Reuben Foster

Originally posted by MadDog49er:

Originally posted by Wodwo:

Originally posted by MadDog49er:

Originally posted by 49AllTheTime:

Originally posted by SmokeCrabtrees:

Originally posted by MadDog49er:

Originally posted by cciowa:

Originally posted by MadDog49er:

What we do know is that Foster is a low character/ no character dude that can't be trusted. he is going to continue to get in trouble because he's not a good guy. Bad people make bad decisions on a regular basis and eventually catches up to them. Even from the beginning I knew there is no way this would make it through court. Few of these cases are ever prosecuted. With a high price attorney it makes it very easy to skate through the process. If he was a high character guy I might give him the benefit of the doubt. But he has shown over and over again to be a low character/no character dude and I don't buy anything he says. Anybody who's got a kid that's about nine or 10 years old and continues doing these things is either a moron, a Bad person or both

now you have went an done it

If Foster was a Seahawk, the defenders who jump to his defense would have tarred and feathered him, sent him to the guillotine and then through a wood chipper. I will never understand the double standard= innocent if a Niner; crooked as hell if he is a Seahawk.
The legal system rarely finds people guilty if they have the means to pay for a high priced attorney. Bill Cosby raped a billion girls and it took moving a mountain to barely find him guilty in what should have been a cut and dry case. People who have committed horrible acts of violence get away with it all the time. That is why from the start I didn't really care whether this case went to trial. It was never going to make it there- there would be a settlement and hush money given...what a shock when the girlfriend suddenly changes her story..only happens about 99.9 percent of the time when big bucks can flow from one account to the next.
The only ruling I care about is what NFL investigators find. They couldnt give a damn what the legal system says, they simply want to find out what happens and then levy a judgment. That is why multiple players have been suspended even though witnesses may Refuse to testify or the case dropped. There are many criminals walking free. Not guilty in the legal sense does not mean a person is not guilty in the court of public opinion.

So what you're really saying is he is guilty lol.

some see foster as the devil all because of a diluted test

How many times does the guy have to be arrested? 5? 10? Damn, he's not been in the league one year and he has been booked multiple times.

Wait, are you arguing that he is the devil?

Why do you care? What is your point exactly? Are you just complaining about it? Do you just feel a need to vent?

It is the hypocracy of the people who defend him. Let's be real. If he was playing for any other NFL team, he would be classified as a thug, a troublemaker, a loser. Because he is "one of us", people run to his defense as if he is a martyr.

The dude has been arrested twice since being a pro, failed a drug test, got kicked out of the combine and was passed by nearly every team in the draft because of character concerns. He hangs out with a shady woman who fights with others while he has a 9 year old daughter. Not sure why anyone would celebrate this guy as one of us.

It is a shame his family was so screwed up as a kid, but he is now a man with a family and team and. Franchise. And, being a guy who is continually in trouble with the law, whether you like some of the laws or not, is not acceptable to me. I'd rather have good players with good character than losers who continually attempt to sabotage the franchise. Instead of celebrating last year's movement forward, the team has to deal with his crap.

Yup if he was on any other team in nfl fans here would be laughing and thankful we passed on him. But becuase he wears a 49er uniform he is seen as some kind of victim and blameless for everytime he's gotten trouble. The team is on upward trend but becuase this knucklehead we have to see him walking out of the court for his crimes.

Basically, the judge has to determine if he thinks it's credible that the victim in question is plausibly lying about it not happening. If he feels there's enough evidence to show that she's lying now and for a jury to see the evidence, things will move forward. If not, it won't go any further than the preliminary hearing.

I'd be really surprised to see a plea deal - especially with Foster's attorney looking for a quick trial. They feel like the onus is all on the prosecution to prove that the victim is lying and that Foster really did harm the woman.

If Foster really didn't hurt her, he shouldn't agree to any plea deal IMO. I wouldn't. I just think this case is gonna be too hard to get 12 people to all agree that he, without a doubt, did it.

From her new story and video to the claim by the DA that he punched her 8-10 times in the head and all she had from that was a swollen lip and ruptured ear drum.... I mean...c'mon. A guy the size of Foster is punching someone, out of rage, 8-10 times, they're gonna have some serious damage done, to the point where you'd probably be able to see the marks on her today.

The loaded assault weapon with a cartridge in the chamber found on his bathroom floor was disturbing. Not good.

