🏀DONALD STERLING🏀
Forums › General Discussion › 🏀DONALD STERLING🏀-
〓 CRͣAͩCͩKA 〓 wrote:
Ha...didn't notice that. Seems racist, sterling isn't pure so he has to go. I smell a comeback, based on purity discrimination.Silver bans Sterling - sounds ironic or some word like that...
(Please read in your most sarcastic tone)
-
Reading espn insider earlier. 0% chance they can make him sale the team. It goes to a civil court and the tape won't be admitted since he didn't know he was being recorded. He will automatically sue because that tape that was illegally made will force him to sale at a lower profit. I do not agree at all with what he said, but he will retain ownership as long as he wants.
-
Hasn't he owned the team for like 30 years?
-
★ʗℝ₳ℤㄚℝㅌⅆℕⅇʗҜ★ wrote:
✊you should run for office! People are always crying over nothing and expecting everyone else to walk on egg shells. Racism works both ways. Sometimes people just say stupid things. Sometimes it's even derogatory to their own race. Why is that ok?Here's an opinion you may not wanna hear but it's mine and here goes. America is too sensitive. The constitution protects us from everything but sensitivity. The government and law makers know this, so why not exploit it?? Your feelings get hurt, what do we do as a people?? We cry about it. Then we seek restitution, then usually we get it... I think this crap needs to stop and for everyone to quit being whiny pussies and mind their own business. But being a nibshit is becoming the American way. Well if you are an asshole and happen to cross my path you will hear nothing but the truth no sugar coating here. Then you can deal with hearing the truth...
-
Supposedly he knew he was being recorded:
"Sources who have heard the entire hourlong recording say Sterling absolutely knew he was being recorded. TMZ Sports has reported Stiviano has said she has more than 100 hours of recorded conversations with the 80-year-old Sterling, who is said to have used the tapes to refresh his memory because he frequently forgot what he said."
Doesn't matter anyway, he won't be sued in civil court, at least not by the league, so the rules of evidence will never come in to play. He could sue them for using in admissible evidence to fire him, but the rules of evidence don't apply in a league boardroom meeting. I do agree that they have no power to force him to sell, though.
http://touch.latimes.com/#section/-1/article/p2p-80046733/
-
You have a right to say and think what you want when you want. But the reaction you get from that is not up to you. If you wish to spew garbage out of your mouth then expect people to try and take you to the dump.
-
⌖Ѵαямιт😱ᵙǥͨ wrote:
Exactly this. People are saying "oh he's being shit on for having an opinion"You have a right to say and think what you want when you want. But the reaction you get from that is not up to you. If you wish to spew garbage out of your mouth then expect people to try and take you to the dump.
Well if you wanna voice that opinion do it silently. In your car or something. Plus he's a known bigot already anyway. Now it finally caught up to him in a way that he can't hide from or bullshit his way out of. -
ᎷᎪᏟᏦᎷᎬᏟᎻ wrote:
California is a 2 party consent state. That means that any confidential conversation must have the consent of all parties to be admissible in court. To be confidential, it must be objectively reasonable to assume that nobody is listening in. These can't be resolved by the media circus, the court would make the determination of whether it is admissible evidence. Whether he was aware or not is not the issue. What matters is consent and expectation of privacy. It's not a hard and fast rule. If this case somehow got to a court system, and the court decided that the league could force the sale of the team, then he will receive fair market value for the sale, TBD by a 3rd party. The recording would not even be at issue.It goes to a civil court and the tape won't be admitted since he didn't know he was being recorded. He will automatically sue because that tape that was illegally made will force him to sale at a lower profit.
-
★ʗℝ₳ℤㄚℝㅌⅆℕⅇʗҜ★ wrote:
👆Real talk right there! No one said in his personal life he has to like black people. It was a private phone call. This to me goes to far and is out of control. Why blow up some shit they've known about for years over a PRIVATE phone call. Shit these men need to get some confidentiality contracts on these side pieces of ass! And how is it that no one is saying shit about the fact that his black/Mexican chick still fucked with him anyways knowing that he's prejudiced?! Ratttttcccchhhettt Ho!Here's an opinion you may not wanna hear but it's mine and here goes. America is too sensitive. The constitution protects us from everything but sensitivity. The government and law makers know this, so why not exploit it?? Your feelings get hurt, what do we do as a people?? We cry about it. Then we seek restitution, then usually we get it. Then we destroy a person or people lives and or livelihood .
-
I'm in the Snoop Dogg camp on this one...
http://instagram.com/p/nQn7sxv9Cr/ -
₭íƖʛɵяȩ🐟Ƭяøϋʈ wrote:
KT, holy ####! Words out of mouth = taken.I'm in the Snoop Dogg camp on this one...
http://instagram.com/p/nQn7sxv9Cr/Quoting NWA while wearing a red fur jacket? My kind of guy. ❤
-
₭íƖʛɵяȩ🐟Ƭяøϋʈ wrote:
Hahaha™I'm in the Snoop Dogg camp on this one...
http://instagram.com/p/nQn7sxv9Cr/ -
People who think this is just about a phone call or simply a guy's opinion need to read the whole story. Truth is he should never have been allowed into the NBA in the first place, what with his history of judgements against him for unlawful racial discrimination in his business practices. This apparently was the final straw. I agree that a man has a right to a hateful opinion, he even has the right to act on it within the law. But the other team owners and the league also have every right to not be associated with that. Should we now be forced to be in business with people whose reputations are bad for business, just in the name of not being too sensitive or PC? Fuck that. I'll disassociate myself from any prick I want to and for any reason. THAT is freedom.
