# Rumor-Zach In Trouble Again? WTF!



## Gunner

This was posted on another Blazer board by a mod who IMO is a credible source. Its bad manners to link to another board so I'll paste the two posts. As I said in the thread title it is a rumor.

"I believe there will be some info in the media very soon (if it's not already there today). I cannot go into detail because I'm not willing to lose my job just to post on this website. However, Zach may be in trouble again and if so, you will want to dump him immediately!!! Sorry guys, I really cannot say anymore than this. There could be trouble ahead for Zach and his buddies."

"Well, let's remember to not judge him until everything is said and done. I don't know any details other than he was named as a suspect. I do not believe it involves any guns. However, it sure ain't pretty if it turns out to be true. I am actually surprised nothing has been mentioned in the media yet because I know for a fact that the Oregonian and KATU know about the incident. It's the type of incident that seems to get tossed out quite a bit, particularly when there's someone involved with lots of money."

**** I hope it isn't true but if so,here we go again! I don't really want to comment until it comes out,but if its true and what I'm guessing it is from the last line... :curse:  :upset: :banghead:


----------



## barfo

Gunner said:


> It's the type of incident that seems to get tossed out quite a bit, particularly when there's someone involved with lots of money."


OMG! Zach has been lighting cigars with $100 bills!

barfo


----------



## Gunner

OMG! That was my 1st thought too! 
The horror.


----------



## BlazerFanFoLife

Gunner said:


> This was posted on another Blazer board by a mod who IMO is a credible source:
> 
> "It's the type of incident that seems to get tossed out quite a bit, particularly when there's someone involved with lots of money."


He pulled a MC Hammer and is broke.


----------



## LameR

BlazerFanFoLife said:


> He pulled a MC Hammer and is broke.


I can die happy now.


----------



## GOD

We will know soon enough. If it's true, I don't think I can forgive someone for lighting cigars with $100 bills. 

He just needs to watch more Walker Texas Ranger and he could be a good guy.


----------



## gatorpops

Ah, he just made eyes at some girl and asked her for a date and got slapped. You think??

gatorpops


----------



## MARIS61

As usual, a lot of fans here have skewed priorities on what is really important and what is of little consequence to the overall success of the franchise and our chances to win a title sometime soon.

It really doesn't matter if he lights them with $100 bills or some other denomination.

My primary concern is are they White Owls or Macanudos?


----------



## dkap

> OMG! Zach has been lighting cigars with $100 bills!


Cubans, no doubt.

Dan


----------



## HispanicCausinPanic

Maybe he put out a bad rap album like JR Rider. Or, maybe he's got gold on all his teeth. If it has to do with him being rich........Maybe he bought a KIA!


----------



## BlazerFanFoLife

HispanicCausinPanic said:


> Maybe he put out a bad rap album like JR Rider. Or, maybe he's got gold on all his teeth. If it has to do with him being rich........Maybe he bought a KIA!


2 for the price of 1?


----------



## stupendous

HispanicCausinPanic said:


> Maybe he put out a bad rap album like JR Rider. Or, maybe he's got gold on all his teeth. If it has to do with him being rich........Maybe he bought a KIA!


JR Rider made a rap album??


----------



## HispanicCausinPanic

stupendous said:


> JR Rider made a rap album??


Well kinda. Mid 90's. It was a bunch of NBA players. They put out a hip-hop album where they all rapped on it. Rider, I can't remember to be exact who else, but I think it was Gary Payton, Jason Kidd and some other cats. It was horrible!


----------



## SlyPokerDog

Here is the link, I found the story!

http://www.tcnewsnet.com/main.asp?SectionID=5&SubSectionID=5&ArticleID=141131&TM=38058.29 

Notice the important key words in the article. Chevrolet BLAZER... RANDOLPH County... ZACH Tracy... Cadillac.... Stable condition at Methodist Hospital.... One dog was killed.... Crash scene... Sheriff's Department is investigating.... 

Just thought I would help everyone out!


----------



## ptownblazer1

If this story or rumor was true...this would probably be breaking news! I think the story is false...and I have no idea if it were true, why the Portland media would be waiting for this story to develop?!


----------



## Oldmangrouch

Randolph county?

Wow......an entire county where everything is Zach's fault. Canzano must be delirious with glee! :biggrin:


----------



## rtg

SlyPokerDog said:


> Here is the link, I found the story!
> 
> http://www.tcnewsnet.com/main.asp?SectionID=5&SubSectionID=5&ArticleID=141131&TM=38058.29
> 
> Notice the important key words in the article. Chevrolet BLAZER... RANDOLPH County... ZACH Tracy... Cadillac.... Stable condition at Methodist Hospital.... One dog was killed.... Crash scene... Sheriff's Department is investigating....
> 
> Just thought I would help everyone out!


Haha, thats funny. Let me know if you find anything real about Zach though.


----------



## crandc

An anonymous source claims an unspecified tip from another anonymous source and can't repeat what the information is. Then says "we" will want to "dump him immediately". Not sure who "we" is. Sounds really really reliable!


----------



## rtg

crandc said:


> An anonymous source claims an unspecified tip from another anonymous source and can't repeat what the information is. Then says "we" will want to "dump him immediately". Not sure who "we" is. Sounds really really reliable!


When an anonymous source has an anonymous source it must be true!


----------



## Gunner

crandc said:


> An anonymous source claims an unspecified tip from another anonymous source and can't repeat what the information is. Then says "we" will want to "dump him immediately". Not sure who "we" is. Sounds really really reliable!


Well,yeeess. I posted it as a rumor & that pretty much describes most rumors! If it was substantiated it wouldn't be just a rumor. The information is that Zach allegedly was named as a suspect in an unspecified occurence & _could_ be in trouble again. The statement that "*We* (meaning the Blazer fans posting in said thread) will want to dump him immediately" stemmed from the thread it was posted in,ie,"Who Would Just Like To Cut Ties with Zach?".
If you'd like to read it yourself and question the OP,its on Real GM,but as the OP said,he really can't reveal more without being in jeopardy of losing his job.


----------



## BlazerFanFoLife

Darius Miles eats kittens! 

(everyone looks away from Zach)


----------



## Blazed

Well it seems obvious the original poster is talking about rape.


----------



## ebott

I don't care if Zach kills somebody. As long as he can play, plugs his *** into the post spot and goes back to being the scoring/rebounding moster we all know and love I don't give a ****. :banana:


----------



## For Three! Rip City!

Well ebott I think you would be in the small majority but can't blame you for throwing up your hands and just rolling with it.

In any case this thread needs a real link or otherwise really shouldn't be here. I'm all for speculation about trades etc. but when it comes to soiling someone's reputation it seems to me that only the facts and the links should be listed. Otherwise it's all just plain silly and frankly unethical.


----------



## PorterIn2004

ebott said:


> I don't care if Zach kills somebody. As long as he can play, plugs his *** into the post spot and goes back to being the scoring/rebounding moster we all know and love I don't give a ****. :banana:


I really hope you're kidding....


----------



## Reep

I know people are always interested in being the first one to break a story, but I think people need to be a little more responsible. There is no good at all that comes out of posting a criminal rumor like this with absolutely no support. I think people should police their own behavior and avoid starting such posts until you have tangible information. Otherwise, it's clear that you are just trying draw attention to yourself.

And ebott, I'm sure you were just trying to make a point, but that was way over the top.


----------



## ebott

Reep said:


> And ebott, I'm sure you were just trying to make a point, but that was way over the top.


No, way over the top would have been creating a little flash page that had Zach stabbing someone.

Honestly, if Zach ever actually did something really bad (rape, murder, dog fighting, etc.) I'd probably be upset about it. But none of the "trouble" he's been in is even close.


----------



## Reep

ebott said:


> But none of the "trouble" he's been in is even close.


Agreed.


----------



## ptownblazer1

Reep said:


> I know people are always interested in being the first one to break a story, but I think people need to be a little more responsible. There is no good at all that comes out of posting a criminal rumor like this with absolutely no support. I think people should police their own behavior and avoid starting such posts until you have tangible information. Otherwise, it's clear that you are just trying draw attention to yourself.



Thanks for that post...I think it's the obvious reason on what he was trying to do. Congrats to whoever broke the "rumor" out...everyone was paying attention to you for a couple days. Good job!

:clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap:

Yes it is a slow time for Blazer news, but hey I'm excited for the season to come upon us! Nothing wrong with watching some baseball...even if it is the Little League World Series...


----------



## Gunner

ptownblazer1 said:


> Thanks for that post...I think it's the obvious reason on what he was trying to do. Congrats to whoever broke the "rumor" out...everyone was paying attention to you for a couple days. Good job!
> 
> :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap:
> 
> Yes it is a slow time for Blazer news, but hey I'm excited for the season to come upon us! Nothing wrong with watching some baseball...even if it is the Little League World Series...


Well thanks for the applause,but obviously if I was attention whoring & wished to draw attention to *myself*  theres other much more spectacular ways to do it! Having been a Blazer fan since the early '70s and in recent years relegated to the role of "Blazer apologist" to non-Blazer fans due to the actions and conduct of certain members of the team, a statement made by someone who as I said I consider a credible source,concerning possible _continued_ misconduct absolutely raises my blood pressure to the boiling point. All things considered I really didn't(and don't) think its farfetched in the least. I'll ask a mod to lock the thread as it obviously upset some of you,as far as veracity(understood) and my intentions(mis-understood). If nothing arises,and believe me when I say that I sincerely hope nothing does,it'll sink to the depths of triple Bnet,never to be seen again. If the *RUMOR* does turn out to be true...I may not even toss out a "I told ya so"! :biggrin: 
My apologies to anyone that this may have offended,and especially to Zach Randolph for impugning your character.


----------



## Blazer Freak

Alright you guys, there was no need to just jump on Gunner, he thought he had something and he said it was a rumor. 

I'm closing this thread before it gets outta hand.


----------



## Trader Ed

*KGW Says... Report says Randolph is being investigated for*

Sexual assault

Link to KGW.com 



> Sex assault report names a Portland Trail Blazer: Police are investigating a sexual assault accusation. Portland Trail Blazer Zach Randolph is named in the report but police are not identifying him as a suspect in the criminal investigation.



CREDIT to Gunner


----------



## barfo

Well well well, the worm has turned. And this thread is open for business once again.

barfo


----------



## sa1177

Never doubt a bad rumour about Zbo...the guy is as dumb as a post... :curse:


----------



## Nightfly

Gunner said:


> This was posted on another Blazer board by a mod who IMO is a credible source. Its bad manners to link to another board so I'll paste the two posts. As I said in the thread title it is a rumor.
> 
> "I believe there will be some info in the media very soon (if it's not already there today). I cannot go into detail because I'm not willing to lose my job just to post on this website. However, Zach may be in trouble again and if so, you will want to dump him immediately!!! Sorry guys, I really cannot say anymore than this. There could be trouble ahead for Zach and his buddies."
> 
> "Well, let's remember to not judge him until everything is said and done. I don't know any details other than he was named as a suspect. I do not believe it involves any guns. However, it sure ain't pretty if it turns out to be true. I am actually surprised nothing has been mentioned in the media yet because I know for a fact that the Oregonian and KATU know about the incident. It's the type of incident that seems to get tossed out quite a bit, particularly when there's someone involved with lots of money."
> 
> **** I hope it isn't true but if so,here we go again! I don't really want to comment until it comes out,but if its true and what I'm guessing it is from the last line... :curse:  :upset: :banghead:


Could you please post the original link?


----------



## It's_GO_Time

Ouch


----------



## Trader Ed

Well I guess we got Zach for the rest of his contract now :banghead:


----------



## Trader Ed

Gunner said:


> If the *RUMOR* does turn out to be true...I may not even toss out a "I told ya so"! :biggrin:


YOU Told them so....


----------



## MARIS61

It merely says the victim named a TrailBlazer in the report.

Most likely in response to the question "By the way, who's your favorite Blazers player?'


----------



## RedHot&Rolling

Let's wait for tangible information on this report. But, that said, it looks like Gunner had a real source of interest and deserves credit/less angst from some of you who shot darts his way!!!


----------



## barfo

MARIS61 said:


> It merely says the victim named a TrailBlazer in the report.
> 
> Most likely in response to the question "By the way, who's your favorite Blazers player?'


The victim must have been pretty badly shaken up, then, to have named him.

barfo


----------



## Oldmangrouch

Let me start by stating the obvious - you can be critical of the story, and not bash Gunner for bringing it up. No sense in shooting the messenger.

As for the story itself, I can't say I am impressed. Remember the Salt Lake City incident? 3 players were involved, but most of the team (and some of the coaches) were "named in the report."

Can we hold off on the lynch mob until we actually know what the **** is going on?


----------



## Nightfly

Any more info on this?

The Fan just started talking about this.


----------



## sa1177

Welcome to th club Gunner...I believe I expierienced much of the same anger, angst and criticism awhile back when Mr. Telfair took his gun on the plane.


----------



## sa1177

IMO there is no doubt some truth to this...Zach is simply a dumb dumb dumb kid.


----------



## sa1177

MARIS61 said:


> *It merely says the victim named a TrailBlazer in the report*.
> 
> Most likely in response to the question "By the way, who's your favorite Blazers player?'


Yes a very specific TrailBlazer..

Although Blazer *Zach Randolph was named in the report*, police have not identified him as a suspect in the criminal investigation, said Sgt. Brian Schmautz, spokesman for the Portland Police Bureau. 

http://www.kgw.com/sports/stories/kgw_082206_news_randolph_assault_report.2121852e.html

At least he isn't a "suspect"...but seriously how many times does this guy have to be at the wrong place at the wrong time.


----------



## Nightfly

An official statement to come from the Blazers with in the next 15 minutes or so.


----------



## Trader Ed

on another note... Hey Gunner.... have any trade rumors to report


----------



## Ed O

Oldmangrouch said:


> Let me start by stating the obvious - you can be critical of the story, and not bash Gunner for bringing it up. No sense in shooting the messenger.
> 
> As for the story itself, I can't say I am impressed. Remember the Salt Lake City incident? 3 players were involved, but most of the team (and some of the coaches) were "named in the report."
> 
> Can we hold off on the lynch mob until we actually know what the **** is going on?


As usual, 100% correct, OMG.

Ed O.


----------



## SodaPopinski

Man, this is like deja vu from the Sebastian Telfair gun incident. Someone posts a rumor that they heard a Blazer might be in trouble, poster gets shot down by rest of the board, rumor comes out, people apologize to poster, people freak out.

I really wish Zach wouldn't associate himself with such lowlifes. I'd still like to hear the whole story, however, before I convict Zach of any wrongdoing. History does not side with Z-bo, but I don't have enough info to process this any further.

-Pop


----------



## SodaPopinski

P.S. Think they'll mention anything about this on CSMN? Poor MB. The guy has been working his tail off this offseason to bring all the good stories about the Blazers to light, and one thing like this can bring it all smashing down. That is assuming there was any wrongdoing on Zach's part.

-Pop


----------



## Mr. Chuck Taylor

it's on oregonlive's front page now...
oregonlive


----------



## SodaPopinski

Mr. Chuck Taylor said:


> it's on oregonlive's front page now...
> oregonlive


I don't claim to know much about criminal investigations (thank goodness), but isn't it a bad sign that Zach has hired an attorney? Is there a reason you'd hire an attorney if you don't have a reason to believe you're a potential suspect?