Originally posted by susweel:

Originally posted by MadDog49er:

Originally posted by Wodwo:

Originally posted by MadDog49er:

Originally posted by 49AllTheTime:

Originally posted by SmokeCrabtrees:

Originally posted by MadDog49er:

Originally posted by cciowa:

Originally posted by MadDog49er:
What we do know is that Foster is a low character/ no character dude that can't be trusted. he is going to continue to get in trouble because he's not a good guy. Bad people make bad decisions on a regular basis and eventually catches up to them. Even from the beginning I knew there is no way this would make it through court. Few of these cases are ever prosecuted. With a high price attorney it makes it very easy to skate through the process. If he was a high character guy I might give him the benefit of the doubt. But he has shown over and over again to be a low character/no character dude and I don't buy anything he says. Anybody who's got a kid that's about nine or 10 years old and continues doing these things is either a moron, a Bad person or both

now you have went an done it

If Foster was a Seahawk, the defenders who jump to his defense would have tarred and feathered him, sent him to the guillotine and then through a wood chipper. I will never understand the double standard= innocent if a Niner; crooked as hell if he is a Seahawk.
The legal system rarely finds people guilty if they have the means to pay for a high priced attorney. Bill Cosby raped a billion girls and it took moving a mountain to barely find him guilty in what should have been a cut and dry case. People who have committed horrible acts of violence get away with it all the time. That is why from the start I didn't really care whether this case went to trial. It was never going to make it there- there would be a settlement and hush money given...what a shock when the girlfriend suddenly changes her story..only happens about 99.9 percent of the time when big bucks can flow from one account to the next.
The only ruling I care about is what NFL investigators find. They couldnt give a damn what the legal system says, they simply want to find out what happens and then levy a judgment. That is why multiple players have been suspended even though witnesses may Refuse to testify or the case dropped. There are many criminals walking free. Not guilty in the legal sense does not mean a person is not guilty in the court of public opinion.

So what you're really saying is he is guilty lol.

some see foster as the devil all because of a diluted test

How many times does the guy have to be arrested? 5? 10? Damn, he's not been in the league one year and he has been booked multiple times.

Wait, are you arguing that he is the devil?

Why do you care? What is your point exactly? Are you just complaining about it? Do you just feel a need to vent?

It is the hypocracy of the people who defend him. Let's be real. If he was playing for any other NFL team, he would be classified as a thug, a troublemaker, a loser. Because he is "one of us", people run to his defense as if he is a martyr.

The dude has been arrested twice since being a pro, failed a drug test, got kicked out of the combine and was passed by nearly every team in the draft because of character concerns. He hangs out with a shady woman who fights with others while he has a 9 year old daughter. Not sure why anyone would celebrate this guy as one of us.

It is a shame his family was so screwed up as a kid, but he is now a man with a family and team and. Franchise. And, being a guy who is continually in trouble with the law, whether you like some of the laws or not, is not acceptable to me. I'd rather have good players with good character than losers who continually attempt to sabotage the franchise. Instead of celebrating last year's movement forward, the team has to deal with his crap.

Yup if he was on any other team in nfl fans here would be laughing and thankful we passed on him. But becuase he wears a 49er uniform he is seen as some kind of victim and blameless for everytime he's gotten trouble. The team is on upward trend but becuase this knucklehead we have to see him walking out of the court for his crimes.

such animosity against a player busted for having weed and not being under the influence or test positive for it

Yes, you can sue for real damages but have you ever heard the phrase, "you can't get blood from a turnip?"

What good is a $10M decision against someone making basic income? You gonna garnish her wages for 279 years?

Originally posted by napo:
The loaded assault weapon with a cartridge in the chamber found on his bathroom floor was disturbing. Not good.

Same could be said of me. My pistol is, by definition, an assault weapon in California and I keep the magazine loaded with a round in the chamber. Am I a bad person? I carry it concealed that way as well - with a permit of course.

Originally posted by GoldBrick:
Yes, you can sue for real damages but have you ever heard the phrase, "you can't get blood from a turnip?"

What good is a $10M decision against someone making basic income? You gonna garnish her wages for 279 years?

Probably no income. I think Foster was supporting her.

Originally posted by jonnydel:

Originally posted by napo:
The loaded assault weapon with a cartridge in the chamber found on his bathroom floor was disturbing. Not good.

Same could be said of me. My pistol is, by definition, an assault weapon in California and I keep the magazine loaded with a round in the chamber. Am I a bad person? I carry it concealed that way as well - with a permit of course.

by some here, you are such a bad person

Originally posted by jonnydel:

Originally posted by napo:

The loaded assault weapon with a cartridge in the chamber found on his bathroom floor was disturbing. Not good.

Same could be said of me. My pistol is, by definition, an assault weapon in California and I keep the magazine loaded with a round in the chamber. Am I a bad person? I carry it concealed that way as well - with a permit of course.

It depends on where you leave it and how it is stored. I wouldn't say being careless with firearms makes someone a bad person, just a reckless person who probably should not own a gun. All those moms who have been shot buy their kids, people whose kids shoot themselves or other kids, people who get their guns stolen because they are not secured. Having it on your person is a secure location IMO.

Originally posted by pd24:

Originally posted by GoldBrick:

Yes, you can sue for real damages but have you ever heard the phrase, "you can't get blood from a turnip?"

What good is a $10M decision against someone making basic income? You gonna garnish her wages for 279 years?

Probably no income. I think Foster was supporting her.

