Dolphins give tryout to man who was wrongly jailed for five years

[MiamiMuss]

The Judicial system in the USA is broke,has been broke and always will be broke.

Personally i hope this guy makes a team it would be a great movie or book.

 

[Charlie Rivers]

He is gonna plant that b*tche's mug on opposing players shoulders and knock them out of his way like rag dolls.

 

[Phin-Omenon]

It's actually the other way around.

In a case of pure he-said/she-said, far more often than not, the man accused of rape is not convicted. There needs to be corroborating evidence, which may include but is not limited to: an immediate police report, forensic data collected from the victim immediately to prove they had sex, pictures of bruising or other marks that indicate a struggle, eye witness accounts, admissions of guilt by the accused.

I'm sorry for what happened to your buddy, if indeed he is innocent as he tells you, but I'd have to see a lot more of what went on with that case before I believe he got convicted wrongfully.

In this particular case, I can see two complicating factors that may have had an impact on Banks' lawyer telling him that a plea deal was his best bet. The first complicating factor is it sounds to me like he admitted they had sex. Without knowing a LOT more details, it's entirely conceivable that there may not have been physical evidence of the deed itself. That may or may not be true, I odn't know all the details of this case...just saying, if he admitted to having sex with her, that presents a problem.

The second complicating factor is the fact that she was 15 and he was 16. It is a little known fact but even if you're underage yourself, it's illegal to have sex with a minor. This particular age differential, her being 15 and him 16, may present a problem in that depending on the state's laws he may have been at the age of consent whereas she was still technically under it.

Whatever the case may be, it SOUNDS to me like whoever his lawyer was (court-assigned public defender?) at the time he was 16 and being accused...just completely screwed him over and gave him bad advice. I would say that happens a LOT more often than guys being thrown in jail for rape because it came down to he-said/she-said, without any marks or bruising to corroborate her story, and him being sent to prison because the courts sided with her story. Truthfully, I would say that almost never happens. But getting bad advice from a court-assigned public defender who has no interest in doing much work on your case and probably thinks you're guilty anyway due to his/her own prejudices...that happens.

I'm honestly not trying to get into a 'lawyering' contest with you, but there is no way that you're going to convince me that it is actually 'the other way around' when it comes to rape accusations. Men get the short end of the stick more often than not when this kind of scenario plays out. Even using the lazy lawyer excuse shows that the way the system is set up a guy has the deck stacked against him.

And concerning these two people, at 15 she should still know better than to lie. At 16 he knew that telling the truth was the right thing to do, thus not denying that they had intercourse. I'll admit though,I don't know the details of this case, as you said as well.

As far as him and football goes, I wish him well but I don't see it panning out for him. That's just too long away from the game, but who knows.

 

[keller377]

Was Carroll at USC when he was offered the scholarship?

 

[ckparrothead]

I'm honestly not trying to get into a 'lawyering' contest with you, but there is no way that you're going to convince me that it is actually 'the other way around' when it comes to rape accusations. Men get the short end of the stick more often than not when this kind of scenario plays out. Even using the lazy lawyer excuse shows that the way the system is set up a guy has the deck stacked against him.

And concerning these two people, at 15 she should still know better than to lie. At 16 he knew that telling the truth was the right thing to do, thus not denying that they had intercourse. I'll admit though,I don't know the details of this case, as you said as well.

As far as him and football goes, I wish him well but I don't see it panning out for him. That's just too long away from the game, but who knows.

I'm sorry but I can't consider that statement anything but pure hogwash. No offense.

1. Rape is under-reported. The American Medical Association says that sexual violence and rape in particular is the most under-reported violent crime. A 2007 government report in England reported that between 75 and 95 percent of rape cases go unreported with most common reasons being privacy and fear of reprisal.

2. The FBI consistently puts the number of "unfounded" rape accusations at about 8%. The largest study was conducted in 2005 from among 2,643 sexual assault cases and found that only 3% of them were unfounded, keeping in mind that "unfounded" is not necessarily synonymous with "false allegation". The definition of unfounded nationally means "a reported case that is investigated or found to be false or baseless".

