Baseball for the Thinking Fan

Login | Register | Feedback

btf_logo
You are here > Home > Baseball Newsstand > Baseball Primer Newsblog > Discussion
Baseball Primer Newsblog
— The Best News Links from the Baseball Newsstand

Wednesday, September 17, 2008

Brandon Puffer arrested for burglary, intent to commit sexual assault

(September 16, 2008)  On Saturday, September 13, 2008, at 3:30 a.m., the Frisco Police Department responded to an assault that had just occurred in the 7500 block of Stonebrook Parkway. The female victim stated that she had just been assaulted by a male subject that was inside of her residence. Officers responded to the location and located a male subject, later identified as Brandon Duane Puffer, age 32, on foot in the immediate area.

The officer’s initial investigation revealed that Puffer was the suspect. Puffer was arrested for Burglary of a Habitation with the intent to commit a felony (Sexual Assault). The arrest occurred without incident. The offense is a first degree felony and is punishable by up to 99 years incarceration and up to a $10,000 fine. The victim was not injured. The offense is still under investigation.

Can I get a ZiPS on how his 3.90 ERA with Frisco in 2008 will play in the Texas Penal League?

Pat Rapper's Delight Posted: September 17, 2008 at 03:59 PM | 95 comment(s) Login to Bookmark
  Tags: minor leagues, rangers

Reader Comments and Retorts

Go to end of page

Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.

   1. MexicanGabe Posted: September 17, 2008 at 04:57 PM (#2944942)
Such a shame and a waste of talent...
   2. Best Dressed Chicken in Town Posted: September 17, 2008 at 05:10 PM (#2944952)
intent to commit sexual assault

this is a crime? I do this a hundred times a day.
   3. Bring Me the Head of Alfredo Griffin (Vlad) Posted: September 17, 2008 at 05:13 PM (#2944958)
Glad the girl was OK, at least. What an idiot.
   4. The importance of being Ernest Riles Posted: September 17, 2008 at 05:42 PM (#2944982)
this is a crime? I do this a hundred times a day.

It's not a crime if you are your own intended victim.
   5. Slinger Francisco Barrios (Dr. Memory) Posted: September 17, 2008 at 06:28 PM (#2945033)
Huh, huh, you said "penal."
   6. Hello Rusty Kuntz, Goodbye Rusty Cars Posted: September 17, 2008 at 06:30 PM (#2945037)
He'll be doing a lot of puffing.
   7. akrasian Posted: September 17, 2008 at 06:41 PM (#2945053)
At least he'll have his MLB pension to fall back on if/when he gets out of prison. Assuming he's guilty, of course.
   8. tsa67 Posted: September 17, 2008 at 06:51 PM (#2945061)
No one knows what really happened there. Most people are going to assume the worst in this situation. Maybe he just wasn't that in to her and that made her mad. Hopefully the truth will come out.
   9. JMPH Posted: September 17, 2008 at 06:56 PM (#2945065)
At least he'll have his MLB pension to fall back on if/when he gets out of prison. Assuming he's guilty, of course.

I thought you need ten years of service time to be eligible for the pension.
   10. SoSH U at work Posted: September 17, 2008 at 06:58 PM (#2945068)
Maybe he just wasn't that in to her and that made her mad.


B1tches
   11. aleskel Posted: September 17, 2008 at 07:06 PM (#2945078)
I thought you need ten years of service time to be eligible for the pension.

but 8 with good behavior!
   12. Cooperstown Schtick Posted: September 17, 2008 at 07:12 PM (#2945086)
Most people are going to assume the worst in this situation. Maybe he just wasn't that in to her and that made her mad.

Reverse puffery.
   13. Chipper Jonestown Massacre Posted: September 17, 2008 at 07:13 PM (#2945087)
So, did this baseball card just go up or down in value?
   14. RJ in TO Posted: September 17, 2008 at 07:14 PM (#2945088)
I thought you need ten years of service time to be eligible for the pension.


