|
|
|
http://www.thedenverchannel.com/kobebryanttrial/2812198/detail.html
By Craig Silverman, 7NEWS Legal Analyst
I heard from Court TV this morning that Jeff Shapiro wrote about me in
his almost-released book. That's all right. I wrote a column about him
at the end of January.
The only difference is that my writing is accurate whereas Shapiro's
version of events is typically all fouled up. The New York Daily News
claims that Shapiro's book attributes the unidentified semen stain on
the yellow underwear to Kobe Bryant's accuser putting on dirty
drawers.
This is apparently contradicted by the alleged victim herself. In its
Jan. 12, 2004 responsive motion, Team Kobe wrote on page 10 that:
"To suggest that these panties, donned during the intervening 18
hours, contained semen and sperm left over from a sexual episode that
was remote is contradicted by the fact that the accuser told law
enforcement that these panties had been clean when she put them on,
and laundering of the panties would have destroyed any semen present."
I know from what I have been read by a Court TV producer that Shapiro
got several things wrong about me. First of all, I have never been an
unattributed source for any tabloid. When I talk to the tabloids, it
is for attribution. They don't tell me what to say. I call things as I
see them.
When the Globe published Bryant's alleged victim's photo, I told them
that I thought that was wrong. I don't approve some things the
tabloids write. Neither do I approve everything the Rocky Mountain
News, the Denver Post, the LA Times, the Washington Post, USA Today,
AP, Reuters or any other publication writes. In terms of getting paid,
I am glad to report that a lot of people and companies pay me for my
legal opinions and analysis. That is called being a lawyer.
Unlike Jeff Shapiro, I have been in the main courtroom for all the
important Bryant case proceedings. He claims I am a defense source
because I told the press that I believed Pamela Mackey's repeated use
of the alleged victim's name in open court was accidental. Indeed, I
did tell the press that I thought Mackey's actions that day were
wrong, stupid, but unintentional.
As apparently stated in Shapiro's book, my former boss, ex-Denver
District Attorney Norm Early said Mackey's naming of the victim was
intentional. However, Norm was not in the courtroom. Norm was
apparently in the listening room. Norm could not see (as I did) that
Mackey had the alleged victim's name written on her prepared
questions. Norm could not see Mackey physically recoil as she realized
her mistakes. Norm could not see an irritated Hal Haddon go up to
Mackey and tell her ways to avoid the mistake again.
Was it a mistake? I suppose reasonable minds can differ. I do know
that several legal analysts and journalists in the main courtroom
agreed with my assessment.
As I try to do with all my legal analysis, I utilized common sense
when analyzing this situation. What did Team Kobe have to gain by
Mackey using the accuser's name? Nothing that I could see. It
detracted from the better headlines they had garnered that day and
brought negative sentiment toward Mackey and Team Kobe.
The reality is that this is the first Colorado case I have ever seen
where lawyers are precluded from saying an adult victim's actual name
in open court. It was clear to me from seeing Mackey's notes that she
did not make the necessary adjustment for that unprecedented rule in
the Bryant case.
On the late afternooon of Feb. 2, I had a chance in Eagle to watch
Jeff Shapiro's appearance on Court TV with Judge Catherine Crier and I
have the following reactions:
If what Jeff Shapiro says is true, then somebody allied with the
prosecution is leaking like a sieve. How else could Shapiro claim to
know that three other women are being looked at by the prosecution as
similars? He claims the prosecution considers one other five-star
hotel encounter to be a sexual assault. That is a clear, as yet
unsubstantiated, effort by Shapiro to destroy Kobe Bryant in the court
of public opinion.
No way would Team Kobe leak the information about the 75-minute talk
with the cops. They are trying to keep it out of the trial. So who
else could have leaked it?
Jeff Shapiro has a demonstrated history of making things up when he
wants to further his own agenda. Remember how he lied repeatedly when
trying to get close to the Ramsey family during the JonBenet mystery.
He even pretended to become an Episcopalian.
Shapiro would have us believe that he is a leopard who has changed his
spots. We will eventually find out how much of what he writes is fact
and how much is fiction.
