Berniewood Hogan
IT'S BERNIE SANDERS WITH A STEEL CHAIR!
@ 1:00 
Stephen A suspended from First Take and ESPN radio for a week
- Thread starter KingJudah
- Start date
philmonroe
Superstar
Shut up you disingenuous bytch asking this dumb ass question
Bilz
Superstar
Based on what?
Bilz
Superstar
for the cacs. 
Tide Run This
Veteran
Screaming A is a chump
philmonroe
Superstar
Never but whatever makes you losers feel better ok and why would I be mad your a bytch?
Bilz
Superstar
Are you trying to provoke something here?
This was sent to us by Ken Williams. A former police officer, Williams often provides accurate and logical analysis of legal situations. This is what he said about domestic violence, Stephen A. Smith and how we might want to look at the situation:
I watched the Stephen A. interview in its entirety and I believe ESPN and the feminist groups improperly analyzed what the man said on national television. Let me start by defining from a Law Enforcement perspective and criminal procedure reference point what is – Domestic violence? Domestic Violence is a fluid escalating argument between two people that are family; or between two people that live together in the same household; or between two people that have a current dating relationship; or between two people that have a past dating relationship where either one or both individuals feel threatened or became the victim of an assault or assault & battery; or it can even be a threat not created in a face-to-face encounter but perhaps by telephone, letter or a third person. Domestic violence laws in some jurisdictions carry enhanced right of arrest laws transforming a past misdemeanor which normally carries no right of arrest in a crime that is arrestable without a warrant. Domestic Violence is not an argument or fight between two strangers.
- Scenario #1 – Anything leading to an assault (verbal threats) & then escalating further without any legal justification to an assault & battery (hitting). This scenario has a clear right of arrest. Keep in mind even an assault can lead to a right of arrest under the domestic violence law if the victim’s perception is they were placed in fear.
- Scenario #2 – In other cases a defendant in a domestic violence situation can go from one moment nothing was occurring to the next moment without warning a verbal assault erupts, or an assault & battery occurs or the victim simply finds themselves on the receiving end of being battered without any warning. This scenario has a clear right of arrest.
- Scenario #3 – A dating couple is engaged in a heated exchange of angry words (verbally attacking / maybe threatening each other’s welfare) but one person or both people choose to escalate from verbal threats to physical violence which adds the element of assault & battery (hitting) to two people bearing responsibility for their acts. Who is at fault? Are both at fault? Who is going to be arrested? Are both going to jail? A man defending and perhaps even striking back under extraordinary circumstances will most likely always be viewed as a negative response. Under scenario #3 it is a jump ball and the police and courts need to sort out these facts with a judge. There can be dual responsibility in Scenario #3 whereby both people are arrested and charged with Domestic Violence. It depends on whose version of events during the ‘he said’ and ‘she said’ investigation are most believable perhaps supported by witnesses.
Often the public does not have access to all the facts which can lead to unreasonable speculation.
In closing, Stephen A. is a sportscaster and probably isn’t familiar with jurisprudence when it concerns domestic violence. That said, his inexperience and lack of firsthand knowledge concerning the Rice incident means his report was, at best, speculative and he injected his personal beliefs into the broadcast. I believe Stephen A. basically touched on these three scenarios.
I also believe Stephen A. recited elements of scenarios #1, #2, and #3 but the audience missed the distinct differences between the right of arrest based on each of these scenarios. The quote regarding ‘provocation’ Stephen A. received a suspension over seems to me to be citing scenario #3 which does have a potential duality right of arrest unlike #2, and #1. It is for this reason I believe the audience erroneously mixed the duality arrest scenario #3 with the clearly defined singular right of arrest outcomes in #2 and #1 because as Stephen A opened with too few broach the subject in public to educate the public in an effort to lower domestic violence. If what I am stating is a fair, true and accurate assessment of what Stephen A. communicated on national television then it is my belief that ESPN overreacted and should have taken a more sensible approach to defusing any misunderstanding by allowing for greater dialogue concerning the topic. Stephen A. should be commended for trying to tackle a difficult subject.
http://www.brothersonsports.com/for...on-the-stephen-a-smith-situation/#prettyPhoto
I watched the Stephen A. interview in its entirety and I believe ESPN and the feminist groups improperly analyzed what the man said on national television. Let me start by defining from a Law Enforcement perspective and criminal procedure reference point what is – Domestic violence? Domestic Violence is a fluid escalating argument between two people that are family; or between two people that live together in the same household; or between two people that have a current dating relationship; or between two people that have a past dating relationship where either one or both individuals feel threatened or became the victim of an assault or assault & battery; or it can even be a threat not created in a face-to-face encounter but perhaps by telephone, letter or a third person. Domestic violence laws in some jurisdictions carry enhanced right of arrest laws transforming a past misdemeanor which normally carries no right of arrest in a crime that is arrestable without a warrant. Domestic Violence is not an argument or fight between two strangers.