I think it's 10 years for the full pension, with lesser amounts for lesser service time.
   15. williamp Posted: September 17, 2008 at 08:25 PM (#2945187)
its all bull #### i know puff he wouldnt do that
   16. Srul Itza Posted: September 17, 2008 at 08:34 PM (#2945196)
So who do we hear from next, tina or Judith Reinsdorf?
   17. North Side Chicago Expatriate Giants Fan Posted: September 17, 2008 at 08:36 PM (#2945198)
its all bull #### i know puff he wouldnt do that

Well, I'm convinced.

So, did this baseball card just go up or down in value?

Bong and Puffer? How is that card not priceless already?
   18. My name is Votto, and I love to get blotto Posted: September 17, 2008 at 08:37 PM (#2945201)
He looks just like Ice-T in that card.
   19. Backlasher Posted: September 17, 2008 at 08:39 PM (#2945202)
its all bull #### i know puff he wouldnt do that


williamp,

Thanks to you and tsa for joining us. Since you know Puff, maybe you can help us get an idea of the other side of the story. We appreciate any information you can provide.
   20. The District Attorney Posted: September 17, 2008 at 08:43 PM (#2945207)
So who do we hear from next, tina or Judith Reinsdorf?
it wasnt puff it was billy beane beat the livin spiderman balls outta that #####
   21. Barry`s_Lazy_Boy Posted: September 17, 2008 at 08:46 PM (#2945213)
Assuming he's guilty, of course.

Only in America!
   22. Backlasher Posted: September 17, 2008 at 09:02 PM (#2945230)
So who do we hear from next, tina or Judith Reinsdorf?


How about James Pidutti.
   23. williamp Posted: September 17, 2008 at 09:04 PM (#2945233)
------------
   24. Justin T., Director of Somethin Posted: September 17, 2008 at 09:09 PM (#2945241)
William, it sounds like you may want to just stfu in regards to this situation on the internet.
   25. williamp Posted: September 17, 2008 at 09:10 PM (#2945242)
i understand what ya mean but really "stfu" you back in hs?
   26. Backlasher Posted: September 17, 2008 at 09:30 PM (#2945263)
i understand what ya mean but really "stfu" you back in hs?


Perhaps just a fan of John Cena.

Nevertheless, I think you will find people that will evaluate what you say fairly. I don't recommend nor would I want you to do anything that would jeopardize Puff's defense, but if there is information you can share, it would be appreciated.
   27. Spahn Insane Posted: September 17, 2008 at 09:37 PM (#2945272)
Am I supposed to remember who this Puffer guy is?
   28. MM1f Posted: September 17, 2008 at 09:52 PM (#2945288)
Journeyman sidearmer. Mostly a minor leaguer but he made some MLB innings. Teams liked to pick up him for PTBNLs or "cash considerations" to give 'em a decent emergency option for the pen to stash at AAA
   29. Justin T., Director of Somethin Posted: September 17, 2008 at 09:53 PM (#2945289)
Stfu not meant negatively, I wasn't saying it directly at you, like "Stfu William."
   30. Backlasher Posted: September 17, 2008 at 10:13 PM (#2945299)
Stfu not meant negatively

Yes, the ubiquotous positive STFU, like "you must positively stfu"

Why not let the man speak. Someone he knows is facing heinous accusations. If he can make the story more fair and balanced, let the man testify.
   31. Best Dressed Chicken in Town Posted: September 17, 2008 at 10:19 PM (#2945301)
Um, who's stopping him?
   32. Harry Balsagne, anti-Centaur hate crime division Posted: September 17, 2008 at 10:20 PM (#2945303)
Yo I know williamp he and puff went to Stanford together
   33. Backlasher Posted: September 17, 2008 at 10:33 PM (#2945313)
Um, who's stopping him?


Er, eh, oh, eee

Maybe the guy that is saying STFU.