Consider Shapiro's misrepresentation regarding how his book was going
to be distributed at the Eagle courthouse on Monday morning. This
prevarication increased the anticipation and the buzz to the benefit
of Jeff Shapiro and nobody else. What does that tell you?
|
| |
| |
s_knight8 wrote:
http://www.thedenverchannel.com/kobebryanttrial/2812198/detail.html
By Craig Silverman, 7NEWS Legal Analyst
I heard from Court TV this morning that Jeff Shapiro wrote about me in
his almost-released book. That's all right. I wrote a column about him
at the end of January.
Obviously, Shapiro is using the event as a marketing ploy to sell his book
which hasn't even been printed and may contain thousands of deliberate
errors to taint the whole thing to show bryant was guilty.
Shapiro should have his book banned from being published and sold.
|
| |
| |
"Richard" <anonymous@127.000> wrote
Obviously, Shapiro is using the event as a marketing ploy to sell his book
which hasn't even been printed and may contain thousands of deliberate
errors to taint the whole thing to show bryant was guilty.
Well, you'd expect a black writer to perhaps take Bryant's side; a
basketball fan to have another point of view-
Shapiro may just take the position of his 'kinswoman'- contrast it with his
work on the Jon Benet case.
Shapiro should have his book banned from being published and sold.
Are you anti-Semitic?
Which other books would you contemplate burning?
Chas
|
| |
| |
"Richard" <anonymous@127.000> wrote in news:bvop7k01ubf@enews2.newsguy.com:
Shapiro should have his book banned from being published and sold.
Sure. In fact, we should probably just #@($can the whole Bill of Rights,
just for Kobe.
--
--Robert
|
| |
| |
The more you hear about it, the more this book sounds like just a smear
job. Sad, but I guess even weasels have to make a living.
s_knight8 wrote:
http://www.thedenverchannel.com/kobebryanttrial/2812198/detail.html
By Craig Silverman, 7NEWS Legal Analyst
I heard from Court TV this morning that Jeff Shapiro wrote about me in
his almost-released book. That's all right. I wrote a column about him
at the end of January.
The only difference is that my writing is accurate whereas Shapiro's
version of events is typically all fouled up. The New York Daily News
claims that Shapiro's book attributes the unidentified semen stain on
the yellow underwear to Kobe Bryant's accuser putting on dirty
drawers.
This is apparently contradicted by the alleged victim herself. In its
Jan. 12, 2004 responsive motion, Team Kobe wrote on page 10 that:
"To suggest that these panties, donned during the intervening 18
hours, contained semen and sperm left over from a sexual episode that
was remote is contradicted by the fact that the accuser told law
enforcement that these panties had been clean when she put them on,
and laundering of the panties would have destroyed any semen present."
I know from what I have been read by a Court TV producer that Shapiro
got several things wrong about me. First of all, I have never been an
unattributed source for any tabloid. When I talk to the tabloids, it
is for attribution. They don't tell me what to say. I call things as I
see them.
When the Globe published Bryant's alleged victim's photo, I told them
that I thought that was wrong. I don't approve some things the
tabloids write. Neither do I approve everything the Rocky Mountain
News, the Denver Post, the LA Times, the Washington Post, USA Today,
AP, Reuters or any other publication writes. In terms of getting paid,
I am glad to report that a lot of people and companies pay me for my
legal opinions and analysis. That is called being a lawyer.
Unlike Jeff Shapiro, I have been in the main courtroom for all the
important Bryant case proceedings. He claims I am a defense source
because I told the press that I believed Pamela Mackey's repeated use
of the alleged victim's name in open court was accidental. Indeed, I
did tell the press that I thought Mackey's actions that day were
wrong, stupid, but unintentional.
As apparently stated in Shapiro's book, my former boss, ex-Denver
District Attorney Norm Early said Mackey's naming of the victim was
intentional. However, Norm was not in the courtroom. Norm was
apparently in the listening room. Norm could not see (as I did) that
Mackey had the alleged victim's name written on her prepared
questions. Norm could not see Mackey physically recoil as she realized
her mistakes. Norm could not see an irritated Hal Haddon go up to
Mackey and tell her ways to avoid the mistake again.
Was it a mistake? I suppose reasonable minds can differ. I do know
that several legal analysts and journalists in the main courtroom
agreed with my assessment.
As I try to do with all my legal analysis, I utilized common sense
when analyzing this situation. What did Team Kobe have to gain by
Mackey using the accuser's name? Nothing that I could see. It
detracted from the better headlines they had garnered that day and
brought negative sentiment toward Mackey and Team Kobe.