3. The arrest rate for rapes reported in the United States as recently as 2008 was just 25%. That's a fraction of the arrest rate for murder, which was 79%. Aggravated assault was 51%. Why so low? A 5 month study of 16 states and cities nationwide found that a staggering 20,000 rape kits were taken, but untested. Yet, in areas where the kits are tested more frequently, the arrest rate is much higher. Take New York City as an example. The city instituted a policy of testing 100% of rape kits, and coincidentally (or not) they have a 70% arrest rate on reports of rape.

4. All told, out of 100 cases of alleged rape, only 46 will be reported to the police, of which 12 will lead to an arrest, if which 9 will be prosecuted, of which 5 will be convicted, of which 3 will serve a day in prison. For those counting, that's 6.5% of rape cases reported to police that result in someone serving jail time. That's it. I say it again, 6.5%.

Yeah...the system is TOTALLY geared to screw over the accused. Sorry, but that's pure BS.

 

[Lee2000]

He was never and will not be offered by Miami.

 

[hoops]

keep that scrub out the building...garbage

edit...i was thinking of tony banks...ha ha...anyways anyone who's been away from the game that damn long i'm not interested in playing for my pro football team...

 

[wonderl33t]

I'm sorry but I can't consider that statement anything but pure hogwash. No offense.

1. Rape is under-reported. The American Medical Association says that sexual violence and rape in particular is the most under-reported violent crime. A 2007 government report in England reported that between 75 and 95 percent of rape cases go unreported with most common reasons being privacy and fear of reprisal.

2. The FBI consistently puts the number of "unfounded" rape accusations at about 8%. The largest study was conducted in 2005 from among 2,643 sexual assault cases and found that only 3% of them were unfounded, keeping in mind that "unfounded" is not necessarily synonymous with "false allegation". The definition of unfounded nationally means "a reported case that is investigated or found to be false or baseless".

3. The arrest rate for rapes reported in the United States as recently as 2008 was just 25%. That's a fraction of the arrest rate for murder, which was 79%. Aggravated assault was 51%. Why so low? A 5 month study of 16 states and cities nationwide found that a staggering 20,000 rape kits were taken, but untested. Yet, in areas where the kits are tested more frequently, the arrest rate is much higher. Take New York City as an example. The city instituted a policy of testing 100% of rape kits, and coincidentally (or not) they have a 70% arrest rate on reports of rape.

4. All told, out of 100 cases of alleged rape, only 46 will be reported to the police, of which 12 will lead to an arrest, if which 9 will be prosecuted, of which 5 will be convicted, of which 3 will serve a day in prison. For those counting, that's 6.5% of rape cases reported to police that result in someone serving jail time. That's it. I say it again, 6.5%.

Yeah...the system is TOTALLY geared to screw over the accused. Sorry, but that's pure BS.

Good post. Unfortunately, it's a vicious cycle, because cases like this money-grubbing hag are a big reason that rape is so under-reported.

 

[SCLSU Mud Dogs]

jk I lied... :tubes:

 

[Fudge 101]

I'm sorry but I can't consider that statement anything but pure hogwash. No offense.

1. Rape is under-reported. The American Medical Association says that sexual violence and rape in particular is the most under-reported violent crime. A 2007 government report in England reported that between 75 and 95 percent of rape cases go unreported with most common reasons being privacy and fear of reprisal.

2. The FBI consistently puts the number of "unfounded" rape accusations at about 8%. The largest study was conducted in 2005 from among 2,643 sexual assault cases and found that only 3% of them were unfounded, keeping in mind that "unfounded" is not necessarily synonymous with "false allegation". The definition of unfounded nationally means "a reported case that is investigated or found to be false or baseless".