-Pop


----------



## sa1177

Quite interesting that Zbo has hired Stephen Housze as his attorney. Housze is one of the top criminal defense attorneys in the state.


----------



## SodaPopinski

sa1177 said:


> Quite interesting that Zbo has hired Stephen Housze as his attorney. Housze is one of the top criminal defense attorneys in the state.


I think the Blazers have him on speed dial. He's also defended a few other Blazers, IIRC.

-Pop


----------



## sa1177

SodaPopinski said:


> I think the Blazers have him on speed dial. He's also defended a few other Blazers, IIRC.
> 
> -Pop


Yes true...bad sign IMO that they bring in a heavy hitter like him immediately though.


----------



## SodaPopinski

sa1177 said:


> Yes true...bad sign IMO that they bring in a heavy hitter like him immediately though.


I understand the strategy behind it, that the attorney will protect you through the investigation, but it sure doesn't make you look innocent.

-Pop


----------



## sa1177

SodaPopinski said:


> I understand the strategy behind it, that the attorney will protect you through the investigation, but it sure doesn't make you look innocent.
> 
> -Pop


Yeh....it's the hiring a attorney before you have even been named as a suspect or charged with anything that concerns me.


----------



## sa1177

Statement on Blazers.com...




> Since this matter is under investigation, out of respect for the legal process, we simply cannot comment at this time. Once we have all the facts, we will act accordingly. This is in response to the following statement issued by the Portland Police Bureau:
> 
> _Late last week I received several calls about a possible criminal investigation involving Zach Randolph of the Portland Trailblazers. At the time, for investigative reasons I was not able to confirm any information. The Police Bureau will now confirm that on August 14, 2006, an officer took a report of a sexual assault and that the report involved Zach Randolph. However, the Police Bureau is not identifying Zach Randolph as a suspect in the criminal investigation. This is an ongoing investigation and detectives are still interviewing potential witnesses. _


http://www.nba.com/blazers/


----------



## Mr. Chuck Taylor

Although difficult giving his past, I will do my best to give Zach the benefit of the doubt right now. We have very limited information about what happened and can only speculate as to what degree he is involved. Even if he is a suspect in a crime, he is still innocent until proven guilty.

However... even if he is just a witness to a crime, he is likely still hanging around a bad crowd, and hasn't matured like we hoped he would. If there were any thoughts to trading him, clearly this does not help his value, no matter what the outcome. 

This gets me to thinking, is there a situation that is so bad that an nba team could void a contract? What if a player had to do jail time? Perhaps they went over this during the Kobe case, but I can't remember.


----------



## Ed O

SodaPopinski said:


> I don't claim to know much about criminal investigations (thank goodness), but isn't it a bad sign that Zach has hired an attorney? Is there a reason you'd hire an attorney if you don't have a reason to believe you're a potential suspect?


Absolutely. Whether he's innocent or guilty, he needs to make sure that his rights are protected. He also can probably use someone to speak for him if/when the media asks questions.

Setting aside the matter of money (which is pretty realistic when you're dealing with a guy making 8 figures a year)... why wouldn't you want an attorney? A misstatement to the police or a slip-up to a reporter can cost you in a lot of different ways, and if it were me, I would definitely hire a lawyer whether I was guilty or not.

Ed O.


----------



## It's_GO_Time

Ed O said:


> Absolutely. Whether he's innocent or guilty, he needs to make sure that his rights are protected. He also can probably use someone to speak for him if/when the media asks questions.
> 
> Setting aside the matter of money (which is pretty realistic when you're dealing with a guy making 8 figures a year)... why wouldn't you want an attorney? A misstatement to the police or a slip-up to a reporter can cost you in a lot of different ways, and if it were me, I would definitely hire a lawyer whether I was guilty or not.
> 
> Ed O.


If money isn't an issue, I generally agree about hiring an attorney whether you are guilty or not. But I don't think it is a no brainer situation. Zach is a public figure and the fact he is hiring an attorney is going to reflect negatively on him publically. 

If he was truly innocent of any wrong doing, wouldn't it be best for him to just remain silent on the situation and allow law enforcement to do their job. Nothing to fear if he didn't do anything, right? 

Funny this issue is raised on the heels of the Ramsey murder confession (parents got a lawyer and were presumed guilty)


----------



## Reep

Well, I hope this adds up to nothing, for Zach's sake. If it does, then I hope he goes to jail. 

However, I still think it is inappropriate to post rumors regarding criminal behavior without any source. Gunner looks good in hindsite because there ended up being something there. However, I still think he jumped the gun (no pun intended). When we are dealing with people's reputations (Zach's in this case) there should be extra caution used. This is not and should not be a forum rule, but I would like to see people police themselves with this kind of content.

:soapbox:


----------



## Mr. Chuck Taylor

Canzano on the fan says...

They've known about it for 5 days and he didn't really think it was a story...but today the police released the report with his name on it, so now its a story.

He says there are 2 girls involved...Zach paid them to do a sex act or take their clothes off or something (i couldnt understand him) in front of him and his friend (canzano says its not illegal). Later one of the women calls 911 and says there was an assault.


----------



## hoojacks

This team is comical.


----------



## furball

Mr. Chuck Taylor said:


> Canzano on the fan says...
> 
> They've known about it for 5 days and he didn't really think it was a story...but today the police released the report with his name on it, so now its a story.
> 
> He says there are 2 girls involved...Zach paid them to do a sex act or take their clothes off or something (i couldnt understand him) in front of him and his friend (canzano says its not illegal). Later one of the women calls 911 and says there was an assault.


The part that is a little scary is that someone went to the hospital. That's not good. And even if Zack is not the one involved in the act, if you are present when someone else is commiting a violent act against someone, you are just as guilty and almost as revolting. I'm really hoping this is not true. Either way, having a couple of hizzles come up to your room isn't exactly going to make the 25 pledge deal look to good.


----------



## Todd

hoojacks said:


> This team is comical.


No. Zach Randolph is a retard plain and simple! He might be able to play a little ball but the guy is as dumb as a box of rocks.


----------



## Buckethead

Mr. Chuck Taylor said:


> Canzano on the fan says...
> there are 2 girls involved...Zach paid them to do a sex act or take their clothes off or something


Forget the Bill Bayno workout footage, I hope Blazers.com has a video podcast of that posted soon. 

Zach needed to keep his nose clean after the drag racing incident. This just shows me that he's not sincere about being a responsible leader with his current track record. Even if he's not charged with anything, the momentum this team had going just took a major PR hit.


----------



## mediocre man

Let's go with a glass half full approach. If this turns out to be true then the Blazers....


1. Should be able to void Zach's contract under the morals clause. 

2. It would clear up the logjam we have at the and possitions. 

3. Allow Aldridge to develop sooner

4. Force Nate to stop running his boring as hell low post offense

5. Makes us learn how to spell Raef LaFrentz quicker

6. Now it really makes the Telfair trade look brilliant

7. We might finally see a PF play defense on this team

8. After it's over it's one less thing for Crapzano to write about

9. When he signs with another team and helps lead them to the championship we can all ***** about it

10. Maybe the Blazers will pay this woman enough to say she "forgot that Miles was there too"


----------



## mediocre man

At least it's not on ESPN.com yet


----------



## It's_GO_Time

I heard Zach try to blame it on his brother . . . until he was informed his brother was in custody.

Maybe it is a good thing he got an attorney. :biggrin:


----------



## sa1177

Reep said:


> Well, I hope this adds up to nothing, for Zach's sake. If it does, then I hope he goes to jail.
> 
> However, I still think it is inappropriate to post rumors regarding criminal behavior without any source. Gunner looks good in hindsite because there ended up being something there. However, I still think he jumped the gun (no pun intended). When we are dealing with people's reputations (Zach's in this case) there should be extra caution used. This is not and should not be a forum rule, but I would like to see people police themselves with this kind of content.
> 
> :soapbox:


The point of a forum like this is to speculate...both good and bad. Zach built his repuation into what it is today...he is not a "victim."


----------



## Yega1979

Too bad we traded Telfair to build around Zach. What a joke.


----------



## SheedSoNasty

sa1177 said:


> The point of a forum like this is to speculate...both good and bad. Zach built his repuation into what it is today...he is not a "victim."


Here here!


----------



## Ed O

Kiss_My_Darius said:


> If he was truly innocent of any wrong doing, wouldn't it be best for him to just remain silent on the situation and allow law enforcement to do their job. Nothing to fear if he didn't do anything, right?


That's a perfect example of why he DOES need an attorney. If the police ask him questions, he should know when to answer and when not to... if he didn't commit a crime, but one did take place, by remaining silent he could get into trouble. Law enforcement might ask him questions, of course, that he's not obligated to answer, and having an attorney helps him protect himself while also doing his legal duties.



> Funny this issue is raised on the heels of the Ramsey murder confession (parents got a lawyer and were presumed guilty)


I don't know that much about the Ramsey case, other than that I would bet a lot of people got creeped out by the activities they had their little girl in and sometimes people tie together weird behavior with illegal behavior.

Ed O.


----------



## FeloniusThunk

On KATU it's now saying that the call to 911 happened 3 days after the "incident", and that there was a request to ZR for money. This is sounding a lot like simple extortion, a familiar peril of wealthy athletes. I guess we'll find out more, but that would make ZR an innocent man (paying women to act hot isn't my cup of tea, but then neither is golf).

I hope that whoever is being or was harmed by this is fairly treated. By us the fans and the legal system.


----------



## It's_GO_Time

Ed O said:


> That's a perfect example of why he DOES need an attorney. If the police ask him questions, he should know when to answer and when not to... if he didn't commit a crime, but one did take place, by remaining silent he could get into trouble. Law enforcement might ask him questions, of course, that he's not obligated to answer, and having an attorney helps him protect himself while also doing his legal duties.
> Ed O.



I don't agree. Zach is under no obligation to speak to the police. If he was not invovled in a crime in anyway, it would be simple to instruct him that should the police wish to question him, he should respectfully decline, letting the police know he does not wish to speak with them while the investigation is pending. He CANNOT get into trouble by refusing to speak with the police during an investigation.

So by remaining silient, he won't put his foot in his mouth and it won't get printed in the press that he has retained an attorney.


----------



## Mr. Chuck Taylor

Kiss_My_Darius said:


> I don't agree. Zach is under no obligation to speak to the police. If he was not invovled in a crime in anyway, it would be simple to instruct him that should the police wish to question him, he should respectfully decline, letting the police know he does not wish to speak with them while the investigation is pending. He CANNOT get into trouble by refusing to speak with the police during an investigation.
> 
> So by remaining silient, he won't put his foot in his mouth and it won't get printed in the press that he has retained an attorney.


Uh, didn't Zach narrowly avoid getting in trouble for keeping his mouth shut in his brother's nightclub shooting incident a few years back? I think Zach should have a lawyer involved regardless of his level of involvement here. I don't see the downside of having a lawyer to consult with, and it's not like he can't afford one.


----------



## wastro

I'm going to withhold judgement until something is proven, but considering that Randolph has a record of bad judgement in the past, it doesn't look good.

But three days later? A request for money? That doesn't look good, either.


----------



## FeloniusThunk

Kiss_My_Darius said:


> So by remaining silient, he won't put his foot in his mouth and it won't get printed in the press that he has retained an attorney.


In another world, I'm guessing you would have said this:


alternate_version said:


> So by retaining an attorney, he won't put his foot in his mouth and it won't get printed in the press that he has remained silent.


Given such a lose-lose result, I'd go with having an attorney.


----------



## Mr. Chuck Taylor

Kiss_My_Darius said:


> I don't agree. Zach is under no obligation to speak to the police. If he was not invovled in a crime in anyway, it would be simple to instruct him that should the police wish to question him, he should respectfully decline, letting the police know he does not wish to speak with them while the investigation is pending. He CANNOT get into trouble by refusing to speak with the police during an investigation.
> 
> So by remaining silient, he won't put his foot in his mouth and it won't get printed in the press that he has retained an attorney.


I believe not giving the police information you know about a crime is called "aiding and abetting" and is very much a crime.


----------



## It's_GO_Time

FeloniusThunk said:


> On KATU it's now saying that the call to 911 happened 3 days after the "incident", and that there was a request to ZR for money. This is sounding a lot like simple extortion, a familiar peril of wealthy athletes. I guess we'll find out more, but that would make ZR an innocent man (paying women to act hot isn't my cup of tea, but then neither is golf).
> 
> I hope that whoever is being or was harmed by this is fairly treated. By us the fans and the legal system.



You say you want whoever is harmed to be treated fairly. I'm assuming that means holding off judgment until the facts are in. But in the same post you quickly call this a case of simple extortion and Zach is innocent.

If a woman was truly sexually assualted, are you treating her fairly?


----------



## It's_GO_Time

Mr. Chuck Taylor said:


> I believe not giving the police information you know about a crime is called "aiding and abetting" and is very much a crime.


 It's not aiding and abetting to not give police information after the crime has been committed. 

"ORS 161.155 Criminal liability for conduct of another. 
A person is criminally liable for the conduct of another person constituting a crime if: 

(1) The person is made criminally liable by the statute defining the crime; or 

(2) With the intent to promote or facilitate the commission of the crime the person: 

(a) Solicits or commands such other person to commit the crime; or 

(b) Aids or abets or agrees or attempts to aid or abet such other person in planning or committing the crime; or 

(c) Having a legal duty to prevent the commission of the crime, fails to make an effort the person is legally required to make."

If the crime has already happened, it is not illegal to refuse to speak with the police. It law enforcement's job to put the case together and you do not have to help them with their job.

I orginally said that in normal situations, I agree that you should get an attorney if you are being investigated. But when you are in the public eye, I wouldn't jump to get an attorney . . . unless you want to help the police or are involved even in a minimal way.


----------



## It's_GO_Time

FeloniusThunk said:


> In another world, I'm guessing you would have said this:
> 
> 
> Given such a lose-lose result, I'd go with having an attorney.


 I don't get that post. I say what my opinion is. So why would I say something different in another world? What other world are you talking about?


----------



## It's_GO_Time

Mr. Chuck Taylor said:


> Uh, didn't Zach narrowly avoid getting in trouble for keeping his mouth shut in his brother's nightclub shooting incident a few years back?



Just the opposite . . . he almost got indicted for lying to the police.


----------



## FeloniusThunk

Kiss_My_Darius said:


> You say you want whoever is harmed to be treated fairly. I'm assuming that means holding off judgment until the facts are in. But in the same post you quickly call this a case of simple extortion and Zach is innocent.


No, I didn't. I said "This is *sounding a lot like* simple extortion". I don't know the truth yet and am withholding judgement, but it doesn't sound so good for the woman at this point (innocent victims don't ask for money first and go to the police second).



> If a woman was truly sexually assualted, are you treating her fairly?


If she was, then I sure hope our legal system treats her fairly and ZR gets his just punishment. If she was assaulted, though, then either the extortion attempt is either flat wrong (and I have been misled) or will require some pretty incredible explanation.