The reality is that this is the first Colorado case I have ever seen
where lawyers are precluded from saying an adult victim's actual name
in open court. It was clear to me from seeing Mackey's notes that she
did not make the necessary adjustment for that unprecedented rule in
the Bryant case.
On the late afternooon of Feb. 2, I had a chance in Eagle to watch
Jeff Shapiro's appearance on Court TV with Judge Catherine Crier and I
have the following reactions:
If what Jeff Shapiro says is true, then somebody allied with the
prosecution is leaking like a sieve. How else could Shapiro claim to
know that three other women are being looked at by the prosecution as
similars? He claims the prosecution considers one other five-star
hotel encounter to be a sexual assault. That is a clear, as yet
unsubstantiated, effort by Shapiro to destroy Kobe Bryant in the court
of public opinion.
No way would Team Kobe leak the information about the 75-minute talk
with the cops. They are trying to keep it out of the trial. So who
else could have leaked it?
Jeff Shapiro has a demonstrated history of making things up when he
wants to further his own agenda. Remember how he lied repeatedly when
trying to get close to the Ramsey family during the JonBenet mystery.
He even pretended to become an Episcopalian.
Shapiro would have us believe that he is a leopard who has changed his
spots. We will eventually find out how much of what he writes is fact
and how much is fiction.
Consider Shapiro's misrepresentation regarding how his book was going
to be distributed at the Eagle courthouse on Monday morning. This
prevarication increased the anticipation and the buzz to the benefit
of Jeff Shapiro and nobody else. What does that tell you?
--
Gary Collard
SABR-L Moderator
gmcollard@yahoo.com
"I would've gone for 2" -- Carolina coach John Fox when asked what he
thought of Justin Timberlake exposing Janet Jackson's breast
|
| |
| |
"Gary Collard" <garycollard@netscape.net> wrote
The more you hear about it, the more this book sounds like just a smear
job. Sad, but I guess even weasels have to make a living.
He's a weasel, but who else do you think would be an investigative reporter?
If memory serves, he was responsible for the only arrests in the Jon Benet
case- he peached on his own employers and co-workers when the rest of the
story went soft for him.
Chas
|
| |
| |
s_knight8 wrote:
Obviously, Shapiro is using the event as a marketing ploy to sell his book
which hasn't even been printed and may contain thousands of deliberate
errors to taint the whole thing to show bryant was guilty.
Shapiro should have his book banned from being published and sold.
No worries, when/if that book gets published I know that someone will be
publishing one about the Lily White Psycho who wore dirty panties to her
rape exam and had a different mans sperm found inside her vagina as
evidenced by the SANE Nurses' internal swabs.
|
| |
| |
"1" <1@1.com> wrote
No worries, when/if that book gets published I know that someone will be
publishing one about the Lily White Psycho who wore dirty panties to her
rape exam and had a different mans sperm found inside her vagina as
evidenced by the SANE Nurses' internal swabs.
Maybe she was only planning sex with one guy when she got raped by the
Famous Black Athlete- in fact, that's a more plausible explanation, if
promiscuity be the question.
Chas
|
| |
| |
"1" <1@1.com> wrote
Maybe she was only planning sex with one guy when she got raped by the
Famous Black Athlete- in fact, that's a more plausible explanation, if
promiscuity be the question.
Chas
So she was brutally raped by the Negro and then had sex with someone else
within 36hrs afterwards? Is this common behavior for white people?
|
| |
| |
"1" <1@1.com> wrote
So she was brutally raped by the Negro and then had sex with someone else
within 36hrs afterwards?
If you say so.
...Is this common behavior for white people?
Which part?
Chas
|
| |
| |
"1" <1@1.com> wrote
If you say so.
Which part?
Chas
Having consensual intercourse within less than 36hrs after being brutally
raped?
|
| |
| |
"1" <1@1.com> wrote
Having consensual intercourse within less than 36hrs after being brutally
raped?
You know, I was very surprised at that, on an anecdotal level.
I had a very close friend that was raped- got teeth knocked out, blacked her
eyes, beat her up.
I arrived just a short time after she returned from the hospital and the
police report stuff, and she was very hurt and very scared. She initiated a
very tender moment between us, and seemed to be comforted- so, I don't know
what's the most usual reaction in such matters.
We're both white, so it might just be a cultural thing.