Just curious, did you not see that from the post.
   34. Best Dressed Chicken in Town Posted: September 17, 2008 at 10:51 PM (#2945324)
Oh, gotcha. I didn't realize that was a military order which disconnected williamp's keyboard.
   35. Backlasher Posted: September 17, 2008 at 11:07 PM (#2945334)
Oh, gotcha. I didn't realize that was a military order which disconnected williamp's keyboard.

I just figured your overwhelming desire to be a smartass prevented you from being able to comprehend the words on the page. That interpretation is looking more cogent, as you still don't seem to understand what is pretty clear text.
   36. csd Posted: September 17, 2008 at 11:13 PM (#2945342)
William, it sounds like you may want to just stfu in regards to this situation on the internet.


You all understand this was meant to say "you'd better not talk about that on the internet", no? As a wild guess, I would say that that's what Stfu not meant negatively meant.

So it's you (#35) that can't understand what is pretty clear text.
   37. Justin T., Director of Somethin Posted: September 17, 2008 at 11:21 PM (#2945361)
Of course it was a casual stfu, but Backlasher is doing what Backlasher does. I'm sure he just wants william to give his side of the story so he can lend a sympathetic ear and possibly help the young man out.
   38. SoSHially Unacceptable Posted: September 17, 2008 at 11:26 PM (#2945379)
So it's you (#35) that can't understand what is pretty clear text.


Sorry, but that positive stfu slipped by me too. Clear it wasn't.
   39. Crispix reaches boiling point with lackluster play Posted: September 17, 2008 at 11:28 PM (#2945386)
I was quite surprised to see someone say "STFU" to the only person who could possibly have actual knowledge of the affairs in this case. What kind of knee-jerk response is that? No wonder williamp found this site unwelcoming.

Apparently some people say "STFU" when they aren't intending to be hostile and insulting?
   40. Best Dressed Chicken in Town Posted: September 17, 2008 at 11:33 PM (#2945406)
you still don't seem to understand what is pretty clear text

You're right, I don't understand how anyone has been prevented from typing anything they want. But please, continue the Most Pointless Argument Ever and explain it to me.
   41. Backlasher Posted: September 17, 2008 at 11:34 PM (#2945411)
You all understand this was meant to say "you'd better not talk about that on the internet", no?

I'm not sure about "ALL" because some people are having problems understanding some simple things. Nevertheless, the constant rephrasing of the statement in no way changes what I wrote.

So it's you (#35) that can't understand what is pretty clear text.

LOL. Is that your version of "I know you are, but what am I." You should have added an "Um" to make it sound even better.

I'll type this real slowly for you and chicken boy so there is no confusion.

Unless williamp is actually Brandon Puffer then there is nothing he can say that can be used as a statement against Brandon Puffer. If he has access to information that you would not want a DA to have, then he shouldn't disclose it. That is what is generally meant by, "I don't recommend nor would I want you to do anything that would jeopardize Puff's defense." I can type it again if you don't understand it.

However, he and tsa have created accounts just to comment on this matter. They have presented a story. In typical primer fashion, there statements get welcomed with,

"Well, I'm convinced."

When they do want to explain something, they get an stfu. Its up to them if they want to disclose something. I'm not twisting their arm, but I am letting them know that not everyone is going to just see if they can figure out how to type the next "Um" statement.
   42. csd Posted: September 17, 2008 at 11:35 PM (#2945413)
Apparently some people say "STFU" when they aren't intending to be hostile and insulting?


Yeah, I assume that's not insulting when said like it was said here, ie

It sounds like you may want to just stfu in regards to this situation on the internet.


No?

I can even think "Hum.... I'd better SFTU" in certain situations, and I'm not aiming at insulting myself.

But hey, I see it can be misunderstood.
   43. csd Posted: September 17, 2008 at 11:42 PM (#2945425)
I'll type this real slowly for you


Hey ########. I understood one thing and that's what Justin T meant.