----------



## FeloniusThunk

Kiss_My_Darius said:


> I don't get that post. I say what my opinion is. So why would I say something different in another world? What other world are you talking about?


You honestly believe that ZR would not be condemned the same way if he had refused to talk to the police? It's easy enough to say that he sounds suspicious for hiring a lawyer, right? Wouldn't it be just as suspicious if he refused to talk to the police?


----------



## Mr. Chuck Taylor

Kiss_My_Darius said:


> Just the opposite . . . he almost got indicted for lying to the police.


Ah yes, you are correct. But this is all the more reason for Zach to hire a lawyer just the same.


----------



## BlayZa

and people complain about the press still calling us the Jail Blazers?

until we deserve to be called something else , the shoe seems to fit pretty well.

we need a Trail Blazers - Wild 'N Out tv special


----------



## For Three! Rip City!

Okay, with the link in place in the media I'm willing to give Gunner props for breaking the story. I was a bit frustrated by the lack of a link giving some substance to the rumor. I guess I would file a thread like this under "you'd better be right". In this case, Gunner was right so it's all good.

Now with that said (and if Zach is involved), I'll come clean and admit I soured on Zach a long time ago and I'm completely fed up with the "it was someone else with me that did it" execuse. When is this guy going to grow up. Maybe we'll be fortunate and he'll find a higher calling or get married (or both).

In any case I can't wait until this guy is out of town. I consider him and Miles to be the last links to Jailblazer's past.

Now that I've eaten my words for Gunner, I suppose I'll be eating my words if Zach is exonerated but I don't know. Just how often can Zach just be in the vicinity before he become the main player in the next incident?


----------



## barfo

Reep said:


> However, I still think it is inappropriate to post rumors regarding criminal behavior without any source. Gunner looks good in hindsite because there ended up being something there. However, I still think he jumped the gun (no pun intended).


But, Gunner had a source and named his source (not explicitly, but it only took me a couple of minutes to find it after Gunner posted - there aren't that many Blazer pornsites, er, I mean messageboards). 

And, if it was not ok to post about it after one guy on a messageboard mentioned it, is it still not ok to post about it now? Do TV news crews and the Oregonian reporting it somehow make the story more true? Is Iavaroni the coach of the Blazers? 

Maybe we shouldn't talk about it until after he's convicted, after all, innocent until proven otherwise, right? But then the conviction could always be overturned on appeal, possibly many years from now. So to be on the safe side maybe we better not ever speak of this again.

barfo


----------



## furball

One of the best parts of this message board is the rumors. I think we all have an obligation to post any rumor we hear. We all know who gives legit rumors and those that just waste our time. Verdict? SA1777= Good. Gunner= Good. Zidane/Chromezilla= Not so good. Rumor it up boys. I surely don't come to this board to read board nerds discussing politics.


----------



## Oldmangrouch

A little history lesson.

Some years ago, NFL star Michael Irvin was accused of rape. Because Irvin had been in trouble before (drugs) everyone just assumed he was guilty. There were just two teeny-tiny problems.......

A) No rape happened. The woman had consensual sex with a buddy of Irvin, who even videotaped the event.

B) Irvin wasn't even in the same hotel suite when the sex took place.

Of course, most of the folks who rushed to crucify Irvin never expressed any remorse. He had "history" and he had "questionable friends", so he was asking for it.  

Before some of you stick your feet in your mouth, you might want to spread a little mustard on those toes.


----------



## Ed O

Kiss_My_Darius said:


> I orginally said that in normal situations, I agree that you should get an attorney if you are being investigated. But when you are in the public eye, I wouldn't jump to get an attorney . . . unless you want to help the police or are involved even in a minimal way.


Zach's going to know that he can simply say, "No thanks" to the police? If they call and ask him to come down to the station, he says ... what? If they come in a police car to take him to the station, he says ... what?

Is he supposed to rely on "Law and Order" reruns? Or posts on this board?

Or is going to know based on the the Oregon criminal code that his criminal culpability is limited as a potential accessory? And is he sure that there's not going to be any federal charges where accessory after the fact is a possibility?

I think it's absolutely crazy to risk this sort of thing without an attorney. PR is nice and all, but he's going to get paid whether some fans think he's guilty or not... unless he goes to jail, and his chances of winding up there are a lot better if he doesn't have an attorney.

I fail to see ANY upside to not getting an attorney beyond making some rush-to-judgment fans perhaps feel more inclined to think him innocent. The downside, of course, is tremendous.

Ed O.


----------



## handclap problematic

Ed O said:


> Zach's going to know that he can simply say, "No thanks" to the police? If they call and ask him to come down to the station, he says ... what? If they come in a police car to take him to the station, he says ... what?
> 
> Is he supposed to rely on "Law and Order" reruns? Or posts on this board?
> 
> Or is going to know based on the the Oregon criminal code that his criminal culpability is limited as a potential accessory? And is he sure that there's not going to be any federal charges where accessory after the fact is a possibility?
> 
> I think it's absolutely crazy to risk this sort of thing without an attorney. PR is nice and all, but he's going to get paid whether some fans think he's guilty or not... unless he goes to jail, and his chances of winding up there are a lot better if he doesn't have an attorney.
> 
> I fail to see ANY upside to not getting an attorney beyond making some rush-to-judgment fans perhaps feel more inclined to think him innocent. The downside, of course, is tremendous.
> 
> Ed O.



I would have to agree with you, Ed, on pretty much all points.
You will find that most human beings, and especially those of the young type, do not know much about stte and federal law. And, one, under these circumstances, would probably feel a lot safer having an attorney to help them through the process. Only good can come from having proper legal council. The attorney can help Zach through the endlessly confusing legal process. I will not make comments about Zach's innocents or lackthereof, but I can find no fault in getting some legal council.

Prunetang

Prunetang


----------



## BlazerFan22

*ZBo witness or suspect?...*

Sounds like Gunner may not have been pulling are chains after all. Zach Randolph was involved in sexual assault investigation. I really hope this is not true. I was never a huge fan of ZBo yet I exepted him on the team. If it is true though I want him gone.  :banghead:


----------



## Anonymous Gambler

If this allegation looks even as true as the allegation against Kobe did, then I say we have to get rid of Zach. Too many of us just can't root for someone like that.

Zach and Dixon for Jalen Rose would be a dump that would work even with heavy charges against Zach.

I really hope it's unfounded, though.... Zach seems like a fairly good kid, at least, I'd like to believe so.


----------



## Gunner

Actually I'm not real happy about being vindicated in this,but thanks for the support and the IMs. As I said ad nauseum :biggrin: I wouldn't have posted in the first place if I hadn't thought it and the source credible. I seriously would have rather had my credibility take a hit,than the Blazer rep that has been making some strides towards respectability in the last couple months. I posted originally in a little hissy fit of frustration,anger and disgust,that all that either doesn't seem to be sinking in with one of the team members or it doesn't matter. As far as Portland and Oregon both go,the hometeam sports figures are the closest thing we have to celebrities and the Blazers of course are the highest profile. Anybody else that gets stopped for street racing, are most likely going to get a ticket,go home and its never heard of again. But with these guys its headline news. Everything they do,good or bad reflects on the team,and the org., & also affects the fan base in this case in a negative manner. Anyone want to lay odds on it being front page news tomorrow? 
That aside giving him the benefit of the doubt, _if_ a rape took place, _if_ Zach's involvement was only as a witness, & to be a witness,you'd think he must have been aware of what was going on. So he let it happen,didn't try to stop it,report it? Would'nt that itself make him an accessory?
"1 a : a person not actually or constructively present but contributing as an assistant or instigator to the commission of an offense -- called also accessory before the fact b : a person who knowing that a crime has been committed aids or shelters the offender with intent to defeat justice -- called also accessory after the fact." ETA I just noticed that Ed O brought that up earlier.
As of yet, I haven't read anything other than whats on Sportsline,but I'd sure like to read the police report & _alleged_ victims statement. I'll be checking "The Smoking Gun" site for updates.
Being a mature adult and a concerned Blazer fan,it would be extremely juvenile and immature for me to say anything regarding the doubters but on the other hand...









:nah:I TOLD YA SO!!!:nah:

You didn't really think I wasn't going to do that did ya? :biggrin:


----------



## ryanjend22

psssh....no rape.

let the birds fly, thats how these females act when they mess with athletes. i feel bad for randolph, and any later legal anxieties could not be good for his on court performance. bad situation all around.


however i would bet its all fabricated dumbness. money hungry people, haters, whatever you wanna call em. just another case of that.


----------



## ScottVdub

Oldmangrouch said:


> A little history lesson.
> 
> Some years ago, NFL star Michael Irvin was accused of rape. Because Irvin had been in trouble before (drugs) everyone just assumed he was guilty. There were just two teeny-tiny problems.......
> 
> A) No rape happened. The woman had consensual sex with a buddy of Irvin, who even videotaped the event.
> 
> B) Irvin wasn't even in the same hotel suite when the sex took place.
> 
> Of course, most of the folks who rushed to crucify Irvin never expressed any remorse. He had "history" and he had "questionable friends", so he was asking for it.
> 
> Before some of you stick your feet in your mouth, you might want to spread a little mustard on those toes.


i remember that. it happened during the playoffs and it was possibly a distraction that ended the cowboys season. A couple weeks later the woman who accused michael irvin and i forget what offensive lineman of rape turned herself in for being a liar and she got arrested. I remember an Irvin quote saying "i had 100 women one night a few months ago, why do i need to rape 1"


----------



## MemphisX

When you make the kind of money Zach makes, you should have your attorney on line for even a traffic stop. Millionaires are just lawsuit magnets and I wouldn't do anything re: the police without an attorney, regardless of my guilt or innocence. There are plenty of innocent men in the pokey.


----------



## mgb

I'm not sure if this has been posted yet but I just heard on local morning news that Zach paid two women to put on a show having sex with each other? Which they said isn't illegal in Oregon. And them someone force themselves on one of the women?


----------



## mediocre man

This from zach's lawyer. Perhaps the best attempt at spin doctoring I have ever seen.






> "Until such time that the police have completed the investigation and it has been reviewed by the district attorney's office for a determination of whether any person may be subject to criminal prosecution, such premature comments seriously risk biasing the investigation and damaging perhaps irreparably the good name of Mr. Randolph."




LMAO at "damaging perhaps irreparably the good name of Mr. Randolph" I hate to tell the lawyer this, but Zach did that on his own, several incidents ago.


----------



## RipCity9

Spin doctoring? Sounds like a reasonable point to me - harm can be done to him even though the police have not determined there was any wrongdoing.


----------



## It's_GO_Time

Ed O said:


> Is he supposed to rely on "Law and Order" reruns? Or posts on this board?
> Ed O.


Those would be my first two choices on how to deal with the situation. But since I don't trust Zach's ability to use the computer or remote control, maybe he should try consulting with an attorney without "officially" retaining him/her.

Anyways, you obviously think the upside to not getting an attorney is not worth the risk involved in not getting an attorney. I view the legal system differently and think that if he has done absolutely nothing wrong, than the risk of not getting an attorney is not so tremendous. 

Either way, as I'm following the story, law enforcement is going to be very challenged trying to put this case together . . . if there is even a case.


----------



## mediocre man

RipCity9 said:


> Spin doctoring? Sounds like a reasonable point to me - harm can be done to him even though the police have not determined there was any wrongdoing.



Zach doesn't have anything close to a "good name" 

1. Sucker punched Ruben Patterson and broke his eye socket while Patterson was being held by other players

2. Lied to police about his brother shooting someone, and was with his brother when it happened

3. Cited for street racing

4. Pulled over for suspicion of driving under the influence, heavy weed smell in the car

5. Smelled like weed at a Blazers Christmas ornament event for kids

6. Arrested as a youth for shoplifting

7. Arrested as a youth for battery

8. Arrested as a youth for possessing stolen property including guns, one of which he sold. 

9. Like it or not but Zach and Qyntel Woods both had pit bulls, and I know for a fact....yes a fact that he was involved in all that dog fighting that went down. Not directly, but was involved. 



Now please tell me again how the Portland police are doing harm to Randolph's "good name"?


----------



## Blazer Ringbearer

Kiss_My_Darius said:


> Those would be my first two choices on how to deal with the situation. But since I don't trust Zach's ability to use the computer or remote control, maybe he should try consulting with an attorney without "officially" retaining him/her.
> 
> Anyways, you obviously think the upside to not getting an attorney is not worth the risk involved in not getting an attorney. I view the legal system differently and think that if he has done absolutely nothing wrong, than the risk of not getting an attorney is not so tremendous.
> 
> Either way, as I'm following the story, law enforcement is going to be very challenged trying to put this case together . . . if there is even a case.


Riiight. If you had millions of dollars and your life as a free man at stake, you'd consult the internet?

That is bull****. 

You'd hire an attorney. 

There is no risk in getting appropriate legal counsel. Everyone besides you understands that it's what anyone would do in a situation where they could be charged with a crime - whether they did it or not.


----------



## It's_GO_Time

Blazer Ringbearer said:


> Riiight. If you had millions of dollars and your life as a free man at stake, you'd consult the internet?
> 
> That is bull****.
> 
> You'd hire an attorney.
> 
> There is no risk in getting appropriate legal counsel. Everyone besides you understands that it's what anyone would do in a situation where they could be charged with a crime - whether they did it or not.


A little upset there BR? I understand most (or all) posters here would hire an attorney, and I have said that under most circumstances, you should hire an attorney. 

But it is my lone opinion, I guess, that in a situation where a public figure has done absolutely nothing wrong, there is no need to "officially" retain an attorney.

I just happen to be strongly on the side that you will not be charged and convicted for a crime you have not committed. What do you want me to do, change my view of the legal system to conform with what this board thinks?

BTW- Polly Glass' father was a person of interest in the murder of his daughter and he didn't get an attorney. If you didn't do anything wrong, it's not such a no brainer to get an attorney even if you are being investigated.


----------



## Fork

Kiss_My_Darius said:


> But it is my lone opinion, I guess, that in a situation where a public figure has done absolutely nothing wrong, there is no need to "officially" retain an attorney.


Wow. That's naive.

I guess John and Patsy Ramsey didn't need a lawyer after their daughter was murdered?


----------



## Fork

Kiss_My_Darius said:


> BTW- Polly Glass' father was a person of interest in the murder of his daughter and he didn't get an attorney. If you didn't do anything wrong, it's not such a no brainer to get an attorney even if you are being investigated.


As to Mark Klass, he was interviewed and dismissed within a couple hours of the abduction. Not quite the same situation.


----------



## mediocre man

I had a friend back in high school whos family hired an attorney for him after his cousin was murdered. he did nothing, and was in fact playing basketball for the school when it happened. None the less he was told to hire one. The lawyer helped with things like reporters, to school itself, to law officialls asking questions. At no time was even considered a suspect, but still obtained an attorney


----------



## sa1177

Blazed said:


> Deleted


Lol so bitter and angry...

Hiring a attorney does of course make sense..but

Hiring the best criminal defense attorney in the city when you have been charged with absolutely nothing does look bad....

I also find it interesting that Housze seems to have quite a good reputation for negotiating plea bargains and deals with the D.A.