And for another 9 years.

Originally posted by 9ersLiferInChicago:
Nope, it wouldn't be crazy. But the damage would have been done. And if he were to be successful in such suit I'd hope he breaks the bank on them. But honestly, I cannot see him being successful. Who would he sue? The DA? Legally that would be an uphill battle. ". . . wasting time, tarnishing someone's name, and wasting tax payers dollars . . ." is pretty par for the course for DA's all across the nation, much less California. It's how they get bad admissions and bad convictions.

Given this nations history it amazes me how people don't think this is possible, that innocent people can be convicted based on all manner of metrics but actual evidence, i.e., "he's a bad guy anyway"; "he put himself in that position"; "he makes bad choices", etc, as if to say he deserves to be wrongfully accused and convicted due to those things.

I hope I'm wrong but I just don't see Foster winning this case.

What you say is true, but in many of those cases, in as far as being found guilty for a crime they didn't commit, many times it is because the accused did not have the resources to get an adequate legal consul. Many of those get those who do pro bono who have not a clue or resources to investigate the evidence or find evidence. The only time a poor person do get a qualified top gun is if the person is doing it for notoriety because the payout is the publicity his name/firm will get.

I do not see Foster being convicted of the DV charges-the gun charges is another matter. Not with the video, not when she admitted to sneaking back into the place three times. Unless, she has her name on the place of residence (ownership, or rental agreement), he can kick her out anytime. However, depending on what the laws in CA are and the actual charges are, the only one he could be charged for that I can see is the 30 round clip. California may have strict rules, but it can be challenged depending on the law they are charging him with and if it infringes on his second amendment rights. Federal law usually cannot be infringed upon by the state. You can't have an assault rifle-which is a fully automatic rifle. That is one thing that has not been released. A semi-auto is not considered an assault rifle (although liberal politicians including DAs have misrepresented). Also a scary looking gun does not constitute does not equate to an actual assault rifle by federal law/technical wording.

Originally posted by GoldBrick:

Originally posted by pd24:

Originally posted by GoldBrick:

Yes, you can sue for real damages but have you ever heard the phrase, "you can't get blood from a turnip?"

What good is a $10M decision against someone making basic income? You gonna garnish her wages for 279 years?

Probably no income. I think Foster was supporting her.

And for another 9 years.

Is Ennis the mother?
The mother is Tray Blackmon's sister and Reuben's daughter goes by A'Zyia Blackmon.

Originally posted by TheWooLick:

Is Ennis the mother?
The mother is Tray Blackmon's sister and Reuben's daughter goes by A'Zyia Blackmon.

Good info. I thought ennis was the baby mama.

Originally posted by WildBill:

Originally posted by 9ersLiferInChicago:

Nope, it wouldn't be crazy. But the damage would have been done. And if he were to be successful in such suit I'd hope he breaks the bank on them. But honestly, I cannot see him being successful. Who would he sue? The DA? Legally that would be an uphill battle. ". . . wasting time, tarnishing someone's name, and wasting tax payers dollars . . ." is pretty par for the course for DA's all across the nation, much less California. It's how they get bad admissions and bad convictions.

Given this nations history it amazes me how people don't think this is possible, that innocent people can be convicted based on all manner of metrics but actual evidence, i.e., "he's a bad guy anyway"; "he put himself in that position"; "he makes bad choices", etc, as if to say he deserves to be wrongfully accused and convicted due to those things.

I hope I'm wrong but I just don't see Foster winning this case.

What you say is true, but in many of those cases, in as far as being found guilty for a crime they didn't commit, many times it is because the accused did not have the resources to get an adequate legal consul. Many of those get those who do pro bono who have not a clue or resources to investigate the evidence or find evidence. The only time a poor person do get a qualified top gun is if the person is doing it for notoriety because the payout is the publicity his name/firm will get.

I do not see Foster being convicted of the DV charges-the gun charges is another matter. Not with the video, not when she admitted to sneaking back into the place three times. Unless, she has her name on the place of residence (ownership, or rental agreement), he can kick her out anytime. However, depending on what the laws in CA are and the actual charges are, the only one he could be charged for that I can see is the 30 round clip. California may have strict rules, but it can be challenged depending on the law they are charging him with and if it infringes on his second amendment rights. Federal law usually cannot be infringed upon by the state. You can't have an assault rifle-which is a fully automatic rifle. That is one thing that has not been released. A semi-auto is not considered an assault rifle (although liberal politicians including DAs have misrepresented). Also a scary looking gun does not constitute does not equate to an actual assault rifle by federal law/technical wording.

This is false. If she is a resident there, it does not matter if her name is on the lease.

Originally posted by GoldBrick:

Originally posted by TheWooLick:

Is Ennis the mother?
The mother is Tray Blackmon's sister and Reuben's daughter goes by A'Zyia Blackmon.

Good info. I thought ennis was the baby mama.

So did I until today.