3. The arrest rate for rapes reported in the United States as recently as 2008 was just 25%. That's a fraction of the arrest rate for murder, which was 79%. Aggravated assault was 51%. Why so low? A 5 month study of 16 states and cities nationwide found that a staggering 20,000 rape kits were taken, but untested. Yet, in areas where the kits are tested more frequently, the arrest rate is much higher. Take New York City as an example. The city instituted a policy of testing 100% of rape kits, and coincidentally (or not) they have a 70% arrest rate on reports of rape.

4. All told, out of 100 cases of alleged rape, only 46 will be reported to the police, of which 12 will lead to an arrest, if which 9 will be prosecuted, of which 5 will be convicted, of which 3 will serve a day in prison. For those counting, that's 6.5% of rape cases reported to police that result in someone serving jail time. That's it. I say it again, 6.5%.

Yeah...the system is TOTALLY geared to screw over the accused. Sorry, but that's pure BS.

CK, I value what you have to say very highly, most of the time. This is not one of those times.

Many of your statistics rely on the fact that rapes go unreported. That has no bearing on the system. If the system does not know about the rape, the system cannot take action. Not to tear through your statistics but you really think assault or battery are not more underreported than rape? Every verbal threat is an assault and every fight is battery. There are so many of those every day. There are not more unreported rapes than assault claims...no chance. The American Medical Association???...where do they have the authority or credibility in collecting this data? The second statistic is from another country with another legal system. Those stats, as you put it, are hogwash.

I have no idea what "unfounded" means. If a guy has consensual sex with a girl and then the girl claims rape, is that well founded? It is absolutely a false allegation but because the rape kit shows positive for DNA that fits into your statistic as not being baseless and thus not "unfounded."

Rape cases, as you noted earlier, require the witness to testify. If they are unwilling, to file a report or testify, there is no arrest because it is pointless.

I cannot follow your stats, I am sorry. Here is the big misconception. Criminal cases require an EXTREMELY high burden that you all know and see all the time, "Beyond a reasonable doubt (or beyond all reasonable doubts)." Almost all crimes are based on circumstantial evidence and this he-said, she-said business. The jury determines who is more credible, and that determines the story they believe. It is definitely true that juries believe the female more often than the male defendant. They take the "she has no reason to bring herself into the courtroom and expain this story because she has nothing to gain by putting him in jail...blah blah blah." But, you are right in that the conviction rate may not be as high because, as a juror, you have to convince yourself you believe one witness so much more than the other that it eliminates any reasonable doubt.


Where you are most certainly wrong is in a civil case for sexual assault or rape. Remember in a civil case the burden is a mere "preponderance of the evidence." This means, to use a football analogy, that you only need to reach the 51 yard line. That is not even field goal range. If the jury says you got to the 51 yard line you win. That makes it SO MUCH easier to win a civil trial for rape because you only have to believe one party slightly more than the other. The jury verdict reporters show it. Look at the size of the settlement the city did to avoid this conflict.

Is the system screwed up? Maybe, but it is certainly better than any other system around the world. I would not want any other system if I ever needed it to work.

 

[cljh19]

The Judicial system in the USA is broke,has been broke and always will be broke.

Personally i hope this guy makes a team it would be a great movie or book.

Its not broke if you use it correctly.

 

[sm0kinfins]

I heard about this case on the ride into work this morning. Terribly sad. According to the morning sports radio chucklehead, this kid didn’t actually even have sex with this twunt girl. They made out in a stairwell and the girl later said she was kidnapped and raped. The young man, on the recommendation of his court appointed attorney, decided to plead no contest rather than face the possibility of 40 years behind bars. This, despite there being absolutely no DNA or physical evidence of any kind. That’s the real head scratcher in my eyes.

According to this telling of the story, recently the silly little twunt friended Billy on Facebook and messaged him saying basicly, “let’s let by-gones be by-gones.” He was smart and hired a PI of some sort to capture her admitting that she lied on tape. Therefore, the exoneration.