So STFU.

No ambiguity this time.
   44. Backlasher Posted: September 17, 2008 at 11:43 PM (#2945428)
You're right, I don't understand how anyone has been prevented from typing anything they want. But please, continue the Most Pointless Argument Ever and explain it to me.

ROFLMAO. OK, I'll help. Slow down and quit trying to think of the next best smartass statement that you are able to come up with and follow the actual conversation. The previous posts will show you the rude welcome those two posters faced, the snide, "I'm convinced"; followed by a STFU (which was obviously the positive kind).

If you don't know STFU is telling someone not to type and that such rejoinders generally discourage discourse, you probably aren't someone who would ever understand. In fact, your obsession on physical compulsion means that you are so literal and so decidely focused on trying to be cute, that you probably aren't going to engage in anything approaching rational thought anyway.

As for pointless, I'm not sure what point you are trying to convey with your original post preceded by gutteral noises. Did you think you were conveying information that the army did not in fact go to williamp's house and deport him to Guantanamo? I doubt even you thought that; you just wanted to be a smartass.

DO YOU UNDERSTAND, OR DID I GO TO FAST.
   45. Backlasher Posted: September 17, 2008 at 11:49 PM (#2945439)
Hey ########. I understood one thing and that's what Justin T meant.


Let me know when you catch on to the rest.
   46. scotto Posted: September 17, 2008 at 11:52 PM (#2945451)
Geez Louise.

Backlasher's point seems to be that if you wanted to caution williamp from broadcasting information that might be harmful to the accused, using STFU, even if it's lower case, might lead to your concern getting misinterpreted because it's typically used in a "You're an idiot, you should just STFU" manner.

Perhaps something like what BL said, or a rephrasing like "Hey, williamp, maybe you should choose what information you present and the words you use to present it carefully for your friend's sake" would do the job.

It wouldn't be as cool, of course, but it would do the trick.
   47. csd Posted: September 17, 2008 at 11:52 PM (#2945452)
The previous posts will show you the rude welcome those two posters faced


True, I have only been here a week or so. But I'm used to internet tough guys like you and I just had to reach for the invaluable "Ignore" feature to get rid of you forever.
   48. Barry`s_Lazy_Boy Posted: September 17, 2008 at 11:55 PM (#2945457)
The troll is back, and as successful as usual. A thread about the entomology of STFU! excellent. troll on.
   49. Avoid running at all times.-S. Paige Posted: September 17, 2008 at 11:56 PM (#2945459)
Just lurking here, but I thought Justin clarified his "stfu" and williamp understood what he meant, even if he thought the acronym was a little high school (I think that's what the "hs" means). So if williamp decided not to post, it seems as if he agrees with Justin, even if both Justin and he are mistaken about the liability issues involved in such a post. But that's just the way I'm interpreting it. Could be he felt unwelcome too.
   50. csd Posted: September 17, 2008 at 11:57 PM (#2945466)
The troll is back

Sorry. I'm new here and I fed him for a few minutes. Won't happen again.
   51. Avoid running at all times.-S. Paige Posted: September 17, 2008 at 11:59 PM (#2945470)
I guess I took the bait too. Oops!
   52. csd Posted: September 18, 2008 at 12:01 AM (#2945472)
They should do something with the title bar text. It says "... intent to commit sexual ass"
   53. MM1f Posted: September 18, 2008 at 12:09 AM (#2945487)
This thread is, at best, two steps above a YouTube comments thread.
   54.     Hey Gurl Posted: September 18, 2008 at 12:10 AM (#2945492)
I'm pretty sure all Justin was trying to say was that williamp would probably be better off not talking about the incident. Given what I've seen on Internet Forums, I think this was sound advice. That he chose to use the words "STFU" is unfortunate I suppose but given the context I can see what he meant and I can see why he didn't intend for it to be taken the way Backlasher has interpreted it.