----------



## mediocre man

sa1177 said:


> Lol so bitter and angry...
> 
> Hiring a attorney does of course make sense..but
> 
> Hiring the best criminal defense attorney in the city when you have been charged with absolutely nothing does look bad....
> 
> I also find it interesting that Housze seems to have quite a good reputation for negotiating plea bargains and deals with the D.A.



You could also look at it like this. If you were a "person of interest" in any case and had the money Zach does wouldn't you hire who you thought was the best lawyer in the city? He has also represented other Blazers I believe, so Zach probably was familiar with him.


----------



## sa1177

mediocre man said:


> You could also look at it like this. If you were a "person of interest" in any case and had the money Zach does wouldn't you hire who you thought was the best lawyer in the city? He has also represented other Blazers I believe, so Zach probably was familiar with him.


I suppose so, if money wasn't really the issue. The point is the attorney he hired is a expert at defending people in criminal trials....just makes me think Zach is probably guilty of something that could possibly go to trial, court etc. Just my oppinion, i hope you are right that he is simply doing it because it's the best option available.


----------



## mediocre man

sa1177 said:


> I suppose so, if money wasn't really the issue. The point is the attorney he hired is a expert at defending people in criminal trials....just makes me think Zach is probably guilty of something that could possibly go to trial, court etc. Just my oppinion, i hope you are right that he is simply doing it because it's the best option available.



Given Zach's past, which I posted earlier in the thread I tend to agree with you. I was just pointing out another reason he may have hired who he did. Sadly for Zach there will be many people, like myself, that given his past will assume he is guilty of something.


----------



## sa1177

mediocre man said:


> Given Zach's past, which I posted earlier in the thread I tend to agree with you. I was just pointing out another reason he may have hired who he did. Sadly for Zach there will be many people, like myself, that given his past will assume he is guilty of something.


Agreed..IMO he is just a dumb dumb imature kid. Therefore I generally assume he is going to make the wrong choice in difficult situations rather then the right one. 

He's earned that honor in my mind.


----------



## Kmurph

The bottom line is...How many of these incidents or "near" incidents does Zach (or any player for that matter) have to get in before some of you realize he isn't worth the negativity he brings to this franchise???

I'd trade him away tomorrow...I just hope that he...once again...skates away from this incident unscathed...so then he actually COULD be traded...


----------



## It's_GO_Time

Fork said:


> As to Mark Klass, he was interviewed and dismissed within a couple hours of the abduction. Not quite the same situation.



I heard he was made to take a polygraph to clear himself. I saw intersting CNN report comparing the way the Klass family and the Ramsey family handled the investigation of the murder of their daughters. They took different routes and Klass was interviewed and asked about the way the Ramseys handled the situation. He thought is was a bad move for the Ramsey's to get an attorney and I agreed.

There are two schools of thought here. I guess it's upsetting to people that I think attorneys are not always necessary when law enforcement is investigating a potentail crime. I'm really not trying to piss posters off, but that is just how I feel.

Personally I'm relieved Zach got a lawyer . . . but I also feel, given his history, that he did something wrong in this situation and if anyone can keep him out of trouble it is Houze.


----------



## Kmurph

*Zach the follower?*

Yeah...right.......

How many of these incidents before some of you give up this ridiculous optomistic spin of yours?

Where was Miles, convincing Zach to put himself in this situation? 


Zach isn't a follower, who will suddenly "See the light" and reform himself if he is surrounded by "good guys"...the guy is just a bad seed...He's got issues...and the Blazers better wake up and realize this...and TRADE HIM away before it is too late and Zach steps over the edge and finds himself in real trouble instead of skirting around it like he normally does....and the Blazers are left holding the multi million dollar bag of garbage....

Zach is not as dumb as he looks (or acts)...Like someone else said...He WANTS to do these illegal activities, but doesn't want to have to deal with the reprecussions...so he is smart enough to have his friends act as his proxy.....Think about that...Personally, I don't find that a "positive" on his ledger....I think it makes him more despicable...

The sooner Zach is gone...the better...for the Blazers and for the City of Portland...Surrounding him by "good guys" isn't going to change his ways....I don't know how many more instances like this have to occur for some of you to see this....I sincerely hope Blazer management sees it by now...for their sake...


----------



## Ed O

Kmurph said:


> The bottom line is...How many of these incidents or "near" incidents does Zach (or any player for that matter) have to get in before some of you realize he isn't worth the negativity he brings to this franchise???


A million? A billion?

This "negativity" is meaningless. If he's found guilty of something? That's another matter. Merely being accused? Meaningless.

Ed O.


----------



## Samuel

*Re: Zach the follower?*

http://www.basketballboards.net/forum/showthread.php?t=297286


----------



## Ed O

*Re: Zach the follower?*



Kmurph said:


> Zach is not as dumb as he looks (or acts)...Like someone else said...He WANTS to do these illegal activities, but doesn't want to have to deal with the reprecussions...


He WANTS a tuna fish sandwich.

Man... making stuff up about people is kind of liberating.

I agree that Zach being a follower is just backseat pop psychological spin by some fans, but that he's a bad person and a master criminal seems just as absurd.

Ed O.


----------



## barfo

Let's try to discuss this without the personal attacks, OK?

barfo


----------



## Reep

*Re: Zach the follower?*

So I guess we are "following" the closed thread?

(oops, it is back open again)


----------



## Reep

Ed O said:


> A million? A billion?
> 
> This "negativity" is meaningless. If he's found guilty of something? That's another matter. Merely being accused? *Meaningless*.
> 
> Ed O.


Ed, do you really believe that there is no distraction factor from frequently being in trouble, but never being arrested? I guess I don't see a bright line here. Yeah, if Zach was charged and found guilty, that would certainly affect the team. However, just being charged and not found guilty also distracts the team. And, just being associated with illicit activity, with no charges, can also be a distraction. Even in situations where you did nothing illegal, but you bring down the reputation of your team by your actions (and get the frown from management) you still negatively impact the team.

Do I think we should trade Zach because of what we know about this incident? No. However, I would certainly be looking for trade opportunities because I don't think anyone can walk that close to the line without eventually stepping over it. And once he steps over it, it's too late to do anything constructive.


----------



## blakeback

*Re: Zach the follower?*



Kmurph said:


> Where was Miles, convincing Zach to put himself in this situation?
> 
> 
> 
> Zach is not as dumb as he looks (or acts)...Like someone else said...He WANTS to do these illegal activities, but doesn't want to have to deal with the reprecussions...



You started a new thread for this? Let me guess... because you thought you'd get more responses than if you just posted it in the big Zach thread?


Where was Miles? Who cares?

He WANTS to do these illegal activities? What illegal activities did he do?


----------



## sa1177

Ed O said:


> A million? A billion?
> 
> This "negativity" is meaningless. If he's found guilty of something? That's another matter. Merely being accused? Meaningless.
> 
> Ed O.


Really...here is a hypothetical question for you then. Would you want your kids hanging out with a guy who had been repeatedly accused of sexually molesting children...yet never convicted?

The tpye of people i respect and view as "good people" don't go around getting accused of sexual assualt. IMO we don't need that type on this team. 

I mean seriously WTF was Zach doing getting two hookers/stripper to perfrom a live sex show for him and his friends in a downtown Hotel Room?


----------



## ebott

If I were a young, dumb, rich kid like Zach I would have my lawer with me at all times.


----------



## Samuel

sa1177 said:


> Really...here is a hypothetical question for you then. Would you want your kids hanging out with a guy who had been repeatedly accused of sexually molesting children...yet never convicted?


Is that the litmus test for sports teams now? "I'll support X team only if I would allow my kids (or hypothetical ones) to 'hang out with them'."


----------



## Sheed30

*Re: Zach the follower?*

Zach did not do any illegal activities. He used very poor judgment. He should not have put himself in that position. But until all the facts come out, we can't jump to conclusion. It's very possible a couple of things could happen. 

First of all, the person making the claim could be lying just to get money. 

Also, it could be that Zach's friend was the one who made the sexually assault, and Zach was a witness. 

Or worse case scenario, is Zach could be involved in the assault himself, which would be a very bad thing. 

But until all the facts come out, people shouldn't jump to conclusion. It could very well be that Zach isn't charged with anything, but yet his image is damaged just with his name associated with the case. Unfair like Canzono said today? I guess we'll find out soon enough


----------



## Blazer Ringbearer

Kiss_My_Darius said:


> A little upset there BR? I understand most (or all) posters here would hire an attorney, and I have said that under most circumstances, you should hire an attorney.
> 
> But it is my lone opinion, I guess, that in a situation where a public figure has done absolutely nothing wrong, there is no need to "officially" retain an attorney.


I'm not in the least bit upset, I just called it like I saw it... excuse the asterisks.

If you were in Zach's situation, guilty or innocent, I think you'd hire an attorney, and that's why I called you on it. You can hold onto your naive beliefs when you're not a high profile basketball player in the midst of a potential charge, but if you were in that situation, you would make sure and get the best legal council you could to protect your millions.

Judge him for what he might have done or what he has done in the past - not for something so trivial as utilizing the legal system.


----------



## Oldmangrouch

sa1177 said:


> Really...here is a hypothetical question for you then. Would you want your kids hanging out with a guy who had been repeatedly accused of sexually molesting children...yet never convicted?
> 
> The tpye of people i respect and view as "good people" don't go around getting accused of sexual assualt. IMO we don't need that type on this team.
> 
> I mean seriously WTF was Zach doing getting two hookers/stripper to perfrom a live sex show for him and his friends in a downtown Hotel Room?



So, innocent people never get wrongly accused of things? Oh wait, you said "good people". I guess you agree with the folks I refered to earlier - the ones who felt it was OK to falsely accuse Michael Irvin of rape because he had a drug problem.

Actually, Zach hasn't even been accused ......but why split hairs.

As for your hooker question........he is young, rich, not real bright, and hetrosexual. None of which are a crime.


----------



## It's_GO_Time

Blazer Ringbearer said:


> I'm not in the least bit upset, I just called it like I saw it... excuse the asterisks.
> 
> If you were in Zach's situation, guilty or innocent, I think you'd hire an attorney, and that's why I called you on it. You can hold onto your naive beliefs when you're not a high profile basketball player in the midst of a potential charge, but if you were in that situation, you would make sure and get the best legal council you could to protect your millions.
> 
> Judge him for what he might have done or what he has done in the past - not for something so trivial as utilizing the legal system.



You know I keep getting called naive on this. I've tried to show that I at least understand the legal system by citing to the aid and abet statute, by correcting posters about the whether it is a crime to refuse to speak with the police, by pointing out another situation where someone under investigation did not officially retain an atorney. I understand no one agrees and am willing to conceed that my opinion may be wrong (not the first time), but I am not naive about this topic.

And if you are about calling like you see it, Zach didn't hire Houze to protect his millions. Houze is soley a criminal defense attorney. Should the alleged victim try and sue Zach civilly for money, Zach would be hiring a completely different attorney. This isn't about saving millions, but rather making sure he doesn't get into criminal trouble.


----------



## e_blazer1

Legal issues aside, does anybody care to venture an opinion as to what the trade value of our prospective starting forward tandem of Darius Miles and Zach Randolph is as of right now? My guess is it's down considerably from where it was at the end of last season...and I didn't really think that was possible.


----------



## It's_GO_Time

Oldmangrouch said:


> As for your hooker question........he is young, rich, not real bright, and hetrosexual. None of which are a crime.



Well this is a chat board so I'm willing to make judgments and draw conclusion even when I don't have all the facts. This may lead to wrong conclusions, but who doesn't try to piece it all together in their minds before getting all the facts?

My opinion is that whatever happened in the hotel room did not stop at a sex show. Escort services are know to be a front for prostitution, which is illegal in Oregon. I find it hard to believe that two young males with a boatload of cash didn't cross the line, in an industry known for crossing the line, and at the very least have sex with the women for money.

What? How can I say that without any evidence? You can't judge Zach so unfairly? You are a naive stupid american sports fan . . . (thought I would get that out since I figure it was coming)


----------



## mook

e_blazer1 said:


> Legal issues aside, does anybody care to venture an opinion as to what the trade value of our prospective starting forward tandem of Darius Miles and Zach Randolph is as of right now? My guess is it's down considerably from where it was at the end of last season...and I didn't really think that was possible.


I'm trying to think of whom we get could for them (without giving up one of our youngsters), and I'm frankly stumped. There was a time where I thought Steve Francis was feasible, but I think we've passed that point. We'd have to trade for a completely worthless (borderline retired), vastly overpaid player on a pretty long contract. There aren't as many of those around as there were a few years ago. 

We're keeping Randolph for a few years, regardless of the outcome here (barring prison, which would void his contract).


----------



## Reep

mook said:


> We're keeping Randolph for a few years, regardless of the outcome here (barring prison, which would void his contract).


I think that is the bottom line. With his contract and issues, there is no value in trading him.


----------



## BlazerFanFoLife

He hasnt done anything wrong, that we know of. I really believe that this is just the females who were present trying to get some extra money out of Zach. I mean they got a good paycheck and afterwards they felt like they could get more. They got greedy and didn't get what they asked for (later). So they threatend to go to the cops with a BS story. They told Zach that his money could make it all go away but Zach refused. To me this sounds much more realistic than that Zach commited a sexual assault or even witnessed one. Worst comes to worse it may have been two consenting adaults, later the female wanted (more) money Zach wouldnt pay her any more.


----------



## Ed O

sa1177 said:


> Really...here is a hypothetical question for you then. Would you want your kids hanging out with a guy who had been repeatedly accused of sexually molesting children...yet never convicted?


That has nothing to do with a man's ability to play basketball and help his team win games.

Ed O.


----------



## Oldmangrouch

Kiss_My_Darius said:


> My opinion is that whatever happened in the hotel room did not stop at a sex show. Escort services are know to be a front for prostitution, which is illegal in Oregon. I find it hard to believe that two young males with a boatload of cash didn't cross the line, in an industry known for crossing the line, and at the very least have sex with the women for money.
> 
> What? How can I say that without any evidence? You can't judge Zach so unfairly? You are a naive stupid american sports fan . . . (thought I would get that out since I figure it was coming)


Actually, that suspicion is perfectly reasonable. It is the huge leap from prostitution to rape that disturbs me. 

This isn't TV. Not every car parked by an expired meter has a dead body in the trunk! :biggrin:


----------



## crandc

sa1177 said:


> Really...here is a hypothetical question for you then. Would you want your kids hanging out with a guy who had been repeatedly accused of sexually molesting children...yet never convicted?
> 
> The tpye of people i respect and view as "good people" don't go around getting accused of sexual assualt. IMO we don't need that type on this team.
> 
> I mean seriously WTF was Zach doing getting two hookers/stripper to perfrom a live sex show for him and his friends in a downtown Hotel Room?


SA, Zach is not a kid. Makes a difference. I would not want my children to spend time with someone who has been accused of child molestation because I would fear they are not safe around such a person. I just don't see that this is relevant here.

I have no sympathy at all for men who commit sexual assault, but so far as I know Zach has not been accused of that. We certainly did not need such people (Ruben Patterson, not accused, convicted) on the team, I agree.