As far as remembering that she was just 15 and somehow innocent and too young to realize what she was doing to this young man. All’s I can say is “come on maaaan.” At 15 you should know the difference between good and evil. What this little bitch did was evil. If, when my boy turns 15, if he attempts to destroy another persons’ life with his lies I’ll whoop his arse. And if some little girl attempts to ruin his life, at the prodding of her parents or not, I’ll whoop that entire families arse.

 

[ckparrothead]

CK, I value what you have to say very highly, most of the time. This is not one of those times.

Many of your statistics rely on the fact that rapes go unreported. That has no bearing on the system. If the system does not know about the rape, the system cannot take action. Not to tear through your statistics but you really think assault or battery are not more underreported than rape? Every verbal threat is an assault and every fight is battery. There are so many of those every day. There are not more unreported rapes than assault claims...no chance. The American Medical Association???...where do they have the authority or credibility in collecting this data? The second statistic is from another country with another legal system. Those stats, as you put it, are hogwash.

I have no idea what "unfounded" means. If a guy has consensual sex with a girl and then the girl claims rape, is that well founded? It is absolutely a false allegation but because the rape kit shows positive for DNA that fits into your statistic as not being baseless and thus not "unfounded."

Rape cases, as you noted earlier, require the witness to testify. If they are unwilling, to file a report or testify, there is no arrest because it is pointless.

I cannot follow your stats, I am sorry. Here is the big misconception. Criminal cases require an EXTREMELY high burden that you all know and see all the time, "Beyond a reasonable doubt (or beyond all reasonable doubts)." Almost all crimes are based on circumstantial evidence and this he-said, she-said business. The jury determines who is more credible, and that determines the story they believe. It is definitely true that juries believe the female more often than the male defendant. They take the "she has no reason to bring herself into the courtroom and expain this story because she has nothing to gain by putting him in jail...blah blah blah." But, you are right in that the conviction rate may not be as high because, as a juror, you have to convince yourself you believe one witness so much more than the other that it eliminates any reasonable doubt.


Where you are most certainly wrong is in a civil case for sexual assault or rape. Remember in a civil case the burden is a mere "preponderance of the evidence." This means, to use a football analogy, that you only need to reach the 51 yard line. That is not even field goal range. If the jury says you got to the 51 yard line you win. That makes it SO MUCH easier to win a civil trial for rape because you only have to believe one party slightly more than the other. The jury verdict reporters show it. Look at the size of the settlement the city did to avoid this conflict.

Is the system screwed up? Maybe, but it is certainly better than any other system around the world. I would not want any other system if I ever needed it to work.

Sorry. You went through a lot of trouble to come up with a response but you really did not bring up very many effective counter arguments.

1. You say most of my statistics "rely on" the fact that most rape goes unreported. What does this even mean? This is a blatantly false statement. The arrest rate for rape is 25% based on REPORTED rapes. That number I cited, 6.5% of all REPORTED rapes end with someone serving jail time, had nothing to do with unreported rapes. You need to go back and read through the post if you're having trouble.

2. Yes, I believe rape may very well be the least reported VIOLENT crime. Nice of you to bring up verbal assault (a non-violent crime) and pretend that falls under the purview of my statement, but nonetheless your point is irrelevant. You say there are many fights every day. There are also many rapes every day, approximately one every 2 minutes, according to the U.S. Department of Justice.

3. Yes, the American Medical Association conducts scientifically devised and accepted surveys and studies about subjects that you on your couch with your potato chips might not have realized. I don't how the simple fact that you didn't know they did that makes their studies invalid all of a sudden. After all, what the hell do the Secret Service know about counterfeiting?

4. You don't like using studies in England, that's fine. Different system of justice, I can see why you would disregard it as it pertains to a discussion of the American legal system. But I also cited statistics (46 of 100 alleged rapes get reported) that are American and conducted by the Department of Justice.

5. I provided the legal definition of "unfounded". It is an allegation that is proven to be FALSE and/or BASELESS. This means, if they are proven not to even have had sex or contact with each other, that is unfounded. Also, if they DID have sex with one another and it is proven through evidence that she consented, that is also unfounded.

