Obviously loyalty is something that only applies to you as long as you have no need to proof friendship and loyalty. The second the wind blows out of a different direction you run the other way. Nice.... It does not make a difference to me if he did it or not as far as being loyal to a friend. He still is my friend and he still is the guy I know and trust. If he did make a mistake he is that stand up of a guy that he will take his punishment and not try to weasel out like someone who would throw loyalty under the bus for fear it could look bad on himself. He is not the guy that will flee to Monaco. As for "shut up" aggressive or not, if you would know what it was about you would not mention this or bring it up. Really all you do by going there is try to convict and judge someone before you have facts on the table. Sad, because that is everything that the US Court system, you know the "freedom" part of the USofA is all about. If you know so much about how serious that is to lawyers you would also know that if it had anything to do with fraud, illegal activities etc. that he would never ever have had the chance to regain his license. Obviously that is not the case so you should be knowing that my statement is actually point on. You can go on and on about this with self-rightous crap. Obviously you do not know Scotty and have no personal stake in it. I would hope for you that if you ever get into such a situation, and it you read my post properly you'd realize that you can get there very quickly without you doing anything wrong, that you do not have friends that value their friendship on your legal status but based on you as a person.
Never said you did... someone posted it in god knows how many pages earlier. a cheap shot. No I am not objective, I am very subjective on this issue. I am not defending SR for what he did and was ultimately convicted of. Neither am I defending if Scotty did what he did. Yet that will not change my position on our friendship and I will help him get through this and whatever the justice system throws at him.
This is a very strange thread... (from the replies). I understand SS was a good friend to many.. but sometimes it's best to put aside the friendship, take off the rose colored glasses, and separate opinion from fact. @Napolis, I think we've all sniffed a dangerous poon at some point in our lives. The smart ones remembered that distinct scent for the next time it came around.
One of the people you defended here was already convicted and served a Federal prison sentence. Yes, I understand how someone defaming your profession would get you upset.
Ya know what guys, this is getting a little out of hand. (And yes, I know I helped.) Here's what we have: Lawyers and fchatters (mostly from outside the region) who think Scotty's in deep **** and that any loyalty to him is misplaced. That Scotty is a "bad guy." Locals who know Scotty and are TRYING to defend him, certainly not his purported actions, but him as their friend. Good friends doing what they think is right, good lawyers and fchatters trying their best to convince those loyal to Scotty that they are wrong. Maybe time to give it up? Both sides, in their own way, are correct, and both are wrong. Neither will ever convince the other of the error of their ways and ultimately even if convicted, it appears that some of the guys (and gals) here will remain loyal to their friend, which is not necessarily a bad thing. Remember sometimes good people do bad things. I think that we should try to dial back the rhetoric and personal attacks on each other and let the chips fall where they may. Ultimately, the legal system will tell us who is misguided, and if Scotty is guilty. Until then, all we're doing now is driving stakes into each others' hearts, which in reality, says more about our character than Scotty's. Thanks for listening, Dave
Good post. I think the main reason for the vitriol is the seething anger people have for the scammers like SR and Madoff and want everyone connected with them punished as well. The Feds have been going after all of Bernie's associates including his brother who has had to forfeit much of his property. Lets have someone keep tabs on the situation and post updates as they happen.
The current problem is that Cavallino Motors is aggressively, inappropriately and personally attacking anyone who apparently disagrees with him or that SS walks on water. So, basically, he is dragging the discussion down and re-directing attention from the issue of SS's acts. That's fine, I suppose, but I'm not impressed with his emotional tantrum. Saying, basically, "STFU"? Really, this is appropriate conduct? So, because he disagrees with my analysis, I shouldn't post? Hmm...very interesting. The court system will indeed decide SS's fates, but based upon what's been posted, I'm getting the distinct impression that excuses will be cobbled up and made for him by his defenders. Again, that's fine, and frankly I don't care, as I don't know the guy. But, there is ZERO excuse for someone who conspired to defraud the bankruptcy administrator, if that has, in fact, been what has happened. Sure, let the process play out, but don't go around attacking other people because they aren't singing the same song as his groupies. CW
If SS didn't do anything, then he shouldn't be punished. Simple as that. I couldn't care less that he knew or rubbed elbows with SR. He is judged on his own acts and behaviour. CW
I resent this inference. You are suggesting, with one big blanket statement, that those of us who view reality and see SSs actions for what they are, have been fair-weather-friends to everyone we know. This is not the case. However, if I have a friend who is so conflicted and so tortured in his personal life that he goes on a public chat board and says "Screw you all," then, AS A FRIEND, I'd wonder if my FRIEND didn't need help. To compound matters, he threatened to sue F-Chat. Swell fellow. NOT TRUE. HIS DEFENDERS ARE FLAMING THE REST OF US. His friends are not simply defending him. They are calling people who don't defend him terrible names. They are calling us trolls. They are saying that we are the last people they'd want to see at a Cars-and-Coffee. They are suggesting that we are one step this side of Hitler simply because we call it like we see it. The SS defenders are not giving us the benefit of our views--we are being castigated for it, in very harsh terms. If this guy truly has the character you all say he has, he could do one thing that would be a step in the right direction. He could come on this board and explain something to us. He could explain why--after writing "SCREW YOU ALL" he didn't let his finger hover about the 'enter' button for a split second and then think better about it (and not send the post). Or he could come on here and explain why he threatened to sue Rob Lay. Interestingly, he was going to sue Rob about remarks made about his client. Hmmm. His client? Was she his client? Or was this just "talk." He has been reading this board--this much is known. But yet, this prince of a guy will not come on here and face it like a man. Isaac Asimov once said, "Your opinion is not more important than the facts."
If such is the case, whether spoken or unspoken, it certainly shouldn't be. Whatever disagreement happens on this thread should stay on this thread. via rubber ducky
Please see Post 499 in this thread. I might add, I was told I could stick a chill pill somewhere in my anatomy the sun don't shine. Nice, real nice.
Those of us who aren't friends with SS don't have any vested interest in this matter. We merely comment on what is published, be it in the papers or in court records. Let's loosely call them "facts". It's an open forum and it's ok to do so. We then form opinions of the person based on what is out there. SS's friends comment based solely on personal emotions...what they feel about SS, what they think they know about SS, etc., in spite of the aforementioned loosely identified "facts". Which is also fine. I think it's ok for me to say that I think SS, if he did what he is accused of doing, is a scumbag (just for example purposes). And I think it's ok for his friends to say that even if he is guilty, they're ok with that and still will be his friends. What I think is silly, is those of us outside the "friend" circle making personal attacks on his friends, and his friends making personal attacks on others...we all have our opinions. And being this is an open forum, everyone should be able to comment as they see fit..."SS is a scumbag", "SS is a friend"...whatever. If I was hurt by comments, I would just stop reading them. But like Dave said, one "side" in this matter is not going to be able to convince the other side...nor should that attempt be made. Did I actually read someone say they don't know if OJ is really guilty because he/she (poster) wasn't there?? LOL
I may be wrong, and I am often wrong. But I clearly recall that SS's friends have reserved their worst insults for those of us who have the temerity to suggest that SS is a criminal. Those insults came first and loudest. The fault has not been equal. I have defended SS's critics (of which I am one) and will continue to do so. You actually read that. It is here to see in all its glory.
Would you advise any client, while under indictment to, "come on here and face it like a man?" I'm guessing the answer to that, innocent or guilty, is a big fat "NO!!!" It would be potential suicide, anything he posted here could surely be used against him later, both in court, and on Fchat. I understand the point you're trying to make, but c'mon, that's not realistic. D