- Scenario #1 – Anything leading to an assault (verbal threats) & then escalating further without any legal justification to an assault & battery (hitting). This scenario has a clear right of arrest. Keep in mind even an assault can lead to a right of arrest under the domestic violence law if the victim’s perception is they were placed in fear.
- Scenario #2 – In other cases a defendant in a domestic violence situation can go from one moment nothing was occurring to the next moment without warning a verbal assault erupts, or an assault & battery occurs or the victim simply finds themselves on the receiving end of being battered without any warning. This scenario has a clear right of arrest.
- Scenario #3 – A dating couple is engaged in a heated exchange of angry words (verbally attacking / maybe threatening each other’s welfare) but one person or both people choose to escalate from verbal threats to physical violence which adds the element of assault & battery (hitting) to two people bearing responsibility for their acts. Who is at fault? Are both at fault? Who is going to be arrested? Are both going to jail? A man defending and perhaps even striking back under extraordinary circumstances will most likely always be viewed as a negative response. Under scenario #3 it is a jump ball and the police and courts need to sort out these facts with a judge. There can be dual responsibility in Scenario #3 whereby both people are arrested and charged with Domestic Violence. It depends on whose version of events during the ‘he said’ and ‘she said’ investigation are most believable perhaps supported by witnesses.
Often the public does not have access to all the facts which can lead to unreasonable speculation.
In closing, Stephen A. is a sportscaster and probably isn’t familiar with jurisprudence when it concerns domestic violence. That said, his inexperience and lack of firsthand knowledge concerning the Rice incident means his report was, at best, speculative and he injected his personal beliefs into the broadcast. I believe Stephen A. basically touched on these three scenarios.
I also believe Stephen A. recited elements of scenarios #1, #2, and #3 but the audience missed the distinct differences between the right of arrest based on each of these scenarios. The quote regarding ‘provocation’ Stephen A. received a suspension over seems to me to be citing scenario #3 which does have a potential duality right of arrest unlike #2, and #1. It is for this reason I believe the audience erroneously mixed the duality arrest scenario #3 with the clearly defined singular right of arrest outcomes in #2 and #1 because as Stephen A opened with too few broach the subject in public to educate the public in an effort to lower domestic violence. If what I am stating is a fair, true and accurate assessment of what Stephen A. communicated on national television then it is my belief that ESPN overreacted and should have taken a more sensible approach to defusing any misunderstanding by allowing for greater dialogue concerning the topic. Stephen A. should be commended for trying to tackle a difficult subject.
http://www.brothersonsports.com/for...on-the-stephen-a-smith-situation/#prettyPhoto
The context of his words.
OG Talk
Archived
The ultimate "company man"
You are witnessing a totally neutered Black man with zero dignity.. You don't have to be super militant and defiant.. But what he said about Michelle Beadle is so pathetic..Why are so many of my Black people so psychologically wounded?
I don't like SAS at all, but I have pity for anyone that feels they have to live their lives like this...
I think its time for a black owned and operated sports network anyway..with all these active and retired black millionaire athletes I think theres enough resources out there to make it happen
cornercommission2k12
so this were u dudes went
What ticks me off the most about this is espn/Disney
Purposely trying to excite racial tension by publically suspending Stephen a
Could have did it on the low like they have done plenty of other times.
Question is why the blatant attempt to piss black folks off?
Then when it's quite clear we don't care about it that much seems to be a continuing effort to keep the story going
At this point it done taken on a mind of its own saw some women posting on Facebook "it's a shame Stephen a supports domestic violence"
This is pitiful
Purposely trying to excite racial tension by publically suspending Stephen a
Could have did it on the low like they have done plenty of other times.
Question is why the blatant attempt to piss black folks off?
Then when it's quite clear we don't care about it that much seems to be a continuing effort to keep the story going
At this point it done taken on a mind of its own saw some women posting on Facebook "it's a shame Stephen a supports domestic violence"
This is pitiful