As for hiring women to perform a sex show...if he did that I personally find it repulsive. But I would be SHOCKED if he is the only one in the NBA who does it. IMO the attitude towards women of men in this society is pretty bad and young male athletes are often expected to show public contempt for women. Not an excuse, but would you want to dump anyone who does such crap? If so you may have a very small team. Hakeem Olajuwon would qualify. Few others.

I also agree that Zach has a penchant for getting into stupid situations and shows poor judgment repeatedly. 

And I agree with those who say that hiring an attorney is a wise precaution. Especially for someone who frankly is not the brightest bulb in the box.


----------



## Blazer Ringbearer

Kiss_My_Darius said:


> You know I keep getting called naive on this. I've tried to show that I at least understand the legal system by citing to the aid and abet statute, by correcting posters about the whether it is a crime to refuse to speak with the police, by pointing out another situation where someone under investigation did not officially retain an atorney. I understand no one agrees and am willing to conceed that my opinion may be wrong (not the first time), but I am not naive about this topic.


I'm not saying that you don't know anything - I'm sure you know more than I do about Oregon law, and that's cool. Where I think you're naive is in thinking that people at risk of being charged in a crime should just take the time to do their own research and depend on their own legal interpretations and capabilities to protect their interests. Why in the world shouldn't someone hire an attorney for legal matters? I also thought it was naive when you made a comment regarding to the effect that if you haven't done anything wrong, then you have nothing to worry about... plenty of innocent people end up in legal battles just by being at the wrong place at the wrong time. Those people need legal representation to be sure that they don't end up in prison.



> And if you are about calling like you see it, Zach didn't hire Houze to protect his millions. Houze is soley a criminal defense attorney. Should the alleged victim try and sue Zach civilly for money, Zach would be hiring a completely different attorney. This isn't about saving millions, but rather making sure he doesn't get into criminal trouble.


If Zach ended up in jail, he wouldn't be pulling in $10+ Million per year for the rest of his playing career... something like that could end up costing him close to $100M if he were to have a long prolific stint in the NBA. That plus his personal freedom mean that there's a whole lot at risk... more than you'd want to put in the hands of your own legal counsel, or a couple of phone conversations with a lawyer you find in the phone book.

I think the case that you make about hiring a lawyer being damaging to the person's character is pretty weak. 

There was a lot more going on in the Ramsey's case than the fact that they hired a lawyer - they in fact hired a PR firm, and didn't speak with the police for months. They also refused to take lie detector tests and had all kinds of goofy evidence and circumstances in that case that seemed to possibly implicate them.

Besides, in Zach's case, he has already been pretty much vilified in the local community. How would not hiring a lawyer have helped his case? How would the Oregonian write it if he was refusing to answer questions (while in his rights) of the police? He'd be just as instantly guilty. Wouldn't you protect your own interests rather than speculate on how the average joe will react to your situation? Isn't that a time in your life when you'd think... who cares what they think, I'm going to look out for me? I would.


----------



## Iwatas

crandc said:


> As for hiring women to perform a sex show...if he did that I personally find it repulsive. But I would be SHOCKED if he is the only one in the NBA who does it.


I was pretty shocked. Why would he need to pay? Seriously. 

And yes, it is stupid, etc. etc. Men are often self-destructive. Rich ones are just self-destructive in more externally amusing ways. 

At least (assuming Zach did not rape anyone), this was a victimless crime, between consenting adults with no marriage or family that would get wrecked as a result. It does not make it pretty, but it makes it much better than, say, a run-of-the-mill adultery event.



> IMO the attitude towards women of men in this society is pretty bad and young male athletes are often expected to show public contempt for women.


Aw, heck. I cannot resist.

Really? "This society"? Why not call a spade what it is and acknowledge that a *certain* sub-culture with certain disgusting musical lyrics and a specifically high rate of unemployment, drug use, teenage pregnancy, convicted criminals, and fatherless homes is really to blame? Name some young male athletes who show contempt for women who come from bible-thumping backgrounds? Buck Williams in his prime, perhaps? Men of all stripes from strong families instinctively respect women -- because they respect their mothers. Show me a man who holds women in contempt and I'll show you a man from a broken and probably irreligious home.

And why not mention that liberal America enables and condones this particular sub-culture on the peculiar grounds that it would be racist to behave otherwise? 

Flame shields up!


iWatas


----------



## It's_GO_Time

Blazer Ringbearer said:


> I'm not saying that you don't know anything - I'm sure you know more than I do about Oregon law, and that's cool. Where I think you're naive is in thinking that people at risk of being charged in a crime should just take the time to do their own research and depend on their own legal interpretations and capabilities to protect their interests. Why in the world shouldn't someone hire an attorney for legal matters? I also thought it was naive when you made a comment regarding to the effect that if you haven't done anything wrong, then you have nothing to worry about... plenty of innocent people end up in legal battles just by being at the wrong place at the wrong time. Those people need legal representation to be sure that they don't end up in prison.
> 
> 
> 
> If Zach ended up in jail, he wouldn't be pulling in $10+ Million per year for the rest of his playing career... something like that could end up costing him close to $100M if he were to have a long prolific stint in the NBA. That plus his personal freedom mean that there's a whole lot at risk... more than you'd want to put in the hands of your own legal counsel, or a couple of phone conversations with a lawyer you find in the phone book.
> 
> I think the case that you make about hiring a lawyer being damaging to the person's character is pretty weak.
> 
> There was a lot more going on in the Ramsey's case than the fact that they hired a lawyer - they in fact hired a PR firm, and didn't speak with the police for months. They also refused to take lie detector tests and had all kinds of goofy evidence and circumstances in that case that seemed to possibly implicate them.
> 
> Besides, in Zach's case, he has already been pretty much vilified in the local community. How would not hiring a lawyer have helped his case? How would the Oregonian write it if he was refusing to answer questions (while in his rights) of the police? He'd be just as instantly guilty. Wouldn't you protect your own interests rather than speculate on how the average joe will react to your situation? Isn't that a time in your life when you'd think... who cares what they think, I'm going to look out for me? I would.


Well we are just going in circles (and realize all posters see it your way) It sad to me that poster's view of the legal system is such that should your name be brought up in a police investigation that the immediate action should be to retain an attorney, no questions asked.

I will mention that to think my thoughts are naive is fair (wrong but fair). But I don't think it is fair to characterize my response to the situation as taking your time, doing their own research, making a couple of phone calls to attorney's out of the phone book. That isn't what I'm saying and maybe why you think it is a naive response. 

I think sitting down with a respected criminal attorney in private to discuss the situation is the appropriate response. Only then do you decide if there is a need to actually retain the attorney. And if you add to the mix the potential client is a public figure, that should weigh into the decison of publically retaining an attorney.


----------



## sa1177

crandc said:


> SA, Zach is not a kid. Makes a difference. I would not want my children to spend time with someone who has been accused of child molestation because I would fear they are not safe around such a person. I just don't see that this is relevant here.
> 
> I have no sympathy at all for men who commit sexual assault, but so far as I know Zach has not been accused of that. We certainly did not need such people (Ruben Patterson, not accused, convicted) on the team, I agree.
> 
> As for hiring women to perform a sex show...if he did that I personally find it repulsive. But I would be SHOCKED if he is the only one in the NBA who does it. IMO the attitude towards women of men in this society is pretty bad and young male athletes are often expected to show public contempt for women. Not an excuse, but would you want to dump anyone who does such crap? If so you may have a very small team. Hakeem Olajuwon would qualify. Few others.
> 
> I also agree that Zach has a penchant for getting into stupid situations and shows poor judgment repeatedly.
> 
> And I agree with those who say that hiring an attorney is a wise precaution. Especially for someone who frankly is not the brightest bulb in the box.


The relevance has to do with reputation....due to Zach's reputation I am not willing to give him the benefit of the doubt anymore...just like I wouldn't trust my kids with a man who had been accused of sexual assualt on multiple occasions.

A man's reputation always precedes him and should be taken seriously IMO.


----------



## Ed O

sa1177 said:


> The relevance has to do with reputation....due to Zach's reputation I am not willing to give him the benefit of the doubt anymore...just like I wouldn't trust my kids with a man who had been accused of sexual assualt on multiple occasions.
> 
> A man's reputation always precedes him and should be taken seriously IMO.


Why is his reputation as a man even relevant?

He's a basketball player. He's paid to play basketball. The only reason any of us know he exists is because he's tall and an excellent, excellent player of the sport.

If and when he commits crime that impacts his ability to play basketball, then that's what should matter. He hasn't done that to date (that we know of) and he hasn't even been charged here.

Ed O.


----------



## sa1177

Ed O said:


> Why is his reputation as a man even relevant?
> 
> He's a basketball player. He's paid to play basketball. The only reason any of us know he exists is because he's tall and an excellent, excellent player of the sport.
> 
> If and when he commits crime that impacts his ability to play basketball, then that's what should matter. He hasn't done that to date (that we know of) and he hasn't even been charged here.
> 
> Ed O.


Ahh reputation is important because you said him merely being accused is "meaningless,"...It's not at all "meaningless" IMO due to his already cloudy reputation. Doesn't it bother you that Zach has put himself in a precarious position with the police yet again? 

Frankly I could care less about the impact of this on Zach's ability to play b-ball...that is not a important issue at all IMO.

And do you want a guy with a reputation for lying to police, speeding with multiple loaded weapons in his car, fighting, and possible sexual assualt etc etc. representing your team and your city?


----------



## Blazer Ringbearer

Kiss_My_Darius said:


> Well we are just going in circles (and realize all posters see it your way) It sad to me that poster's view of the legal system is such that should your name be brought up in a police investigation that the immediate action should be to retain an attorney, no questions asked.
> 
> I will mention that to think my thoughts are naive is fair (wrong but fair). But I don't think it is fair to characterize my response to the situation as taking your time, doing their own research, making a couple of phone calls to attorney's out of the phone book. That isn't what I'm saying and maybe why you think it is a naive response.
> 
> I think sitting down with a respected criminal attorney in private to discuss the situation is the appropriate response. Only then do you decide if there is a need to actually retain the attorney. And if you add to the mix the potential client is a public figure, that should weigh into the decison of publically retaining an attorney.


Fair enough. We probably only disagree a little bit - or maybe a lot. 

Just for the record, I don't think you've said anything stupid and hope I haven't offended you. 

Have a good one...


----------



## Ed O

sa1177 said:


> Ahh reputation is important because you said him merely being accused is "meaningless,"...It's not at all "meaningless" IMO due to his already cloudy reputation. Doesn't it bother you that Zach has put himself in a precarious position with the police yet again?


Why would it bother me? I don't know Zach Randolph at all. He's the one that's responsible for, and has to live with, his reputations as a man and as a player, and it's only the latter that I'm at all concerned with.



> Frankly I could care less about the impact of this on Zach's ability to play b-ball...that is not a important issue at all IMO.


Ah. OK. You *do* know that this is a board about a basketball team, right?



> And do you want a guy with a reputation for lying to police, speeding with multiple loaded weapons in his car, fighting, and possible sexual assualt etc etc. representing your team and your city?


First of all, Portland's not "my city". Secondly, I've never believed that a professional athlete can represent a city... especially when he grew up in Indiana, went to college in Michigan, and presumably lives outside of Portland for at least part of the season.

Ed O.


----------



## sa1177

Ed O said:


> Why would it bother me? I don't know Zach Randolph at all. He's the one that's responsible for, and has to live with, his reputations as a man and as a player, and it's only the latter that I'm at all concerned with.


Totally fine and I understand your stance because it is one many share with you, but keep in mind others do care about the reputation, character and persona of the athletes who they are fans of.




> First of all, Portland's not "my city". Secondly, I've never believed that a professional athlete can represent a city... especially when he grew up in Indiana, went to college in Michigan, and presumably lives outside of Portland for at least part of the season.
> Ed O.


Portland is a one team town...IMO the Blazers certainly do represent Portland in the major sports world. Randolph has played his entire NBA career here. While he did grow up in Indiana and Play at Michigan he never received the type of coverage/publicity there that he receives here. National coverage associates Zbo with Portland and thus so do the masses...


----------



## crandc

Iwatas said:



> Really? "This society"? Why not call a spade what it is and acknowledge that a *certain* sub-culture with certain disgusting musical lyrics and a specifically high rate of unemployment, drug use, teenage pregnancy, convicted criminals, and fatherless homes is really to blame? Name some young male athletes who show contempt for women who come from bible-thumping backgrounds? Buck Williams in his prime, perhaps? Men of all stripes from strong families instinctively respect women -- because they respect their mothers. Show me a man who holds women in contempt and I'll show you a man from a broken and probably irreligious home.
> 
> And why not mention that liberal America enables and condones this particular sub-culture on the peculiar grounds that it would be racist to behave otherwise?
> 
> Flame shields up!
> 
> 
> iWatas


Disgusting lyrics? You mean like the Rolling Stones with "scarred old slaver knows he's doing all right, hear him whip the women just around midnight." Oh wait, they are not that "subculture", are they?

Because, to call things by their right names, it is not just poor black athletes who act contemptuously to women. Kobe Bryant grew up rich and in a strong family, right? What about John Rocker? White, Christian, went to bible schools. How about Larry Bird and (hell, just spaced on the name, former Red Sox with a road wife), white, Christian? Fact is, men with strong mothers may not have any fathers at all and respect women because they respect their mothers. Some men respect their strong mothers but no other women. Some bible thumping men hate and excoriate women. Some irreligious men are strongly pro-feminist. Most liberals, however, at least in theory support equality for women. 

Racism only applies if what you mean, and clearly you do, is that this is something that Black men who are not Christian do, but that white men and Black Christians do not do.

Hey, do you know, when the Houston Rockets won their second title they celebrated at one of those clubs where naked women writhe on the laps of fully clothed men. All the Rockets, including Clyde, married, single, black, white, with one exception. The exception was Hakeem Olajuwon because his Muslim faith prohibits physical contact with any woman not his wife. Of course so did the faith of the married Christian players but it did not stop them. So maybe it is Koran-thumpers who don't behave in this way?


----------



## Fork

crandc said:


> Disgusting lyrics? You mean like the Rolling Stones with "scarred old slaver knows he's doing all right, hear him whip the women just around midnight." Oh wait, they are not that "subculture", are they?
> 
> Because, to call things by their right names, it is not just poor black athletes who act contemptuously to women. Kobe Bryant grew up rich and in a strong family, right? What about John Rocker? White, Christian, went to bible schools. How about Larry Bird and (hell, just spaced on the name, former Red Sox with a road wife), white, Christian? Fact is, men with strong mothers may not have any fathers at all and respect women because they respect their mothers. Some men respect their strong mothers but no other women. Some bible thumping men hate and excoriate women. Some irreligious men are strongly pro-feminist. Most liberals, however, at least in theory support equality for women.
> 
> Racism only applies if what you mean, and clearly you do, is that this is something that Black men who are not Christian do, but that white men and Black Christians do not do.
> 
> Hey, do you know, when the Houston Rockets won their second title they celebrated at one of those clubs where naked women writhe on the laps of fully clothed men. All the Rockets, including Clyde, married, single, black, white, with one exception. The exception was Hakeem Olajuwon because his Muslim faith prohibits physical contact with any woman not his wife. Of course so did the faith of the married Christian players but it did not stop them. So maybe it is Koran-thumpers who don't behave in this way?