Hers was a black rapist also, former athlete- maybe it's scenario specific.
Chas
|
| |
| |
On Tue, 3 Feb 2004 12:29:52 -0600, "Richard" <anonymous@127.000>
wrote:
s_knight8 wrote:
Obviously, Shapiro is using the event as a marketing ploy to sell his
book
which hasn't even been printed and may contain thousands of
deliberate
errors to taint the whole thing to show bryant was guilty.
Shapiro should have his book banned from being published and sold.
Why don't you start a grass roots campaign to ban his book?
--
Like a game of pick up stick played by @$#*ing lunatics
|
| |
| |
"1" <1@1.com> wrote
You know, I was very surprised at that, on an anecdotal level.
I had a very close friend that was raped- got teeth knocked out, blacked
her
eyes, beat her up.
I arrived just a short time after she returned from the hospital and the
police report stuff, and she was very hurt and very scared. She initiated
a
very tender moment between us, and seemed to be comforted- so, I don't
know
what's the most usual reaction in such matters.
We're both white, so it might just be a cultural thing.
Hers was a black rapist also, former athlete- maybe it's scenario
specific.
Chas
I am sorry to hear about your friend and hope that her attacker was
convicted.
I do not believe that intercourse after brutal rape is very common at all
unless the accuser made some false claims only to seek the attention from a
man whom she needs the attention of... *shrug..
*Does a bruise smaller than a dime = shocking physical injuries?
|
| |
| |
On Tue, 3 Feb 2004 14:12:05 -0700, "Chas"
<chasclementsFLAME@comcast.net> wrote:
"1" <1@1.com> wrote
You know, I was very surprised at that, on an anecdotal level.
I had a very close friend that was raped- got teeth knocked out, blacked her
eyes, beat her up.
I arrived just a short time after she returned from the hospital and the
police report stuff, and she was very hurt and very scared. She initiated a
very tender moment between us, and seemed to be comforted- so, I don't know
what's the most usual reaction in such matters.
We're both white, so it might just be a cultural thing.
Hers was a black rapist also, former athlete- maybe it's scenario specific.
Chas
MOST women do not want to have sex within a short time after they have
been raped.
|
| |
| |
"1" <1@1.com> wrote
I am sorry to hear about your friend and hope that her attacker was
convicted.
Yeah; he got a #@($load of time. The rape/beating was a revenge for my
friend giving one of his whores, his wife by the way, a shelter. They were
friends in college, outside of any other involvement. He made no effort at
disguising himself- kicked in the front door, lots of screaming and stuff;
very crazy.
I do not believe that intercourse after brutal rape is very common at all
unless the accuser made some false claims only to seek the attention from
a
man whom she needs the attention of... *shrug..
The one thing I saw in doing rape counceling and at battered women's shelter
was that there isn't a common response to much of anything.
I knew a young woman; very independent, very physical- she was raped in
Central America on a solo trip there. She seemed to slough it off pretty
easily; know another woman who is totally agoraphobic and won't even speak
to a man except in the company of another woman, after a much 'gentler'
experience.
*Does a bruise smaller than a dime = shocking physical injuries?
A man with the hand skills of a Kobe Bryant could take you to the trembling
edge of strangulation or a spinal snap, and never leave a mark. He could
give you pain that would have you screaming, and never leave a mark. He's
*huge*, immensely strong and exquisitely prepared for just such an
application.
'Shocking' is a relative word, but a lot of painful injuries only leave
faint surface marks/abrasions.
Chas
|
| |
| |
"Sky King" <heaystiem@emas.net> wrote
MOST women do not want to have sex within a short time after they have
been raped.
And of course you have a cite for such a strongly worded point-
yes?
Chas
|
| |
| |
On Tue, 3 Feb 2004 14:56:27 -0700, "Chas"
<chasclementsFLAME@comcast.net> wrote:
"Sky King" <heaystiem@emas.net> wrote
And of course you have a cite for such a strongly worded point-
yes?
Chas
Over 20 years as a therapist who has had rape victims as patients.
Many, many hours spent in shelters talking to rape victims.
I am getting ready for supper so remind me to get you some
"real" cites. It should not be difficult. To me its common sense.
|
| |
| |
In article <gh50205hvgekoh4e7lbgth1a4134g1n5do@4ax.com>,
Sky King <heaystiem@emas.net> wrote:
MOST women do not want to have sex within a short time after they have
been raped.