This is all really dumb though. Everyone should just stfu and let the topic get back to Brandon Puffer.
   55.     Hey Gurl Posted: September 18, 2008 at 12:19 AM (#2945535)
This thread is, at best, two steps above a YouTube comments thread.


That's pretty harsh, MM1f. That would only put us 4 steps above a steroids thread.
   56. MM1f Posted: September 18, 2008 at 12:20 AM (#2945539)
HaHa
   57. Backlasher Posted: September 18, 2008 at 12:21 AM (#2945543)
The troll is back, and as successful as usual.

IF your talking about me, then I can't take your compliment regarding success. The only person I wanted to talk was williamp. I was interested in Puffer's story. Whether chicken boy or Chris Smith talked doesn't matter too much. They aren't adding anything, so I would not try to make them talk.
   58. bads85 Posted: September 18, 2008 at 01:08 AM (#2945674)
A thread about the entomology of STFU! excellent. troll on.


Now we are on bugs, just in time for the midges' return to Cleveland.
   59. akrasian Posted: September 18, 2008 at 01:09 AM (#2945681)
I think it's 10 years for the full pension, with lesser amounts for lesser service time.

Yes. Starting with game 1 on the major league roster (even if you don't actually get in the game).

Doing it from memory (which is notoriously bad in my case) I think at the time it worked out to be $100 per game on the roster, capping out at $162,000 after ten years. Those are yearly pension figures, starting at (again from memory) age 55.

Now back to the etymology of stfu.
   60. The Anthony Kennedy of BBTF (Scott) Posted: September 18, 2008 at 01:12 AM (#2945692)
if i were Puffers attorney, i'd prefer that no-one said a thing about the incident to anyone in a public venue. while hearsay rules keep it from being admitted, and while it would be absolutely stunning for someone involved in the case to read about it here, the police don't have to work that hard to come up with independent confirmation of it, nor does a DA have to work that hard to get a criminal court judge to accept the fruit of the poisonous tree. have you done criminal defense before, Backlasher? in my (admittedly short) experience, the playing field isn't exactly level. what these people say may have no impact on the case, and may not even know Mr. Puffer, but if i were representing Mr. Puffer i'd very much prefer them to be quiet on the matter even if they feel aggrieved.
   61. Lassus Posted: September 18, 2008 at 01:22 AM (#2945702)
Yowza. This thread really took a turn towards junior high.
   62. Jeff K. Posted: September 18, 2008 at 01:34 AM (#2945735)
Calling BL a troll is pretty ####### ignorant. He can be abrasive, of course, but usually isn't until someone is to him. He very often likes to take a contrarian viewpoint. Nothing wrong with that. He has no problem rolling in the mud with an idiot or going point-by-point with someone more eloquent.

BL and I have certainly disagreed about any number of things, but not once has it gotten personal. That's because I treat him the way I expect to be treated and he returns the favor. Shocking, that. If you dismiss someone with snark, don't be surprised if you aren't treated with respect on the way back.

Even with all that, of all the people I've seen call him a troll or proclaim they have him on ignore, he's contributed more than their entirety. With the exception of Treder, whom I think (and said to them) has been treated unfairly by the Union.

</meta>
   63. Cooperstown Schtick Posted: September 18, 2008 at 01:36 AM (#2945738)
I have long been curious about the entenmannology of the internet term "cookies."
   64. Joe Bivens, Minor Genius Posted: September 18, 2008 at 01:40 AM (#2945742)
Jeff, I thought I leashed you in the Lounge?
   65. Backlasher Posted: September 18, 2008 at 01:41 AM (#2945745)
scott,

If these two people are witnesses to the actual event, then yes I'd think they want to keep quiet. You don't want them impeached if the story changes in some way. If they are going to say that Puff made some type of statement of intent, then yes they should keep quiet. If they provide background on the relationship between the parties, then I can't see how its going to be much of a problem.