Anywhoooo...back to basketball.


----------



## hoojacks

Fork said:


> Anywhoooo...back to basketball.


Perhaps you should of also quoted iWatas.


----------



## HispanicCausinPanic

Man I never thought I'd say this but, lets get rid of em'! I've finally realized(it has obviously taken me longer than others) that we just need to get rid of Miles and Zbo! When we dumped bonzi and sheed I was upset. I now see that it was nessasary in order for this organization and city to move forward. I've always kinda just said,"oh well" when I'd here about this kind of stuff. Now with the great strides that the team has taken in the last few months trying to overhaul it's image, I've had enough. I like gangstas as much as the next guy(Ice Cube, Sheed, Q. Woods, Mike Rice)but enough is enough! We have to bite the bullet, and just get rid of these guys.
I'm not a fan of addition by subtraction, but I think that should be our next move. The trade value of the 2 aforementioned gangstas is obviously at it's lowest point, but we should be able to get some sort of value. If not, suck it up and move on. We have alot of young and impressionable young men on this squad, and this type of situation can only hurt the club. ADDITION BY SUBTRACTION!!!!


----------



## barfo

sa1177 said:


> National coverage associates Zbo with Portland and thus so do the masses...


This is of course correct, but why should anyone care? Zbo does not represent the city of Portland, and anyone who forms a negative opinion of a city because of a professional basketball player who plays there is a moron. 

There are a lot of morons out there, I agree, but we should be happy they think badly of Portland, maybe that will keep them away. We've got enough morons here already.

I would like to use the word "moron" a few more times in this post, but I'm too much of a moron to think of any more on this.

barfo


----------



## 9diamonds

I thought this would b his year


----------



## Iwatas

Typical liberal response -- anecdotal stories to try to ignore overwhelming evidence that kids from good families tend to be better people, more successful spouses and parents, etc. I won't even start on the ridiculous example of muslims treating women with respect. Have you seen the instructional videos on Saudi television which explain to a man how to beat his wife so that he doesn't break any bones and she can still do the chores? Can you imagine such a thing even on PBS?

But my point is even simpler: you wrote that it is our society that does not respect women. But this is not true -- only *some* segments of society treat women like dirt. And these segments are identifiable. It is not hard to correlate convicted rapists with lousy families or certain subcultures. Don't blame society or men in general for the way some people behave. 

iWatas


----------



## MARIS61

sa1177 said:


> Totally fine and I understand your stance because it is one many share with you, but keep in mind others do care about the reputation, character and persona of the athletes who they are fans of.
> ...


Let me again take this opportunity to thank said concerned fans for our pathetic record and high-school level talent pool.

Zach is our only decent PF, and until we can *replace* him with comparable TALENT, I'm fine with him.


----------



## Fork

Iwatas said:


> Typical liberal response -- anecdotal stories to try to ignore overwhelming evidence that kids from good families tend to be better people, more successful spouses and parents, etc. I won't even start on the ridiculous example of muslims treating women with respect. Have you seen the instructional videos on Saudi television which explain to a man how to beat his wife so that he doesn't break any bones and she can still do the chores? Can you imagine such a thing even on PBS?
> 
> But my point is even simpler: you wrote that it is our society that does not respect women. But this is not true -- only *some* segments of society treat women like dirt. And these segments are identifiable. It is not hard to correlate convicted rapists with lousy families or certain subcultures. Don't blame society or men in general for the way some people behave.
> 
> iWatas


Anywhoooo....back to basketball.


----------



## sa1177

MARIS61 said:


> Let me again take this opportunity to thank said concerned fans for our pathetic record and high-school level talent pool.
> 
> Zach is our only decent PF, and until we can *replace* him with comparable TALENT, I'm fine with him.


Duly noted...I suggest you go root for the team at the Oregon State Pen. they got some great ballers down there.


----------



## AudieNorris

If I did the things Zach has done, I'd no longer have a job. Zach should be traded since he can't be fired.




Iwatas said:


> -- only *some* segments of society treat women like dirt. And these segments are identifiable. It is not hard to correlate convicted rapists with lousy families or certain subcultures. Don't blame society or men in general for the way some people behave.
> 
> iWatas


Segments of society do not treat women like dirt. Individuals do. It spans all political parties, classes, races, and religions. To try to put a conservative/liberal spin on this issue is not responsible.


----------



## Ed O

sa1177 said:


> Duly noted...I suggest you go root for the team at the Oregon State Pen. they got some great ballers down there.


No they don't. I think that you would make this kind of comment shows how weak your position is.

I root for NBA-level basketball players. Their skill level is my priority.

You root for people that "represent the city" and claim that how their reputation is impacted is more important than how their ability to help the team win is affected.

I'm rooting for a sports team, and you're rooting for a bunch of men (that you don't know personally) to live up to some sort of good person standard...

If one of us should go find another team to root for, I think that you could find a team of nicer guys that play basketball much more easily than I could find a team of guys that play basketball at a higher level that are nice.

Ed O.


----------



## Ed O

AudieNorris said:


> If I did the things Zach has done, I'd no longer have a job.


I don't know what you do, but if you were one of the top 100 people in the world at what you do in an industry that generates billions of dollars in revenue, I would *guess* you'd still have a job.

Ed O.


----------



## wastro

Ed O said:


> I don't know what you do, but if you were one of the top 100 people in the world at what you do in an industry that generates billions of dollars in revenue, I would *guess* you'd still have a job.
> 
> Ed O.


Totally agreed. It always gets on my nerves when people make the comparison for pretty much the exact same reason you mentioned.


----------



## AudieNorris

Ed O said:


> I don't know what you do, but if you were one of the top 100 people in the world at what you do in an industry that generates billions of dollars in revenue, I would *guess* you'd still have a job.
> 
> Ed O.


OK, maybe I'd still have a job but it wouldn't be at my current position or employer.


----------



## BlazerCaravan

AudieNorris said:


> OK, maybe I'd still have a job but it wouldn't be at my current position or employer.



Exactly. Unless you're the #1 (not even #2) at your position, you're replaceable.


----------



## It's_GO_Time

Ed O said:


> I root for NBA-level basketball players. Their skill level is my priority.
> 
> Ed O.


It must be tough for you to remain a Blazer fan given the clearly stated agenda of the Blazers to not just seek out talent but character as well. Your preferance of talent being the top priority with little consideration to character runs contrary to the Blazer philosophy. I know it frustrates me at times.

Personally, I happen to weigh more heavily on the side of talent and "just win baby win" mentality, but can appreciate some balance and not just turning a blind eye to character. 

At some point do you get tired of hearing Zach's name associated with criminal investigations or is always who cares kind of thing?


----------



## crandc

Iwatas said:


> Typical liberal response -- anecdotal stories to try to ignore overwhelming evidence that kids from good families tend to be better people, more successful spouses and parents, etc. I won't even start on the ridiculous example of muslims treating women with respect. Have you seen the instructional videos on Saudi television which explain to a man how to beat his wife so that he doesn't break any bones and she can still do the chores? Can you imagine such a thing even on PBS?
> 
> But my point is even simpler: you wrote that it is our society that does not respect women. But this is not true -- only *some* segments of society treat women like dirt. And these segments are identifiable. It is not hard to correlate convicted rapists with lousy families or certain subcultures. Don't blame society or men in general for the way some people behave.
> 
> iWatas


Actually, I am not a liberal.

Facts are stubborn things, Iwatas.

Fact #1: A poll taken only about a month ago showed that those who call themselves fundamentalists are far more likely to say that women who are raped are to blame, that they "asked for it". In fact, among fundamentalist Christian ministers, a full 75% believe that women who are raped "asked for it". So much for religion, specifically Christian religion, being a determining factor of how one views violence aginst women.

Fact #2: Rape is not confined to any "subculture". Rape is a function of a number of factors, including status of women, individual and group attitudes towards women and power relationships. In wartime, invading armies are more likely to rape than defending armies. Slavemasters are notorious rapists and have been long before slavery in the US. And African American men are no more likely to be rapists than other American men. 

Fact #3: I did not say Islam is particularly respectful of women. I did say that Olajuwon at least lived by his faith - do not touch a woman not your wife - when those who claim Christianity did not. So that being a "bible thumper" does not equal treating women with respect.

Fact #4: An international study in 2004 compared a number of life and social issues in countries defined as secular (where there are large numbers who consider themselves atheist/agnostic and where those who are personally religious for the most part consider it a personal matter and believe the state should be secular, where the personal religious beliefs & practices of leaders are considered irrelevant) and those defined as religious (where the large majority of population are religious, where public policy has strong religious basisi and where leaders are expected to publicly observe the dominant faith). Among other things, the study found that crime is lower in secular countries and that in those countries women have made much greater strides towards equality.

Finally: not a fact, an admitted "I don't know". I don't know what Zach Randolph's personal religious views are. I don't know what his taste in music is. I don't know what kind of family he hails from. Do you? Or are you just assuming because it fits your stereotype?

I certainly know that there are many in society who believe strongly in gender (and racial and religious and sexual orientation and national origin etc.) equality. Are you one of them, iwatas? (They are rarely found among the very religious, although there are exceptions.) I never blamed "men" generally. But look around. Clearly despite all the gains women have made this is still a male dominated society, women are still seen as less than equal. And sex is most definitely a commodity. As long as those two things exist sexual violence will continue. To blame it on rap music is not only false, it is ridiculous. Who raped women before there was rap?


----------



## HispanicCausinPanic

Yeah...........what He Said!


----------



## barfo

For those keeping score at home, this thread is now the 7th most viewed thread ever in the Blazer forum. Only 700 more views and it'll pass the Kobe rape thread for 6th place.

barfo


----------



## The Sebastian Express

Rape is about power. To ever blame it on the victim is ridiculous. It has always been about power, it will always be about power. It is one of the single most humiliating and degrading things that can happen to a person, and when you humiliate and degrade someone, you gain power over them.


----------



## tradetheo

*I've had it with randolph.*

Jesus, how ****ing hard is it to stay out of trouble? I don't care if he did it or was a witness, he is at fault. if something happened, he needs to stop it and be an ADULT or not put himself in that position. He is not like everybody else, he is a celeb who woman will use to get money out of by doing whatever is necessary. Not all woman, but a lot of woman will do this sort of thing. He needs to quit being so idiotic and naive, pull his head out of his butt and think. There's no excuse this time for him, he has got to go. We need to get rid of the image not only for the blazers but for the game of basketball. The nba is just full of idiots right now who use their background for an excuse to do stupid things. I don't care if you're black and grew up in the ghetto, your mom still taught you right from wrong right? Think!


----------



## HispanicCausinPanic

barfo said:


> For those keeping score at home, this thread is now the 7th most viewed thread ever in the Blazer forum. Only 700 more views and it'll pass the Kobe rape thread for 6th place.
> 
> barfo


For us newer people, could you list the top 10 viewed threads ever. That's very interesting to me.


----------



## barfo

HispanicCausinPanic said:


> For us newer people, could you list the top 10 viewed threads ever. That's very interesting to me.


Sure, but you can check for yourself. Up at the top of the screen in the Blazer forum main page, where it lists the members currently viewing the forum? Look just to the left of that, and there is a section titled "Display Options".

Set these options:

Sorted by: Number of views
Sort order: decending
From : the beginning

Then click the 'show threads' button there.

barfo


----------



## Kmurph

> You started a new thread for this? Let me guess... because you thought you'd get more responses than if you just posted it in the big Zach thread?


Actually, no it had nothing to do with that...I just thought that it is an interesting debate regarding the "Zach is a follower" crowd, many of whom believe that if Miles presence were removed, then Zach would become this model citizen...and those who think (like me) that Zach is just a problem child, and that his issues and flirtations with breaking the law and team rules are a result of his poor character and not the nefarious influence of the evil Dr Darius....



> This "negativity" is meaningless. If he's found guilty of something? That's another matter. Merely being accused? Meaningless.



Well I can't say I am surprised by your "talent is all that matters" approach to NBA players...you have been spouting it for quite awhile now....All I CAN say is that I completely disagree with your opinion, and that it is just that type of mentality (talent trumps character) that lead the Blazers into this abyss in the first place...

I know...you disagree with that premise....and IMO your just plain wrong in your assesment...Zach is not Michael Jordan level talent...hell, he isn't even Allen Iverson level...He is a decent player on a lousy team...the guy hasn't even been an All Star..and IMO he isn't worth the trouble that he ROUTINELY seems to court.....

A criminal mastermind? Hardly, but I cannot deny (or ignore) his ability to be around the periphery of trouble...living vicariously through his "posse" so to speak...I equate it to getting drunk with your buddies, buying their drinks, having a grand time, but letting your "boys" drive your car home...b\c when the cops pull you over...He goes to jail, and you walk away unscathed...but hey, you had a hell of a good time , right?

Guys like that find themselves in trouble sooner or later...I would rather see the Blazers be ahead of the curve here, and deal him before he does screw up and the Blazers are left holding the bag...


----------



## barfo

HispanicCausinPanic said:


> For us newer people, could you list the top 10 viewed threads ever. That's very interesting to me.


The list doesn't actually make a whole lot of sense, in terms of importance of topics.

1) Telfair and his pillowcase gun
2) Shareef traded (not) to NJ
3) Davis & Dickau traded for Van Exel
4) Sheed traded
5) What do posters do for a living?
6) Kobe is a rapist
7) Zach is maybe a rapist
8) Redd to Blazers rumors
9) Sheed wins championship after trade
10) Should we draft Bargnani?

barfo


----------



## Samuel

Once again, partisan banter hijacks another thread. Thanks Zach!


----------



## BlazerFanFoLife

Wait what did Zach do wrong. LETS JUST WAIT FOR THE POLICE REPORT. OR ATLEAST AN OFFICIAL STATEMENT ON WHAT REALLY HAPPEND.


----------



## Ed O

Kiss_My_Darius said:


> It must be tough for you to remain a Blazer fan given the clearly stated agenda of the Blazers to not just seek out talent but character as well. Your preferance of talent being the top priority with little consideration to character runs contrary to the Blazer philosophy. I know it frustrates me at times.


It frustrates me, but I don't know if it's tough for me to remain a Blazer fan because of it... I don't mind having nice guys on the team, but I DO mind having a bad team.



> At some point do you get tired of hearing Zach's name associated with criminal investigations or is always who cares kind of thing?


It's always a "who cares" thing for me. If/when he's convicted of things, it bothers me, and a lot of even minor convictions would start to aggravate me.

But this, at this point? There could be a thousand of these and it wouldn't bother me in the least.

Ed O.


----------



## Iwatas

crandc said:


> Facts are stubborn things, Iwatas.


Sure. But you have to get them right for starters. All your assertions add up to a hill of beans next to my point that strong (and religious) families make for better kids.

http://www.townhall.com/columnists/MarkMAlexander/2006/06/16/fathers_linked_to_healthy_families
"According to the CDC, DoJ, DHHS and the Bureau of the Census, the 30 percent of children who live apart from their fathers will account for 63 percent of teen suicides, 70 percent of juveniles in state-operated institutions, 71 percent of high-school dropouts, 75 percent of children in chemical-abuse centers, 80 percent of rapists, 85 percent of youths in prison, and 85 percent of children who exhibit behavioral disorders. In addition, 90 percent of homeless and runaway children are from fatherless homes. In fact, children born to unwed mothers are 10 times more likely to live in poverty as children with fathers in the home."