And your basis for this is?
|
| |
| |
"Sky King" <heaystiem@emas.net> wrote
MOST women do not want to have sex within a short time after they have
been raped.
And of course you have a cite for such a strongly worded point-
yes?
Over 20 years as a therapist who has had rape victims as patients.
A very defined group- women who seek therapy.
What are the percentages of women raped who then seek, and support, therapy?
Many, many hours spent in shelters talking to rape victims.
See? I worked in the same sorts of environments and had no such experience
at all. In fact, presented anecdotal evidence in utter alternative to that.
It may be more common in women who talk to therapists or something.
Chas
|
| |
| |
"Gary Collard" <garycollard@netscape.net> wrote
He's a weasel, but who else do you think would be an investigative
reporter?
There are MANY investigative reporters, both in print and electronic media,
and they are not all weasels. Journalism is an honorable profession, and so
is investigative journalism. You are starting to sound like a crazy,
simple-minded kook.
If memory serves, he was responsible for the only arrests in the Jon Benet
case- he peached on his own employers and co-workers when the rest of the
story went soft for him.
Chas
|
| |
| |
"Raqui" <WestCoast@TV.com> wrote
There are MANY investigative reporters, both in print and electronic
media,
and they are not all weasels.
You've got data?
Journalism is an honorable profession, and so
is investigative journalism.
Well; how very kind of you to say.
You are starting to sound like a crazy,
simple-minded kook.
That a professional evaluation, or simply an opinion?
Chas
|
| |
| |
"Raqui" <WestCoast@TV.com> wrote
media,
You've got data?
I don't need it. Do you really believe what you said? I think you do, but
I'm giving you an out here.
Well; how very kind of you to say.
It is isn't it? It's nice that you have taken notice. So why did you say
what you did?
You are starting to sound like a crazy,
simple-minded kook.
That a professional evaluation, or simply an opinion?
Oh it's just an opinion, but for you to make the statement that you did...
Chas
|
| |
| |
"Raqui" <WestCoast@TV.com> wrote
You've got data?
I don't need it. Do you really believe what you said? I think you do, but
I'm giving you an out here.
I was mocking you; consider it rhetorical
c.
|
| |
| |
"Raqui" <WestCoast@TV.com> wrote
You've got data?
I was mocking you; consider it rhetorical
But I am NOT mocking you...you act like a kook...really...you do. It must be
sad to live in your world, always thinking you are right, but it rarely
being true. You're rather advanced in years aren't you? I ask because you
kind of remind me of that old kook on "Saturday Night Live", who always
thought everything was better in the *good ole days*. It was more difficult
or whatever..."but he liked it". Carry on though...I'm sure being called a
kook is something you are used to.
|
| |
| |
"Richard" <anonymous@127.000> wrote in news:bvop7k01ubf@enews2.newsguy.com:
Shapiro should have his book banned from being published and sold.
Why would he want to do that?
|
| |
| |
On Tue, 3 Feb 2004 13:02:17 -0700, "Chas" <chasclementsFLAME@comcast.net>
blurted:
"Gary Collard" <garycollard@netscape.net> wrote
He's a weasel, but who else do you think would be an investigative reporter?
If memory serves, he was responsible for the only arrests in the Jon Benet
case- he peached on his own employers and co-workers when the rest of the
story went soft for him.
Chas
What does "peached on his own employers..." mean?
|
| |
| |
On Tue, 3 Feb 2004 21:21:58 -0800, "Raqui" <WestCoast@TV.com> blurted:
I don't need it. Do you really believe what you said? I think you do, but
I'm giving you an out here.
It is isn't it? It's nice that you have taken notice. So why did you say
what you did?
You are starting to sound like a crazy,
simple-minded kook.
Oh it's just an opinion, but for you to make the statement that you did...
Peeeeeeeeee ewwwwwwwwwwe!!!!!! Excuse ewe!
Chas
|
| |
| |
On Tue, 3 Feb 2004 14:54:02 -0700, "Chas" <chasclementsFLAME@comcast.net>
blurted:
"1" <1@1.com> wrote
Yeah; he got a #@($load of time. The rape/beating was a revenge for my
friend giving one of his whores, his wife by the way, a shelter. They were
friends in college, outside of any other involvement. He made no effort at
disguising himself- kicked in the front door, lots of screaming and stuff;
very crazy.
aThe one thing I saw in doing rape counceling and at battered women's shelter
was that there isn't a common response to much of anything.
