12 minutes ago, Soxbadger said:

This is the exact reason why he had to plead guilty and take the deal. Even though all of the evidence suggests he is innocent, you adamantly say he is a child molester without any fact that supports your conclusion.

/shrugs

And that's why I didn't even bother to argue that point. I still think the value is too good to pass up.

1 hour ago, Dam8610 said:

Why draft Singer at 4 when you can draft Heimlich likely in the 11th round? Better stats, better grades, bigger need because he's a LHSP, and Madrigal has a 70 grade hit tool, those don't come through the draft that often, and they're usually taken 1-1.

I will pass on the molester in any round.

Sorry is a lawyer actually arguing the veracity of a polygraph test?

Put it this way: if the child abused was your daughter, I highly doubt you would think that a professional baseball team should draft the kid. Why does that matter? Because sometimes we can detach ourselves from the reality of despicable actions. Putting ourselves in the shoes of the parents of the abused child changes the perspective. 

 

No way no how should the Sox pick him. Period. End of story. 

21 minutes ago, Soxbadger said:

This is the exact reason why he had to plead guilty and take the deal. Even though all of the evidence suggests he is innocent, you adamantly say he is a child molester without any fact that supports your conclusion.

/shrugs

Not to derail this thread any further, but what is all this evidence that suggests he is innocent and why did he ever accept a plea deal if so much favorable evidence existed?

1 minute ago, southsider2k5 said:

I will pass on the molester in any round.

Surprising, you aren't usually one to ignore value for meathead reasons.

Just now, Dam8610 said:

Surprising, you aren't usually one to ignore value for meathead reasons.

If that makes me a meathead, so be it.  I will also pass on a lot of other criminals out there.  Those aren't the people I want leading my organization publicly.

1 minute ago, Chicago White Sox said:

Not to derail this thread any further, but what is all this evidence that suggests he is innocent and why did he ever accept a plea deal if so much favorable evidence existed?

Innocent people take plea deals to expedite the processing of the legal system all the time in America.

1 minute ago, southsider2k5 said:

If that makes me a meathead, so be it.  I will also pass on a lot of other criminals out there.  Those aren't the people I want leading my organization publicly.

Please find his criminal record.

1 minute ago, Dam8610 said:

Innocent people take plea deals to expedite the processing of the legal system all the time in America.

Not when they have overwhelming evidence that suggests they are innocent.

Just now, Chicago White Sox said:

Not when they have overwhelming evidence that suggests they are innocent.

Yes, they do, for a variety of reasons. Mainly so that they can get out of jail.

5 minutes ago, Dam8610 said:

Surprising, you aren't usually one to ignore value for meathead reasons.

Calling someone a meathead because they don’t want to draft someone who at bare minimum pleaded guilty to molesting a six year old child seems a bit egregious.

1 minute ago, Dam8610 said:

Yes, they do, for a variety of reasons. Mainly so that they can get out of jail.

But when you have all the evidence to prove your innocence why are you even worried about jail, especially as a minor?  And I’m not even suggesting that he’s without question guilty, I just think it’s odd that someone would say all the evidence suggests he’s innocent but he still took a plea.  More than anything I’m just curious about what that evidence is to better educate myself on the case.

5 minutes ago, Chicago White Sox said:

Not to derail this thread any further, but what is all this evidence that suggests he is innocent and why did he ever accept a plea deal if so much favorable evidence existed?

He said he took the plea deal because he didn't want to have his niece have to go on the stand and be badgered by his lawyer and that his lawyer gave him bad advice saying that it was basically no big deal if he pleaded guilty because everything would be back to normal in five years (which it would have been if not for the mistake by the Oregon police). There is no evidence that he isn't guilty, but there also isn't any evidence that he is guilty and he has maintained at all times, except in the court mandated letter, that he was innocent. When the news about it came out, reporters were even able to get the notes from his therapist which were included in the file and the therapist's notes state how he always said he was innocent and that was in a setting where he didn't really have reason to lie. 

 

Personally I don't know how I feel about the whole situation. There is enough doubt in my mind that he did it and he already served the time which the court thought was a good enough punishment. Statistics also show that there is very little chance he ever does anything like that again and it seems like his brother (the father of the niece) has come to the point of talking to him again, so it seems like even he has forgiven him. I feel like with all of that he shouldn't be outcast for the rest of his life and probably should get a shot with a team. On the other hand, I would rather not it be with the Sox because even if he is completely innocent it could still cause trouble in the locker rooms or with free agents if he were ever to make the big leagues. Plus, with how much bad press the Sox get I would rather not make us an easy target. 