You certainly aren't going to have any problem as Puff's attorney in the criminal action if they keep quiet altogether; I agree with you there. Likewise, if they just slandered the victim, that would also not be a good thing.

But right now there is a statement about the accusition on Puffer. However, from a public relations standpoint, he is going to have to live in society. If his friends were to give details such as, "These two use to date and there was anonymosity after the breakup." or "This is someone that was down the hall from his girlfriend who was constantly trying to get him to go out with her." it certainly frames things differently. tsa's statement was getting close to that. Neither of them seemed to be over the top in their statements. They didn't call the victim names; they just started hinting at another scenario and probably could provide new information.

If they don't want to share; have been advised not to share, etc. I was not, and have not, tried to get them to do anything to threaten Puffer's liberty. I just wanted them to have a forum where they at least knew that not everyone was snarking at their comments.
   66. CookieMonster! Posted: September 18, 2008 at 01:47 AM (#2945760)
I have long been curious about the entenmannology of the internet term "cookies."

Someone say cookie?
   67. Nasty Nate Posted: September 18, 2008 at 02:30 AM (#2945870)
was there anything in post #23 before it was edited/redacted etc?
   68. tsa67 Posted: September 18, 2008 at 06:18 AM (#2945979)
Why do any of you speak about what you don't know?
   69. Chipper Jonestown Massacre Posted: September 18, 2008 at 06:57 AM (#2945984)
Bong and Puffer? How is that card not priceless already?


Not as priceless as this game featuring Bong & Leiter...
   70. Fancy Pants Handles lap changes with class Posted: September 18, 2008 at 07:14 AM (#2945986)
entenmannology

Entenmann would be german for "Duck Man"... so the study of duck men

anonymosity

A feeling of hostilitys towards somebody you don't know?
   71. Jeff K. Posted: September 18, 2008 at 09:12 AM (#2945991)
Why do any of you speak about what you don't know?

Well, if we're going there, what does anyone truly know?

Seriously, that's the kind of thing that turns the thread into the one about Taylor (Tyler?) what's-his-name, the kid who took steroids and his dad and friends showed up, etc.

Ah, Taylor Hooton, the thread. People talk about news events. Even people who don't "know". You weren't in the Oval Office to see if Monica did a little knob slobbering, but I bet you discussed it. Ditto OJ, Amelia Earhart, and ####### who shot JR. Discussion threads are for discussing. If you don't like to see people commenting about something, I'd advise not clicking on the little link that says "70 comments".

(Man, it seems from the Hooton thread and this one that I'm against people who know a story principal coming in to the thread; I'm not. I'm against them stifling discussion with "You didn't know him"s and the like.)
   72. Jeff K. Posted: September 18, 2008 at 09:15 AM (#2945992)
Entenmann would be german for "Duck Man"... so the study of duck men

Fancy Pants, I don't want to alarm you, but there may be a duck man, or possibly duckmen inside the house.
   73. Slinger Francisco Barrios (Dr. Memory) Posted: September 18, 2008 at 12:33 PM (#2946022)
Why do any of you speak about what you don't know?

Let me tell you why you said that...
   74. RJ in TO Posted: September 18, 2008 at 01:06 PM (#2946033)
Fancy Pants, I don't want to alarm you, but there may be a duck man, or possibly duckmen inside the house.


Speaking of Duckman, it finally came out on DVD, meaning that you can now complete that empty spot in your library that you've been saving for an incompetent, profane animated duck detective show.
   75. IronChef Chris Wok Posted: September 18, 2008 at 01:20 PM (#2946043)
Damn lawyers screwing up a thread where I can make sexual assault jokes.
   76. Jeff K. Posted: September 18, 2008 at 01:57 PM (#2946074)
Ugh, I never got Duckman. It just wasn't funny. (My reference, for those who don't know, was Simpsons.) It seemed like it should be good, but it wasn't.
   77. RJ in TO Posted: September 18, 2008 at 02:03 PM (#2946086)
Ugh, I never got Duckman. It just wasn't funny. (My reference, for those who don't know, was Simpsons.) It seemed like it should be good, but it wasn't.