-
Wonder if the forced sale has to be unanimous among owners or simple majority? (Still believe it will never happen)
-
ᎷᎪᏟᏦᎷᎬᏟᎻ ᎪᎠᎠ ᏦᎷ wrote:
I think it may be more about strong arming. I don't know enough to say. Maybe when they buy a team they go into a contract with it. You know, similar to an HOA. No telling.Wonder if the forced sale has to be unanimous among owners or simple majority? (Still believe it will never happen)
-
ᎷᎪᏟᏦᎷᎬᏟᎻ ᎪᎠᎠ ᏦᎷ wrote:
Wonder if the forced sale has to be unanimous among owners or simple majority? (Still believe it will never happen)
22 of the 29 other owner are required
-
I believe that if you are a fast food franchise owner they can simply refund your franchise fees and tell you to stop using their logos and marketing materials. If NBA franchises are structured similarly, Sterling could be presented with the choice between either selling the team for fair market value or being stuck with a basketball squad that is no longer associated with the NBA and plays in no league games.
-
If dude didn't want black people around, he shoulda bought a hockey team.
-
http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/legally-nba-ban-is-likely-a-done-deal-team-sale-is-a-more-complicated-matter/2014/04/29/2b4217c0-cfd3-11e3-a6b1-45c4dffb85a6_story.html
-
Boner Jams '03 wrote:
If dude didn't want black people around, he shoulda bought a hockey team.
Post of the year! 😂😂😂😂
-
Two quick questions:
1. What happens if Sterling shows up at a game?
2. Can he sue TMZ? -
I dunno. There's more to it than that. Clearly they love the game and want to finish the season. Why let a bad apple spoil your dreams? IMO, striking would be more about the money. Now, playing is rising up and saying that bigot isn't going to bring me down. There's a time and place for things. Personally I'd have less respect for them if they sat it out over this particular issue. He's a nasty old man, and not worth another thought from those players. If they did that then they are giving him the power. Naw, screw that.
-
ᎷᎪᏟᏦᎷᎬᏟᎻ ᎪᎠᎠ ᏦᎷ wrote:
Two quick questions:
1. What happens if Sterling shows up at a game?
2. Can he sue TMZ?1. Whatever the NBA bylaws say should happen to a banned person if they show up.
2. Sue them for what? It's not considered libel or slander if it's true.
-
★fnord★ wrote:
ᎷᎪᏟᏦᎷᎬᏟᎻ ᎪᎠᎠ ᏦᎷ wrote:
Two quick questions:
1. What happens if Sterling shows up at a game?
2. Can he sue TMZ?1. Whatever the NBA bylaws say should happen to a banned person if they show up.
2. Sue them for what? It's not considered libel or slander if it's true.
1. Fair enough
2. What if he can prove it was recorded without consent? Does that make them an accessory or liable or anything? -
California penal code sections 630-638, cover recording without consent. I just scanned over them, but looks like $2500 max fine and not more than 1 year in jail for first offense. Subsequent offenses, fines up to $10,000, but still only up to one year in jail.
I don't see a prosecutor taking a case like that to court unless there is a confession.
-
ᎷᎪᏟᏦᎷᎬᏟᎻ ᎪᎠᎠ ᏦᎷ wrote:
I believe the only person that can be held liable is the one who made the recording. Also, the threshold for a public figure to claim defamation is higher than for a private citizen:1. Fair enough
2. What if he can prove it was recorded without consent? Does that make them an accessory or liable or anything?
"A public figure (such as a politician, celebrity, or business leader) cannot base a lawsuit on incorrect harmful statements unless there is proof that the writer or publisher acted with actual malice (knowledge of falsity or reckless disregard for the truth)." -
If journalists could be prosecuted for reporting the truth it would be farewell to what little corporate and government transparency we have left.
-
I don't condone what he said, but what happened to our first amendment right, freedom of speech? It protects the bad as well as the good...just sayin!
-
Cazzo wrote:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.I don't condone what he said, but what happened to our first amendment right, freedom of speech? It protects the bad as well as the good...just sayin!
The first amendment prohibits govt activity. How is the govt involved here?
-
★〓🔥⌖ Víper ⌖🔥〓★ wrote: I agree with what Mark Cuban said. Forcing him to sell for a difference of opinion (that's essentially what this is, no matter how wrong his opinion may be) opens the door for the league to kick out other owners for other reasons.
"But regardless of your background, regardless of the history they have, if we're taking something somebody said in their home and we're trying to turn it into something that leads to you being forced to divest property in any way, shape or form, that's not the United States of America. I don't want to be part of that."
Absolutely agree, how many times have any of us said something in the privacy of our own homes that isnt correct within the means of society. The man is a pig anyway, married and cheating with his half hispanic and black girlfriend, give me a break.
![[][]](https://turfwarsapp.com/img/app/ajax-forbutton.gif)
Purchase Respect Points NEW! · Support · Turf Map · Terms · Privacy
©2021 MeanFreePath LLC