Chris Kyle vs Jesse Ventura

I was totally gonna stay out of this because its once again...turning into a pointless battle of personal opinon...and in the spirit of pointless personal opinons a shall offer mine.....

Jesse Ventura is a shamefull wretch...honorless! The honorable thing to do, given the circumstances, would be to collect whatever entitlements he was awarded from the insurance company and let the widowed spouse be. The fact that Chris was a Navy Seal and a patriot should mean something. His wife is innocent of any wrong doing regardless of the facts....an honorable man would realize this...and I am sure the question would arise..."Would you stand to loose $1.3m for the sake of honor?" I would.... I didnt have the $1.3 before and I can walk away with $500k and my honor in tact.... I can take my honor with me...I cant take $1.3m.....thats my opinion and I am quite positive it wont be popular

 

As clear as its become that in this case there are no real winners, the common denominator in most of these case is that so many of those whom we hold in high regard seldom have done anything to really earn that status, many a fallen sports hero come to mind.

If we instead looked closer to home for people to admire, we would likely find many more who deserve your admiration and really do make your life better and more fulfilling. And very seldom will a true hero's names ever appear in the news paper or internet chat rooms.

 

Wow John. Here I thought you were no smarter than a pile of bricks. Your statement is very true.

 

There's no reason to be that hard on bricks...........

 

It's obvious most of you can't leave emotion out of this and stick strictly to facts. Hopefully most of you never sit on a jury.

 

You know jurors are randomly selected voters right...If you agree that the principal that if you have a group of 10 random people at a minimum 3 of the 10 are idiots, you know what to expect

 

I believe many of the facts are unknown because if I heard right a lot of the people that witnessed the event aren't talking...

 

I think the only provable fact in this case is that JV is a miserable asshat.

 

Thats true, but a jury heard all the facts presented to them and decided one person was lying. Unfortunately, it's everyone's hero that was lying and none of you can handle that.

 

I hear he was in MN playing in a golfing tourney when the alleged bar fight occured............

 

I just cannot envision a former military guy who has always outwardly supported America and its troop, say something as stupid as alleged in this case.

 

something that has apparently escaped everyone, including the jury, is that public figures (and JV certainly qualifies for that- former governor, world famous wrestler and actor, author and radio show host) are almost universally disqualified from defamation case judgments. Having nasty untrue things said about you is the cost of fame. Otherwise, the civil courts would be absolutely crushed under the weight of the number of lawsuits. This judgement; no matter whether right or wrong based on the facts- sets a dangerous precedent that will cause major problems if it is not overturned.

 

Dangerous precedence? You mean people won't say the nasty **** they say and write about celebrities? This world might be a nicer place?

 

And I am SURE the jury in this case was so devout and stuck strictly to the facts that theres no way they could be swayed by the fact that JV was a public figure....that NEVER happens...."if the glove dont fit you must aquit..." aint that right OJ??

Thats not not an emotional sentiment brother...that is afact if you are able to remove emotion from anything you do...your a colder man than I....

 

Who amongst us has not seen first hand the Dr. Jekle and Mr. Hyde effects that alcohol has on some people, in a club filled with testosterone, alcohol and huge egos, I'm guessing you could untold number of versions of this interaction depending on who you asked.

 

Think read somewhere they actually did. Alot of people from both parties side were mixed about if it actually happened or not.

Sent from my SM-G900R4 using Tapatalk

 

So, you're saying, that because someone is famous it should be ok to tell lies about them that could damage their character?

 

So, I'm cold because I can look at a case and not be swayed by who the parties are that are involved?

 

Perhaps "cold" was not the right choice...but in the absence of fact...which in this case there was an absence of fact.....there is an element of "most probable".....thats emotionally charged. as a juror it would be the individual juror to decide which party had the "most probable" argument. And then the foreman of that jury would then assume the "most probable" course of action...either way it boils down to how good your lawyer is...and each juror as a human, would also consider the parties and the result of their decision...its the nature of the human condition...so in a way one would have to overrride any feeling and/or emotion that goes into evry decision we, as humans, make. That is tough...........so maybe you are a tougher man than I.....

 

Just an observation Bowhuntandlive. You write some pretty emotional posts, I would hate for you to be on my jury if the facts were on my side but you believed in something else entirely. You seem adamant about going on how you feel, and not what is presented/not presented in the case. I fear people like you, because you can't seem to judge facts or evidence devoid of emotion. Sure you can think deep inside your heart that the man is guilty of murder(random case) but if the evidence isn't there and you still try to pin him as guilty, you're just negating the laws put in place.

There have been many times where people have felt the defendant guilty, decades later turns out he/she was innocent.