6. I'm not sure what point you're trying to make talking about how an arrest makes no sense if the witness is not willing to testify. I just got done talking about how CBS News conducted a 5 month study in 2009 of police stations in Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Los Angeles, San Diego, Oakland, Florida, Illinois, Maryland, Indiana, Michigan, Minnesota, New Mexico, New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island and Texas, and found over the 5 months an astounding 20,000 rape kits that sat in storage and went completely untested. As I said before, the national average arrest rate for REPORTED rape is about 25%. Yet, in New York City where they have a policy of testing EVERY rape kit, they have an arrest rate of 70%, nearly three times the national average.

7. You don't follow my stats? Just try reading through them again. I wasn't writing in circles or dazzling with fancy words or grammar. I put together pretty straight forward arguments.

8. I'm not sure what you're trying to say when you talk about the standards of proof in a criminal case. Are you making my case for me? It sounds like you are. You're pointing out that the standard of proof (beyond a reasonable doubt) steers jurors toward not sending a man to prison based on he-said/she-said. I believe that's correct. I would note that the conviction rate for rape cases that actually go to trial approximates the conviction rate of all cases that go to trial. But what *I* pointed out is the simple fact that only about 20% of REPORTED rapes end up with the prosecution of someone in court.

9. I have no idea why you're going through civil cases and the standard of proof and yes I'm very well aware the standard of proof is lower. It's not germane to the topic at hand since we're talking about Brian Banks who went to jail for 5 years and had another 5 years of house arrest hanging over his head until his accuser recanted.

10. In no way was anything I said meant to be comparative to other court systems around the world in order to make the case that our system is more or less screwed up than any other countries. I would save the Amurrrica chest thumping for when it's a little more appropriate.

 

[finomenal]

Incidentally before everyone goes on the "bitch must die" war path, keep in mind...she was 15. I bet you've done some pretty stupid **** when you were 15 years old.

She didn't put him in jail. The justice system put him in jail. As I've been saying, rape convictions almost never come down to a simple he-said/she-said and everyone automatically siding with the woman. That **** just doesn't happen. IF he was in fact innocent of all this, then it was the justice system that should have upheld justice, but instead it threw him in jail. That's what you should blame, not some 15 year old kid that got scared and bullied around by her parents.

The other possibility to keep in mind is maybe he did do it. Maybe he did have sex with her even though she didn't want to, and it straddled a fine line between I don't want this to happen but I'm letting it happen anyway, to where she never really held it against him and eventually just felt really remorseful that he had to spend 5 years in jail over it. She's broke, or so I hear. She's already spent the settlement money and is on welfare. That may be why she reached out to him about recanting her story.

I respect your opinions more than a lot of fans on here, but sadly, I'm shocked. I just can't agree with that statement in any way. I don't see how you could possibly categorize this as "stupid ****" 15 year olds do. Some examples of stupid things fifteen year olds do include things like smoking weed in the school bathroom, shoplifting, etc.

Accusing someone of rape that leads to prison time is certainly not an example of "stupid **** 15 year olds do." It's evil. I don't give a damn that she was 15. Fifteen sounds very young, but if you think about it, that's a sophomore in high school. She's old enough to know that if she tells authorities that a guy raped her, there's a strong chance he goes to prison.

My cousin got stabbed to death by a 15 year old many years ago (Here's a link to the article if anyone would like to read it http://articles.sun-sentinel.com/20...0_1_plummer-s-life-summers-mother-steak-knife). She knew what the hell she was doing, too. She's not a baby. It's funny how this girl who accused Brian Banks is now broke and on welfare. Good for her. Living it up while he's in prison. Really nice. Stereotypical ghetto hoodrat.

View attachment 8786

BURN. IN. HELL. BITCH.



edited to add: Can someone please tell me why the picture I posted shows up as a link instead of displaying the picture?

 

[stwingle]

Did the woman who lied about the rape end up in jail like she should be? You shouldn't be able to take away a guy's freedom for 5 years with a false accusation without getting some sort of punishment.

He should go after eveything shes got.