thanks lsu777 and Gings5 for the input. As for the aesthetics template, you’re suggesting the one you have in the GSLP master thread and run it for 3 months, correct? I see there are two weeks set up, but is it basically putting that on repeat for week after week for 3 months? Appreciate the advice. Like I said it’s been a long time since I’ve done serious weightlifting.

Gings5 - Re: HIIT, I was working out at Orange Theory (a boutique as someone else in another thread mentioned) for the last 4-5 years. It was great for getting me back into the swing of working out after a long period of being sedentary. With young kids, I liked that I could get a workout in at 5 am before kids were up, and that I didn’t have to plan. It got me into great shape cardiovascular wise, but there just isn’t enough time (or equipment) to really focus/emphasize weight training or muscle gains (which is really my biggest knock on it). Over that last year+ I started supplementing that with dumbbell/kettlebell and TRX work at home. I’m just ready to shift more to a weightlifting focus at this point.

You're wrong, and you are either intentionally perpetuating a lie or unintentionally doing it by buying into someone - who may or may not have a financial incentive to do so - who is mischaracterizing what the Acting U.S. Attorney said.

What he said - word for word - is in the last post on page 1, but I'll put it here for ease of reference:

"The videos show the officers as they arrived on scene and engaged with Sterling. The videos show that the officers directed Sterling to put his hands on the hood of a car. When Sterling did not comply, the officers placed their hands on Sterling, and he struggled with the officers. Officer Salamoni then pulled out his gun and pointed it at Sterling’s head, at which point Sterling placed his hands on the hood."

Not once did the Acting U.S. Attorney say a "the office put a gun to his head" much less "prior to the tazing / struggling / shooting." To the contrary, he said the officer pointed a gun at his head after struggling with Sterling, who was refusing to comply.

I'm sure you can understand the difference between "pointing a gun" at someone's head and "putting it to his head." The latter evokes an almost execution-like event (or at least a precursor to such) while the former connotes some distance between the gun and the person-at-whom-it's-pointed's head. For example, one can point a gun at someone's head from 5 ft., 10 ft., 100 ft., etc.

Lilsnapp - can I get a copy of your budget template? I really like that layout.

sunnysixkiller327 at gmail.com

Thanks.

Exactly. Add to it that all of Frank's friends (Jordan, Nails, and presumably Ray and Ani are out of the country) or dead, plus he no longer had his passport/fake passport and no means to get a new one so he can get to Venezuela. The simple fact is he's out of money and out of leverage. There's no way he can exact his revenge if he get back to town after walking through the desert in his underwear.

He didn't deny it because he was blackout drunk and couldn't remember anything from that night. His story has always been consistent, which was noted by the investigator, et al. If he tried to deny it, he'd be painted a liar and his credibility hurt. In this situation, I don't remember because i was black out drunk is (should be) a valid explanation.

On top of that, Amherst's empowering victims policy/procedures stacked everything against Doe. She, as the accuser, no longer had the burden of showing she was raped. Rather, even though he was incapacitated, he (without counsel) must no unequivocally show it didn't happen for him to not be expelled. That doesn't even address the litany of other procedural issues with this situation. Why should her story stand now when it has been shown that she lied to investigator and panel and witheld evidence.

You aren't really this dumb are you?

They had both been drinking. Yet, she was cognizant enough to (a) know he was incapacitated, (b) worry about how her roommate would respond, and (c) discuss pinning it all on the guy but decided against it because he was too drunk to come up with a lie. Sounds like she could consent and he couldn't, which she knew.

How about the person perpetuated the sexual assault actually be subject to a complaint and expelled.

I know. Funny that VOLhalla keeps mentioning that she claims to have withdrawn consent, yet refuses to acknowledge Doe was incapable of consenting

He could have used those of she hadn't lied about their existence or withheld them from the investigator.

Although you correctly state this isn't s criminal proceeding, you do know that Amherst's student handbook doesn't trump his due process rights, don't you?

Do you know why it was "undisputed"?

He was deprived of his due process rights. He was procedurally prevent from cross examining his accuser. His only "recourse" was writing down questions that the panel had the ability to decide whether or not to ask. On top of that, she was allowed to write her responses to the question instead of audibly responding (which the investigator found she was capable of doing), which only works in favor of her credibility. Part of requiring a person to audibly respond is that you can assess the content of the statement as well as the tone and manner in which it is given.

This doesn't even address the fact that she lied to the investigator/panel, withheld exculpatory evidence (think Brady violation), he was deprived of having counsel present, the investigator had no subpoena power, etc.

Moreoecer, by Amherst own policies, they had/have (but refuse to look at) evidence showing that she committed sexual assault. In the immediate aftermath of the event, she texted a friend saying he was intoxicated.

Please explain how he gave affirmative consent to her when, in her own words, he was intoxicated and thus could not give consent to her performing oral sex on him?

Please tell me you aren't seriously implying that walking outside, see Doucet camped out with a camera crew, and walking back inside is handling the situation poorly.

For reference, here is WBRZ's story about the Walk On's meeting.

LINK

Wafb's is on page 5. I'll let you tell me which one you think is more professional.