In other words, counter to your baseless assertions of "fact", rapists are far LESS likely to come out of traditional mother-and-father homes. So yes, rape is more common in certain sub-cultures. I am astonished that this is even a controversial statement.

Facts, crandc, facts. Don't say that everyone is equally likely to commit rapes unless you know it is the truth. Black rapists are 0.5% of the prison population; whites are 0.7% (2002 BJS stats) -- so per capita, blacks are far MORE likely to be in prison for rape. You may argue that there are other reasons, that whites get off, etc. -- but the hard numbers suggest you are dead wrong. Rape is not something that everyone is equally likely to do. Nurture matters.




crandc said:


> I never blamed "men" generally. But look around. Clearly despite all the gains women have made this is still a male dominated society, women are still seen as less than equal.


Nonsense. You are just spouting the party line. Try some facts on for size:



> Girls make up 57 percent of straight-A students; boys make up 57 percent of high school dropouts.
> 
> In 1998, 48 percent of girls but only 40 percent of boys graduating from high school had completed the courses in English, social studies, science, math, and foreign languages recommended as a minimum by the National Commission on Excellence in Education. According to the National Center for Education Statistics, high school girls now outnumber boys in upper-level courses in algebra, chemistry, and biology; physics is the only subject in which males are still a majority.
> 
> * On the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) tests in 1996, 17-year-old girls, on average, outscored boys by 14 points in reading and 17 points in writing (on a scale of 0 to 500). While boys did better on the math and science tests, it was by margins of five and eight points, respectively.
> 
> * Women account for 56 percent of college enrollment in America. This is not due simply, as some feminists claim, to older women going back to school; among 1997 high school graduates, 64 percent of boys and 70 percent of girls went on to college. Female college freshmen are also more likely than men to get a degree in four years.
> 
> These differences do not cut across all racial and social lines. The gender gap in higher education has reached truly startling proportions among blacks. From 1977 to 1997, the number of bachelor's degrees awarded annually rose by 30 percent for black men but by 77 percent for black women; among 1996-97 college graduates, black women outnumbered men almost 2 to 1. The "man shortage" among college-educated blacks, which has contributed to tensions over interracial dating, is singled out as a "cause for concern" in the Urban League's recent report The State of Black America 1999.
> 
> Among non-Hispanic whites, women now receive 55 percent of bachelor's degrees. Feminists are correct when they say this imbalance is partly due to older women going back to school after growing up in an era when girls were expected to pursue the "MRS degree." In 1998, according to the Census Bureau, 48 percent of white college students under 35 were male. But for blacks and Hispanics, a female-to-male ratio of about 3 to 2 persists even when older students are excluded.
> 
> In many cases, the "college gap" indisputably reflects a trend toward more upward mobility for women. In a 1999 Rutgers Marriage Project study of sex and relationships among noncollege men and women under 30, David Popenoe and Barbara Dafoe Whitehead report that the women in their focus groups came across as more confident and responsible.
> 
> Today, for every 100 women who earn a bachelor's degree, just 73 men get one.


Apologies for the older data. The newer data is even more stark, but I lacked the time to find it in detail.

Women are doing just fine. The people getting most left behind are those from broken homes including black *men*. It is ludicrous to suggest that a culture which considers it wrong to "act white" by going to school has nothing to do with this. 

iWatas


----------



## Iwatas

The Sebastian Express said:


> Rape is about power. To ever blame it on the victim is ridiculous. It has always been about power, it will always be about power. It is one of the single most humiliating and degrading things that can happen to a person, and when you humiliate and degrade someone, you gain power over them.


If you walk down a dark alley while flashing $100, is it partially your fault if you get mugged? Is the mugger all about "power"? I think he wants the money.

If an attractive woman dresses to kill, and gets drunk amidst horny men, does sex occur because of "power"? Or because people are hardwired to want sex, and alcohol lowers inhibitions? Which is common sense?

iWatas


----------



## BealzeeBob

crandc said:


> Actually, I am not a liberal.
> 
> Fact #1: A poll taken only about a month ago showed that those who call themselves fundamentalists are far more likely to say that women who are raped are to blame, that they "asked for it". In fact, among fundamentalist Christian ministers, a full 75% believe that women who are raped "asked for it". So much for religion, specifically Christian religion, being a determining factor of how one views violence aginst women.


Do you have a link to that study? I'd be interested in what a Christian fundamentalist is defined as. I've know a fair number of ministers, and I've never met one that felt women who are raped "asked for it", unless there were some rare circumstances. Maybe I just don't know a fundamentalist.



> Fact #3: I did not say Islam is particularly respectful of women. I did say that Olajuwon at least lived by his faith - do not touch a woman not your wife - when those who claim Christianity did not. So that being a "bible thumper" does not equal treating women with respect.


To say that Islam isn't particularly respectful of women is a bit of an understatement, don't you think? Which of the other players at the strip club claimed to be a member of a Christian denomination that prohibits the touching of a women other than your wife?
[/QUOTE]

Go Blazers


----------



## It's_GO_Time

Canzano wrote an article today basically about legal consultation given to Blazer players. Apparently the consultation message was the police are not your friends.

It is a sad and distorted message to send to a bunch of young male millionaires . . . but I have to agree that if you are commiting crimes, the police are not your friends.


----------



## Reep

Kiss_My_Darius said:


> Canzano wrote an article today basically about legal consultation given to Blazer players. Apparently the consultation message was the police are not your friends.
> 
> It is a sad and distorted message to send to a bunch of young male millionaires . . . but I have to agree that if you are commiting crimes, the police are not your friends.


I had mixed feelings when reading the article. On the one hand, it bothered me to hear that, at least in part, the Blazers were telling their people "when you get caught doing something illegal, here's how you might be able to get away with at least part of it." That was very troublesome. However, on the other hand, I really didn't like Canzano's suggestion that civil rights aren't important and anyone who exercises their civil rights (by not cooperating) is doing someting wrong. 

Now, I am about as far from the left as anyone can be, but it bothers me when someone says that you are wrong to use the civil rights granted to you by our nation. I'm just not sure if Canzano's words or the Blazers bothered me more.


----------



## crandc

Since I don't want to continue way off topic, if anyone wants the source of the studies I cited, PM me.

(One final OT point: it is true that when the playing field levels women and girls surge forward. That is why a majority of college students are now female. But, post college, women continue to be paid less and kept in lower jobs. Look at the majorities in the US Senate/House of Reps, Supreme Court, Fortune 500 executives, major newspaper editors, university presidents. Overwhelmingly white and male. And 3 examples of attitudes towards women:

a. A question was asked in a national publication regarding whether it was appropriate for Hillary Clinton to campaign for the US Senate wearing a pantsuit rather than a skirt/dress. The reply was that pantsuits are appropriate business attire for women and besides Clinton's legs are "not her best feature". Does anyone recall any male Senate candidate being assessed on the appearance of his legs?
b. Time magazine recently covered the story of the US soldiers accused of raping and killing a 14 year old Iraqi girl and killing her family. The story began with speculation over whether the girl was "beautiful" and concluded she was "ordinary". Does anyone recall the opening paragraph in a story on a male crime victim being about his appearance?
c. The San Francisco Chronicle a week ago reported on a local dispute taking place in Eureka, CA. They interviewed the main parties in the dispute, 5 men and 1 woman. The woman was described as "a well coiffed willowy blond". None of the men's size, hair color or hair style was mentioned.

Meanwhile, men are still debating under what circumstances women must be forced to carry pregnancies to term against our will.)


----------



## e_blazer1

Kiss_My_Darius said:


> Canzano wrote an article today basically about legal consultation given to Blazer players. Apparently the consultation message was the police are not your friends.
> 
> It is a sad and distorted message to send to a bunch of young male millionaires . . . but I have to agree that if you are commiting crimes, the police are not your friends.


I don't want to be an apologist for bad actions by some Blazers players, but Canzano's column is more of his typical twisting things to make the point he wants to make...whether it's accurate or not. In the context of what was being discussed, a situation where a player (or anybody, for that matter) has been stopped by police for some alleged violation of a law, the advice that "the police are not your friends" is absolutely accurate. The police are there to do their job, which is to gather facts relating to the incident. You have no obligation to make their job easier by providing them with evidence that may incriminate you. They are not there to protect your rights or to put the best light on situation so that it favors you. That's the job of your attorney. 

Canzano's column makes it sound like this was the only advice given the players on legal matters and I have to call BS on that one. I can't imagine that the Blazers didn't also have plenty of discussions about players being responsible for obeying the law and staying out of trouble. 

I get a kick out of Canzano talking about the Oregonian's big ethical discussions about how to handle the reporting of the Randolph matter. Of course, in his column, Canzano doesn't mind dropping little unsubstantiated innuendoes like a rumored deal of Randolph for KMart being nixed early on "presumably" because the Nuggets are worried about Randolph's penchant for getting into off-court problems. While I'm certain that Zach's legal troubles are a factor to any team thinking about trading for him, Canzano is simply making things up here without any substantiation. Personally, I think the Blazers would be a little reluctant to take on KMart given his injury record and lack of production of late. In my view, ethics in journalism for sports columnists calls for reporting facts as facts and clearly identifying when you're veering into supposition and commentary. Canzano is sadly lacking in this area.

I don't know about the rest of you, but I'm really tired of the constant sniping and bickering going on between the Oregonian and the Blazers. Isn't it time that both entities realize that they need each other and start behaving in a responsible and professional manner?


----------



## Samuel

I'm interested to read today's Canzano article interview transcript. Sounds like he was quite meticulous in his transcription technique years ago.


----------



## Reep

crandc said:


> Since I don't want to continue way off topic,
> 
> Meanwhile, men are still debating under what circumstances women must be forced to carry pregnancies to term against our will.)


You obviously do mean to continue off topic. Your statements above are clearly emotionally based on your feelings. The factual content is lacking. 

If you want to continue off topic (I don't recommend it) then please address what percent of women (even well educated women, gasp) choose to stay home (by their own choice, not chained in the basement) to raise families? And what effect do you think that has on your conclusions.

Second, explain how it that men (exclusively, by your statement) are the only one's interested in the life of a baby? How do you explain your ignoring of women who make up the other half of the pro-life movement? I guess it is okay to ignore those women because they don't matter.

I can't believe those awful men are at it again. First they recognize the rights of African-Americans to exist and not be slaves (can you believe that?) and now they want a fully sustainable baby to actually have the right to live? Those barbarians.


----------



## Mr. Chuck Taylor

If I owned the Blazers, I sure as heck would have my team educated on what to do at a police stop. Do you want the players to keep handing the cops their basketball cards as I.D.? Of course you never want them to get into a situation like that, but if it happens, why not have them prepared? Especially when the image of a NBA team is on the line - a lot of money is at stake.


----------



## Ed O

crandc said:


> Meanwhile, men are still debating under what circumstances women must be forced to carry pregnancies to term against our will.)


And women are still debating how fast I can drive, what drugs I can put into my body, and what kind of porn I can watch!

Laws are crazy like that sometimes.

Ed O.


----------



## Mr. Chuck Taylor

Ed O said:


> Why is his reputation as a man even relevant?
> 
> He's a basketball player. He's paid to play basketball. The only reason any of us know he exists is because he's tall and an excellent, excellent player of the sport.
> 
> If and when he commits crime that impacts his ability to play basketball, then that's what should matter. He hasn't done that to date (that we know of) and he hasn't even been charged here.
> 
> Ed O.


Even if you are of the opinion that talent is all that matters on the court, I still think it's naive to completely dismiss the relevancy of a player's reputation. A player's reputation affects his trade value around the league, which in turn affects the talent level of the team, which affects how many games you win. It affects the fan support of the team, which in turn affects the ownership situation (which is especially important in our situation). Those are big enough reasons for me to care about a player's reputation.


----------



## Reep

Ed O said:


> And women are still debating how fast I can drive, what drugs I can put into my body, and what kind of porn I can watch!
> 
> Laws are crazy like that sometimes.
> 
> Ed O.


You are gifted at knowing how to make a point.


----------



## BlazerFanFoLife

there is a study that showed that a higher percentage of women were content at being in the back seat and not at the top of the food chain while more men are willing to be in the spot light and do what it takes. If more men try to be CEO's and Congressmen then there will be more male CEO's and Congressmen. I read a study in school if its important to you, search on google. It had scientific evidance on why and everything


----------



## isabel322

ptownblazer1 said:


> If this story or rumor was true...this would probably be breaking news! I think the story is false...and I have no idea if it were true, why the Portland media would be waiting for this story to develop?!


You probably have seen this by now, but it's in today's Oregonian (8/23) Canzano's column is on it. 
Not all the facts are out yet but it's clear to me Zbo is from the Qyntel Woods school of Punkdom. 
He and Miles are the twin towers of idiocy.


----------



## ebott

Mr. Chuck Taylor said:


> Even if you are of the opinion that talent is all that matters on the court, I still think it's naive to completely dismiss the relevancy of a player's reputation. A player's reputation affects his trade value around the league, which in turn affects the talent level of the team, which affects how many games you win. It affects the fan support of the team, which in turn affects the ownership situation (which is especially important in our situation). Those are big enough reasons for me to care about a player's reputation.


Good valid points. But the point that dismisses all of this is that the only thing anyone REALLY cares about is winning.

What I really worry about with guys that have bad reputations is how much their disorganized and dangerous off the court life style affects how they approach the game. Up until this off season I would have said that the lack of preparation and common sense in Zach's day to day life is directly reflected in how he approaches basketball. But he's really impressed me with the way he's dedicated himself to improving this summer. 

My hope is that same kind of detailed approach to basketball related activities will one day translate to how he lives his off the court life. And then we won't see any more of this police blotter crap with Zach because he'll pay attention to the details that will keep him out of trouble.


----------



## Oldmangrouch

Reputations are like 30 second news stories on TV. At best, they are incomplete.

The BTK killer had an impecable reputation. So did the Green River killer. The reverse happens just as easily.

I never thought I would say this, but I kind of admire the LA fans! At least they gave Kobe the benefit of "innocent until proven guilty".

Now, before you leap for the "reply" button to tell me that Kobe is a great player and Zach isn't......stop and think REAL HARD. What possible relevance does that have to the discussion?


----------



## Ed O

Oldmangrouch said:


> I never thought I would say this, but I kind of admire the LA fans! At least they gave Kobe the benefit of "innocent until proven guilty".
> 
> Now, before you leap for the "reply" button to tell me that Kobe is a great player and Zach isn't......stop and think REAL HARD. What possible relevance does that have to the discussion?


I bet a lot of people that are pissed Zach might be involved in this situation also thinks that Kobe is guilty, so an argument that restraint on the part of the LAL fans until the case was decided might fall on deaf ears, OMG...

Ed O.