If we are going to hold Heimlichs denial up as proof, shouldn’t we also note that the victim has not?

2 minutes ago, Chicago White Sox said:

Calling someone a meathead because they don’t want to draft someone who at bare minimum pleaded guilty to molesting a six year old child seems a bit egregious.

I said "meathead reasons", which calling someone a child molester and saying you don't want them drafted because of that when there's a good chance they're innocent and even if they're not, there's a good chance of there being a good reason why it happened and will never happen again qualifies as a meathead reason to me.

4 minutes ago, Chicago White Sox said:

But when you have all the evidence to prove your innocence why are you even worried about jail, especially as a minor?  And I’m not even suggesting that he’s without question guilty, I just think it’s odd that someone would say all the evidence suggests he’s innocent but he still took a plea.  More than anything I’m just curious about what that evidence is to better educate myself on the case.

You did realize that if you can't make bail, you sit in jail until your trial, right? Further, Soxbadger said there was some sort of custodial issue with the parents that the plea deal helped. That's likely why his lawyer suggested taking the deal.

The notion that Madrigal could be another Altuve is not likely to transpire.  Jose is a rare talent and the odds of there being another one like him are not the kind of odds, that I would bet on. If Madrigal can be a good Major League second baseman, that would make him a worthy pick. However, if you are hoping that he is going to be like Altuve, you are setting yourself up for a big disappointment. 

Edited June 2, 20187 yr by Lillian

2 minutes ago, Dam8610 said:

I said "meathead reasons", which calling someone a child molester and saying you don't want them drafted because of that when there's a good chance they're innocent and even if they're not, there's a good chance of there being a good reason why it happened and will never happen again qualifies as a meathead reason to me.

WTF?

Just now, Lillian said:

The notion that Madrigal could be another Altuve is not likely. Jose is a rare talent and the odds of there being another one like him are not the kind of odds, that I would bet on. If Madrigal can be a good Major League second baseman, that would make him a worthy pick. However, if you are hoping that he is going to be like Altuve, you are setting yourself up for a big disappointment. 

Absolutely.  Expecting him to be like one of the most unique talents in the game is, well, a little crazy.  He is much more likely DJ Lemaheiu or Jean Segura at the top end, which is still a very good useful player and a good guy to have on your team.  

1 minute ago, Lillian said:

The notion that Madrigal could be another Altuve is not likely. Jose is a rare talent and the odds of there being another one like him are not the kind of odds, that I would bet on. If Madrigal can be a good Major League second baseman, that would make him a worthy pick. However, if you are hoping that he is going to be like Altuve, you are setting yourself up for a big disappointment. 

UPSIDE.

Just now, turnin' two said:

WTF?

Good = explainable in this case. Sexually abused minors often perpetuate the cycle of abuse if not treated appropriately. Further, the recidivism rate for minors who receive treatment at the age he did is less than 5%. Even if he did it, which is disputable, he was treated at the right time and is highly unlikely to ever have an issue again.

7 minutes ago, turnin' two said:

Absolutely.  Expecting him to be like one of the most unique talents in the game is, well, a little crazy.  He is much more likely DJ Lemaheiu or Jean Segura at the top end, which is still a very good useful player and a good guy to have on your team.  

Expecting it would be, that's why it's called upside, not expected outcome.

4 minutes ago, Dam8610 said:

Good = explainable in this case. Sexually abused minors often perpetuate the cycle of abuse if not treated appropriately. Further, the recidivism rate for minors who receive treatment at the age he did is less than 5%. Even if he did it, which is disputable, he was treated at the right time and is highly unlikely to ever have an issue again.

So, do you have any evidence of this "good" reason?  Or is it just your speculation?  Either way, calling that explanation a "good reason" is irresponsible and dangerous.  

Just now, turnin' two said:

So, do you have any evidence of this "good" reason?  Or is it just your speculation?  Either way, calling that explanation a "good reason" is irresponsible and dangerous.  

Do you have any evidence that he's guilty? I mean, I'd start there, but that's me.

7 minutes ago, Dam8610 said:

UPSIDE.

Good = explainable in this case. Sexually abused minors often perpetuate the cycle of abuse if not treated appropriately. Further, the recidivism rate for minors who receive treatment at the age he did is less than 5%. Even if he did it, which is disputable, he was treated at the right time and is highly unlikely to ever have an issue again.

But you said there’s a good reason that he molested a 6 year old