I knew a young woman; very independent, very physical- she was raped in
Central America on a solo trip there. She seemed to slough it off pretty
easily; know another woman who is totally agoraphobic and won't even speak
to a man except in the company of another woman, after a much 'gentler'
experience.
A man with the hand skills of a Kobe Bryant could take you to the trembling
edge of strangulation or a spinal snap, and never leave a mark. He could
give you pain that would have you screaming, and never leave a mark. He's
*huge*, immensely strong and exquisitely prepared for just such an
application.
Basketball players aren't huge or overly strong in the hands. Even the largest
basketball players like Smaq and El Bow* are skinny little beanpoles standing
next to normal human beings.
'Shocking' is a relative word, but a lot of painful injuries only leave
faint surface marks/abrasions.
Chas
And how many more leave hideous bruises and scars? I would say a great
majority.
|
| |
| |
On Wed, 04 Feb 2004 11:04:12 GMT, Ruben Patterson and Chris Mihm Both
Posterized Snaq <HowCanTh@t.Be??> wrote:
On Tue, 3 Feb 2004 14:54:02 -0700, "Chas" <chasclementsFLAME@comcast.net>
blurted:
Basketball players aren't huge or overly strong in the hands. Even the largest
basketball players like Smaq and El Bow* are skinny little beanpoles standing
next to normal human beings.
And how many more leave hideous bruises and scars? I would say a great
majority.
|
| |
| |
"Ruben Patterson and Chris Mihm Both Posterized Snaq" <HowCanTh@t.Be??>
wrote
He's a weasel, but who else do you think would be an investigative
reporter?
If memory serves, he was responsible for the only arrests in the Jon
Benet
case- he peached on his own employers and co-workers when the rest of the
story went soft for him.
What does "peached on his own employers..." mean?
He reported the tabloids to the FBI/State over 'unethical' actions in the
JBRamsey case- the only arrests made in the case, ims. None of it panned out
as other than an inconvenience, except the autopsy photos from JDColfax, but
it *made* Shapiro's name recognition high level.
Read the google on him-
Chas
|
| |
| |
"Sky King" <heaystiem@emas.net> wrote
The one thing I saw doing the same thing was that is one of the things
women DID have in common. They did not want to have sex the first
week after being raped.
That may well be a common response- not universal, but common. It certainly
sounds logical.
On the other hand, rape is a crime of violence, and not 'sex'. Perhaps some
women seek comfort from the violence in tenderness and support from their
loved one.
It's certainly been my experience now to see both attitudes.
Chas
|
| |
| |
Raqui wrote:
reporter?
There are MANY investigative reporters, both in print and electronic media,
and they are not all weasels. Journalism is an honorable profession, and so
is investigative journalism.
Yes, just because there are some bad apples who form a conclusion and then
go looking for any mix of facts, opinions and lies that will support it
like this Shapiro doesn't mean that all IJ's are dishonorable.
--
Gary Collard
SABR-L Moderator
gmcollard@yahoo.com
"I would've gone for 2" -- Carolina coach John Fox when asked what he
thought of Justin Timberlake exposing Janet Jackson's breast
|
| |
| |
"Chas" <chasclementsFLAME@comcast.net> wrote in message news:<DoKdndlbu5vkhb3dRVn-hg@comcast.com>...
[snip]
A man with the hand skills of a Kobe Bryant could take you to the trembling
edge of strangulation or a spinal snap, and never leave a mark. He could
give you pain that would have you screaming, and never leave a mark. He's
*huge*, immensely strong and exquisitely prepared for just such an
application.
Even if he's large and strong, Even if he can handle a basketball with
such exquisite skill as to border on prestidigitation, this does not
imply the knowledge of human anatomy and bruising required to carry
out the absurd acts of torture you suggest is possible. Where would
he have acquired the experience to know what will leave bruises and
what will not? where would he have acquired the experience of spinal
snapping required to know beyond all doubt that he is stopping just
short of breaking point?
The suggestion that he has such remarkabe skills in the application of
violence on the basis of his ball handling skills is ridiculous!
'Shocking' is a relative word, but a lot of painful injuries only leave
faint surface marks/abrasions.
Chas
|
| |
| |
| | |