----------



## e_blazer1

Nobody knows what Zach is accused of doing other than the reported legal, but stupid, decision on his part to pay a couple of women to perform a sex act in a hotel room in front of him and a buddy. If that's all it is, I'll simply shake my head and add it to the list of things that I don't like about Zach's off-court behavior and move along. Legal off-court activities, whether I approve of the behavior or not, are none of my business, IMO. 

That said, let's take it another level and say that Zach, like Kobe, ends up being accused of a sex crime. In that instance I suspect that Blazers fans will have a range of their responses. One group will be ready to toss Zach in the slammer and throw away the key just on the presumption that he's probably guilty because of his past behavior. Another group will take the generally accepted position that a person is innocent until proved guilty. Others, perhaps, will take the position that Zach is simply too much trouble, guilty or not, that such off-court behavior is disruptive to the success of the team, and that the Blazers should dump him. I suspect that it is the last position that differentiates Zach's case from Kobe's. Zach has a record of off-court legal problems that Kobe did not. 

As for OMG's argument that skill level shouldn't be a factor in this matter, I'll say that I agree. However, don't you think that maybe that argues against some Laker fans for their decision to blindly profess Kobe's innocence prior to his case being dismissed? Had Kobe been a second string role player, I doubt that the support would have been as overwhelming.


----------



## Gunner

I just read Canzanos column and its another fine example of him using opinionism,innuendos & spin doctoring to smear the Blazer org. A _responsible_ journalist _without an agenda_ IMO would have also included some mention of what they tell the team re staying OUT of trouble to begin with. And its a nobrainer that they do just that. I would like nothing more than to see a disclaimer printed with each Canzano column,that states something along the lines that...:"The OPINIONS expressed here are just that,OPINIONS and are not based on FACT or factual evidence". After all, hes already stated that himself hasn't he? Email,telephone,letter writing campaign? 



> Kindergarten teachers tell their students that the police are our friends. Parents tell kids, if in trouble, find the first person in uniform, because they're here to help. But when it comes to the Blazers, somehow, the "Serve and Protect" message got fuzzed up.


That is one of the most inane things I'v ever read,even in a Canzano column! We'r not talking about kindergarten "students" here,we'r talking about adults(even though some do not conduct themselves accordingly). If a Blazer was to have somehow got separated from his mommie & daddy at the mall,or a stranger tried to entice them into a car with offers of candy, I would certainly hope that they would seek out a person in uniform for help. 



> When the officer informed Randolph that not cooperating could have an effect on his concealed weapons permit for the two guns they already knew were locked inside the vehicle, according to the report, Randolph responded, "You gotta do what you need to do."


The officer mis-informed Zach in that instant. Merely not co-operating after he told them that he didn't know who had the keys would not have any effect on his CHL. IF he was found guilty of a crime and convicted,then he would be ordered to surrender his CHL. This is a prime example of why you should not take at face value everything the police tell you and have an attourney present.



> The lawyers told the Blazers that if it were the middle of the night, and police were instructing a player that he could either let them search or wait a couple of hours to get a warrant, well, make them wake up a judge and get the warrant.This prompted a second veteran Blazers player to make a "Just Say No" joke, which caused the room to bust up giggling.





> he third meeting you need to know about went down Monday afternoon in the fourth floor conference room of The Oregonian. Senior editors met with reporters working Day No. 6 of the latest story involving Randolph.t began with someone at one end of the room asking, "What do we know?" This was followed by a lengthy discussion about ethics, journalism, fairness, basic decency and some of the details of the police investigation involving Randolph.


I'm assuming at some time during the discussion _about ethics, journalism, fairness, and basic decency_ a veteran sports columnist piped up with,"Just Say No",causing the entire room to bust up giggling.


----------



## The Sebastian Express

> If you walk down a dark alley while flashing $100, is it partially your fault if you get mugged? Is the mugger all about "power"? I think he wants the money.
> 
> If an attractive woman dresses to kill, and gets drunk amidst horny men, does sex occur because of "power"? Or because people are hardwired to want sex, and alcohol lowers inhibitions? Which is common sense?
> 
> iWatas


More money equals power. The mugger chooses to exert his/her power and take something that is not his/hers. Flashing your money is annoying, and stupid, but it is not an open invitation to have it taken from you. Maybe have people roll their eyes at you, but not have it physically taken from you against your will.

Your second scenario is dicey. You use sex, not rape. If she never says no, then it is consensual. The minute she says no and they continue, no matter how drunk either party is, it is rape. It doesn't matter how much someone teased you and got you worked up, you must stop. Immediately. I imagine in most scenarios where both parties are extremely drunk, and someone hears 'no, stop', they get pissed off. Then it is about power. 

I had the great misfortune of hearing my Bible teacher, when in eighth grade, tell a class full of thirty girls that fifty percent of the time a woman gets raped it is their fault. That is an insane and horrible message to send to young girls. 

People are hardwired to have sex, but people are also hard wired to have self control and know when no means no. Whether they choose to use their self control when someone says no, well, if they don't, there are consequences. 

If a woman says no, you may be a bit pissed or even a lot, but it doesn't matter. This goes the same if a guy says no, because men do get raped. You simply say, 'fine', leave and go uh.. release some tension yourself or with another willing party.

It's like asking if someone walks around Los Angeles wearing blue, and a Blood member kills them. Did that person deserve to be shot, because he wore opposing gang colors unknowingly?

In regards to Randolph's situation, I have no idea what to think. I've seen people post that allegedly Zach was approached twice and asked for money to keep his name out of it. That sends off a flashing red sign infront of me. I can't speak for these women, and I can't speak for Zach and his friend. I sincerely hope that no one was assaulted against their will, and if they were, I hope the attacker is punished to the maximum. But if someone really did approach Zach and asked for money, then it would appear that this is a scheme to get rich quick. And I hope it is not so, because all it does is hurt women who do come forward with rape.


----------



## Masbee

Ed O said:


> And women are still debating how fast I can drive, what drugs I can put into my body, and what kind of porn I can watch!
> 
> Laws are crazy like that sometimes.
> 
> Ed O.


Ed O. watches porn?!?!


----------



## southnc

Until the facts come out (whenever they do), you have to presume Zach is innocent.

However, one thing is clear: ZBo is doing a lousy job of picking his friends. Hanging out with the wrong crowd is a one-way ticket to disaster. Especially when you have money (lots of) and popularity. Many athletes, from Mercury Morris to Len Bias, were brought down by hanging with bad-intensioned "friends."

This guy clearly needs a mentor to help him fly the straight and narrow, before it's too late. And, if the upcoming facts prove disasterous, it may already be too late.


----------



## It's_GO_Time

Maybe I'm missing the something here (as is evident by my posts in this thread), but law enforcement is not always the enemy. I don't understand the blanket statement that poilce are not your friends. If you are involved in wrong doing then, clearly, police are not your friends. But if you are not doing anything wrong besides a traffic infraction, what is the harm of cooperating with the police?

A real life example is I got stopped for speeding late night. The officer must have thought I was up to something because he wanted to search my car. I told him that I would allow him to search my car (knowing he had no legal right to) if he didn't write me up for speeding. He said if he could search the car and trunk and found nothing, he wouldn't write me up. I allowed him to search (about 15 minutes), he found nothing and let me go.

I just don't think police are out there to create bogus charges against people. I know I'm going to get called naive on this, but I have had many dealings with law enforcement both professionally and socially.

I have no problem and in fact think it is a good idea to teach the Blazer what their constitutional rights are and how to properly exercise them. But I have big problems if the Blazers are teaching to not cooperate under any circumstances becuase the police are the enemy.


----------



## furball

Kiss_My_Darius said:


> Maybe I'm missing the something here (as is evident by my posts in this thread), but law enforcement is not always the enemy. I don't understand the blanket statement that poilce are not your friends. If you are involved in wrong doing then, clearly, police are not your friends. But if you are not doing anything wrong besides a traffic infraction, what is the harm of cooperating with the police?
> 
> A real life example is I got stopped for speeding late night. The officer must have thought I was up to something because he wanted to search my car. I told him that I would allow him to search my car (knowing he had no legal right to) if he didn't write me up for speeding. He said if he could search the car and trunk and found nothing, he wouldn't write me up. I allowed him to search (about 15 minutes), he found nothing and let me go.
> 
> I just don't think police are out there to create bogus charges against people. I know I'm going to get called naive on this, but I have had many dealings with law enforcement both professionally and socially.
> 
> I have no problem and in fact think it is a good idea to teach the Blazer what their constitutional rights are and how to properly exercise them. But I have big problems if the Blazers are teaching to not cooperate under any circumstances becuase the police are the enemy.


Completely agree with this post. Police are not the enemy. Excuses are. If you constantly tell people the police are not their friend, they are going to naturally grow up thinking that. It's the same thing for adults. If people are told that the police are out to get them, they are going to have negative thoughts. You basically give people excuses to use when they get in trouble.


----------



## ebott

furball said:


> Police are not the enemy.


Going way off topic here.

What the hell country do you live in? We don't live in Norway or Japan. We live in the United States of America. A country that is chock full of violence for no good reason. Other countries say that violence isn't the answer. For most Americans it's the first option. 

The police are no exception. If you look around you'll find that violence is the rule with the cops. They shoot/beat first and ask questions later.

Not that I blame them. They see a lot of ****ed up ****. After a while you just get used to it. And you assume that everyone you come in contact with is trying to pull something. That's why so many cops get divorced or stay single their whole lives. They try to be normal people. But it just doesn't work out.

And I'm a middle class white guy. I can't imagine how poor black folks see the police.


----------



## SheedSoNasty

ebott said:


> And I'm a middle class white guy. I can't imagine how poor black folks see the police.


... I think you just added another 100 posts to this thread.

(just a heads up)


----------



## ProudBFan

southnc said:


> Until the facts come out (whenever they do), you have to presume Zach is innocent.
> 
> However, one thing is clear: ZBo is doing a lousy job of picking his friends. Hanging out with the wrong crowd is a one-way ticket to disaster. Especially when you have money (lots of) and popularity. Many athletes, from Mercury Morris to Len Bias, were brought down by hanging with bad-intensioned "friends."
> 
> This guy clearly needs a mentor to help him fly the straight and narrow, before it's too late. And, if the upcoming facts prove disasterous, it may already be too late.


I seriously hope no one here is the least bit surprised by this news: Zach does not WANT to fly straight and narrow. He wants to get away with as much as he absolutely can, while he can. He is headed down the EXACT same path as Rider, and soon (if it hasnt happened already) one poor decision is going to cost him everything.

I actually feel sorry for Zach... but not sorry enough to hope he remains a Blazer. But if he does, they seriously NEED to throw him a nice, long blanket party.

What the hell happened to Zach Randolph, the hard-working rising star of 3 years ago? Because this clown is a joke.

PBF
PS: And dont tell me I have to presume Zach is innocent. That line of thinking is reserved for courts of law. This is the court of public opinion, and where theres smoke, theres fire. Its been swirling around Zach for a while now. (Sorry, the apostrophe key on this keyboard doesnt work.)


----------



## ProudBFan

ebott said:


> No, way over the top would have been creating a little flash page that had Zach stabbing someone.
> 
> Honestly, if Zach ever actually did something really bad (rape, murder, dog fighting, etc.) I'd probably be upset about it. But none of the "trouble" he's been in is even close.


Curious to know how you are feeling about Zach now, ebott.

PBF


----------



## ryanjend22

mediocre man said:


> Zach doesn't have anything close to a "good name"
> 
> 1. Sucker punched Ruben Patterson and broke his eye socket while Patterson was being held by other players
> 
> 2. Lied to police about his brother shooting someone, and was with his brother when it happened
> 
> 3. Cited for street racing
> 
> 4. Pulled over for suspicion of driving under the influence, heavy weed smell in the car
> 
> 5. Smelled like weed at a Blazers Christmas ornament event for kids
> 
> 6. Arrested as a youth for shoplifting
> 
> 7. Arrested as a youth for battery
> 
> 8. Arrested as a youth for possessing stolen property including guns, one of which he sold.
> 
> 9. Like it or not but Zach and Qyntel Woods both had pit bulls, and I know for a fact....yes a fact that he was involved in all that dog fighting that went down. Not directly, but was involved.
> 
> 
> 
> Now please tell me again how the Portland police are doing harm to Randolph's "good name"?


agreed.

zach is an idiot. i like him, but he is no leader or respectable individual.


----------



## Mr. Chuck Taylor

ProudBFan said:


> And dont tell me I have to presume Zach is innocent. That line of thinking is reserved for courts of law. This is the court of public opinion, and where theres smoke, theres fire. Its been swirling around Zach for a while now. (Sorry, the apostrophe key on this keyboard doesnt work.)


In your court of public opinion, PBF, what is Zach guilty of?


----------



## It's_GO_Time

Mr. Chuck Taylor said:


> In your court of public opinion, PBF, what is Zach guilty of?



I don't know what he is guilty of, but he is gulity of something. On the court, Zach has shown his dedication to the game. Off the court Zach is a thug and a liar. He is into guns, dog fights, running around with people who disregard the law, and shows a complete disrespect of his responsiblities as the highest paid player on the team.

My court of public opinion says Zach doesn't care if what he does is legal or not, he just cares if he gets caught.

All that being said, I don't want to see him traded unless it improves the team.


----------



## Mr. Chuck Taylor

Kiss_My_Darius said:


> I don't know what he is guilty of, but he is gulity of something. On the court, Zach has shown his dedication to the game. Off the court Zach is a thug and a liar. He is into guns, dog fights, running around with people who disregard the law, and shows a complete disrespect of his responsiblities as the highest paid player on the team.
> 
> My court of public opinion says Zach doesn't care if what he does is legal or not, he just cares if he gets caught.
> 
> All that being said, I don't want to see him traded unless it improves the team.


I agree...it just sounded like PBF was already finding Zach guilty for this instance. I think this reaffirms our beliefs that he is trouble off the court, but you can't call him guilty for any crime yet.


----------



## It's_GO_Time

Mr. Chuck Taylor said:


> I agree...it just sounded like PBF was already finding Zach guilty for this instance. I think this reaffirms our beliefs that he is trouble off the court, but you can't call him guilty for any crime yet.



I'll even take it a step further and guess (based on what's out there) that Zach didn't commit a sexual assualt. I'm guessing the friend probabaly didn't commit a sexual assualt (as defined by law).

My stab in the dark: a sex fest in the hotel that went bad by either Zach not paying enough (or what the women thought they should have been paid) or that the friend got rougher than the woman expected and it turned into the women thinking she was wronged . . . asking for money to make it right and then taking it to the police when Zach wouldn't compenstate them for the "wrong doing".

I tend to think that the woman would not have taken it to the police unless she was really upset, felt that she was wronged and wasn't going to stand for it v. just taking it to the police because the threat didn't pan out. Of course there is always the possibility she was sexually assualted.

I love to speculate. :biggrin:


----------



## mook

man, this thread is brutal. page after page of basically no facts beyond:

a. Randolph hired some women to have sex. 

b. Randolph hired a lawyer. 

if I missed something in there, somebody please add to the list. it's too dreary for me to want to devote much time to.


----------



## barfo

mook said:


> man, this thread is brutal. page after page of basically no facts beyond:
> 
> a. Randolph hired some lawyers to have sex.


barfo


----------

