This is a mockery, and clearly driven by this Bears fan's desire to give Chicago as much chance as possible when going up against The Indianapolis Colts.
Do you support him letting criminals go free to play a game?
2007-01-25 03:22:31 · 11 answers · asked by Handsome Boy Modeling School 3 in Sports ➔ Football (American)
Interesting that so many Bears fans think it's ok.
Bottom line: If it were you or me, you wouldn't be traveling out of state. Period.
2007-01-25 04:50:02 · update #1
No. Another case of "Celebrity Justice." Or should it be "Celebrity Injustice?"
2007-01-25 13:59:55 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Innocent intil proven guilty. Not letting him play affects his money, which would be cruel and unusual punishment for someone in his position. Had the judge not let him go (for 100,000K), then there would be a countersuit if a guilty plea was not handed down. Add to that, he is not a flight risk with all the attention that he will be getting and the fact that he will probably not face jail time making fleeing unneccissary. If he was already guilty and on probation, that would be one thing, but the trial has to play out before anyone can pass judgement. Just think of the Duke Lacrosse team.
2007-01-25 03:48:11 · answer #2 · answered by Jopo Lugo 2 · 0⤊ 1⤋
No I do not. This is just another example of celebrities getting a free pass.
If I was in the same situation and I had to travel for a teachers conference I would not be allowed to go.
Why?
Because I would be on probation and Im allowed to leave the area, unless its for a VERY good reason. To play football is not a good reason.
People who give celebrities a free pass are Dumba**es in my book.
2007-01-25 03:34:54 · answer #3 · answered by tardis1977 4 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Criminal Record Search Database : http://www.InfoSearchDetective.com
2015-10-07 17:59:52 · answer #4 · answered by Juli 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I don't think this judgement made a lot of sense, but I am glad that they did. I hope Peyton looks worse than his little sister did all season for the Giants
2007-01-25 05:51:41 · answer #5 · answered by luckylilfukr 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes, I agree wth the judge Tank Johnosn still has to work and pay his bills, he is not a criminal you don't know the whole story
2007-01-25 03:28:51 · answer #6 · answered by Fruitful1 3 · 0⤊ 3⤋
I sincerely doubt the bond posted for bail was one hundred million dollars, as so gracefully cited in the answer before me (100,000K) Idiot, I bet you're a FIB aren't you?
2007-01-25 04:00:45 · answer #7 · answered by NML 1635 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
if criminals were not allowed to play then the whole bengals team would have to find other jobs , and yes what tank did was wrong , he is making attepts to change his life and they should let him go , it is his job , its what he gets paid to do , and it is the chance of a lifetime
2007-01-25 03:28:01 · answer #8 · answered by Country Boy With A Guitar 2 · 1⤊ 2⤋
do your homework. that judge set a 100K bail on tank, the norm for probabtion infraction is usually only 1000 dollars.
2007-01-25 03:27:30 · answer #9 · answered by The Indigo Cobra 4 · 1⤊ 2⤋
Dude, before you ask a "conspiracy" question, it's always a good idea to have all the facts and know the law. Thanks for the 2 points though!
2007-01-25 03:31:51 · answer #10 · answered by Joe L 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