Perhaps you just don't sufficiently enjoy unbelievably lowbrow humor.
   78. Newsflash Posted: July 08, 2009 at 05:05 PM (#3245990)
For those of you who made ignorant comments like Best Dressed Chicken (more likely a pig) in Town here is an update:

On Thursday July 2, 2009, Brandon Duane Puffer was found guilty of aforementioned charges in a Collin county courtroom and sentenced to 5 years in the Huntsville, Tx prison.
   79. zonk Posted: July 08, 2009 at 05:24 PM (#3246023)
Wow...

You'll never read me saying it again, but can someone take this thread off-topic to Pavement, Soccer, or the films of the 30s and 40s?
   80. Hang down your head, Tom Foley Posted: July 08, 2009 at 05:29 PM (#3246028)
Worst things in the history of the world:
1. Pavement
2. soccer
3. Gone With the Wind
4. The Holocaust
5. intent to commit sexual assault
   81. Jose Is The Most Absurd Thing on the Site Posted: July 08, 2009 at 05:30 PM (#3246031)
Ugh, I never got Duckman. It just wasn't funny. (My reference, for those who don't know, was Simpsons.) It seemed like it should be good, but it wasn't.


I don't want to say this to strongly, but this makes you a horrible human being. Duckman is a television triumph. Absolutely loved that show.

I also liked that Brandon Puffer got a 2004 World Series ring for spending one day on the Red Sox roster without pitching.
   82. zonk Posted: July 08, 2009 at 05:30 PM (#3246033)
Worst things in the history of the world:
1. Pavement
2. soccer
3. Gone With the Wind
4. The Holocaust
5. intent to commit sexual assault


I believe Steve Garvey had a hand in at least 4 of those things.
   83. Shooty Survived the Shutdown of '14! Posted: July 08, 2009 at 05:32 PM (#3246035)
Worst things in the history of the world:
1. Pavement


No no no. Clearly #1 is you, sir. Fat, ugly and a philistine is no way to play thirdbase.
   84. Guapo Posted: July 08, 2009 at 05:33 PM (#3246037)
You'll never read me saying it again, but can someone take this thread off-topic to Pavement, Soccer, or the films of the 30s and 40s?

STFU.
   85. Hang down your head, Tom Foley Posted: July 08, 2009 at 05:45 PM (#3246041)
I believe Steve Garvey had a hand in at least 4 of those things.

And using your hands is illegal in at least two of them.
   86. SoSH U at work Posted: July 08, 2009 at 05:47 PM (#3246043)
I am eagerly awaiting williamp and TS67's follow up posts.
   87. Best Dressed Chicken in Town Posted: July 08, 2009 at 05:52 PM (#3246048)
Which of my comments was more ignorant, Newsflash? That "intent" to commit sexual assault is not a crime, or that writing "stfu" is not a crime?
   88. Shooty Survived the Shutdown of '14! Posted: July 08, 2009 at 05:52 PM (#3246050)
I am eagerly awaiting williamp and TS67's follow up posts.

Maybe I'm just knackered today, but looking back at that argument between BL and The Best Dressed Chicken now makes me chuckle. That's good comedy.
   89. Jorge Luis Bourjos (Walewander) Posted: July 08, 2009 at 05:52 PM (#3246052)
The first line of his wiki is now unintentionally hilarious:

Brandon Duane Puffer (born October 5, 1975 in Downey, California) is an American professional baseball player who is currently a free agent.


GET IT DONE DOMBROWSKI
   90. GGC don't think it can get longer than a novella Posted: July 08, 2009 at 06:04 PM (#3246068)
I wouldn't use STFU unless I was pissed at someone. Maybe that's why I sense hostility at BTF when there isn't any.
   91. Spahn Insane Posted: July 08, 2009 at 06:09 PM (#3246072)
I believe Steve Garvey had a hand in at least 4 of those things.

That wasn't his hand.
   92. Srul Itza Posted: July 08, 2009 at 06:51 PM (#3246118)
"intent" to commit sexual assault is not a crime

Correct. And that was not the charge.

Burglary has various definitions, but a common one is the illegal entry of a building with the intent to commit a serious crime -- to distinguish from other forms of breaking and entering.

So if he had the intent to commit a crime, including sexual assault, but did nothing about it on the street, no problem. If he breaks into someone's home with the intent to commit a serious crime, such as sexual assault, then that is burglary, and a felony.
   93. A.T.F.W. Posted: July 08, 2009 at 06:54 PM (#3246124)
but was he in a zip code when he broke in the house?
   94. Cris E Posted: July 08, 2009 at 07:44 PM (#3246209)
You can;t be "in" a house. It's really just points and lines and a lot of building materials.
   95. Guapo Posted: July 08, 2009 at 07:50 PM (#3246221)
STFU isn't really an acronym; it's a personal philosophy.

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

 

 

<< Back to main

BBTF Partner

Support BBTF

donate

Thanks to
Sebastian
for his generous support.

Bookmarks

You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.

Hot Topics

NewsblogCurt Schilling not hiding his scars - ESPN Boston
(22 - 3:24am, Oct 25)
Last: TVerik, the gum-snappin' hairdresser

NewsblogBuster Olney on Twitter: "Sources: Manager Joe Maddon has exercised an opt-out clause in his contract and is leaving the Tampa Bay Rays immediately."
(81 - 2:03am, Oct 25)
Last: Dan

Newsblog9 reasons Hunter Pence is the most interesting man in the World (Series) | For The Win
(16 - 1:35am, Oct 25)
Last: base ball chick

NewsblogJohn McGrath: The Giants have become the Yankees — obnoxious | The News Tribune
(12 - 1:31am, Oct 25)
Last: Into the Void

NewsblogOT: The Soccer Thread, September 2014
(916 - 1:29am, Oct 25)
Last: J. Sosa

Newsblog2014 WORLD SERIES GAME 3 OMNICHATTER
(515 - 1:26am, Oct 25)
Last: Pat Rapper's Delight

NewsblogOT: Monthly NBA Thread - October 2014
(385 - 1:05am, Oct 25)
Last: tshipman

NewsblogOT: Politics, October 2014: Sunshine, Baseball, and Etch A Sketch: How Politicians Use Analogies
(3736 - 12:23am, Oct 25)
Last: The Yankee Clapper

NewsblogHow top World Series players ranked as prospects. | SportsonEarth.com : Jim Callis Article
(21 - 12:04am, Oct 25)
Last: Howie Menckel

NewsblogRoyals get four AL Gold Glove finalists, but not Lorenzo Cain | The Kansas City Star
(14 - 11:59pm, Oct 24)
Last: Zach

NewsblogDid Adam Dunn Ruin Baseball? – The Hardball Times
(73 - 11:22pm, Oct 24)
Last: Walt Davis

NewsblogBeaneball | Gold Gloves and Coco Crisp's Terrible 2014 Defense
(2 - 7:47pm, Oct 24)
Last: Walt Davis

NewsblogOT: NBC.news: Valve isn’t making one gaming console, but multiple ‘Steam machines’
(871 - 7:22pm, Oct 24)
Last: Jim Wisinski

NewsblogDealing or dueling – what’s a manager to do? | MGL on Baseball
(67 - 6:38pm, Oct 24)
Last: villageidiom

NewsblogThe ‘Little Things’ – The Hardball Times
(2 - 6:34pm, Oct 24)
Last: RMc is a fine piece of cheese

Page rendered in 0.8634 seconds
53 querie(s) executed