Jump to content
  • Current Donation Goals

    • Raised $440 of $700 target

I am boycotting the NBA Playoffs until Donald Sterling is removed from the NBA completely


NBASupes

Recommended Posts

  • Moderators

NBA getting aggressive on this one. Very nice to see as well that 75% of the owners can agree to vote him out. I have thought he should be out for years between his total incompetence (competitively) and his racism. He will cash a very nice check if/when he sells the team, though.

* * * * *

On innocent until proven guilty, that is directly related to burdens of proof. In a criminal case, the burden of proof requires the prosecutor to prove the case "beyond a reasonable doubt." That is different than lower burdens of proof like clear and convincing evidence or preponderance of the evidence where simply convincing a fact-finder that it is more likely than not that something happened can be enough (as in the preponderance of evidence standard). Beyond a reasonable doubt has been described as:

This is the highest standard used as the burden of proof in Anglo-American jurisprudence and typically only applies in criminal proceedings. It has been described, in negative terms, as a proof having been met if there is no plausible reason to believe otherwise. If there is a real doubt, based upon reason and common sense after careful and impartial consideration of all the evidence, or lack of evidence, in a case, then the level of proof has not been met.

Proof beyond a reasonable doubt, therefore, is proof of such a convincing character that one would be willing to rely and act upon it without hesitation in the most important of one's own affairs. However, it does not mean an absolute certainty. The standard that must be met by the prosecution's evidence in a criminal prosecution is that no other logical explanation can be derived from the facts except that the defendant committed the crime, thereby overcoming the presumption that a person is innocent unless and until proven guilty.

Because a criminal defendant is innocent until proven guilty, the defendant need not put on any proof. If the prosecutor fails to remove all reasonable doubt, the defendant can simply rest without offering up any defense and win the case because the prosecutor has failed to carry his or her burden of proof.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Report: Sterling Stressed Clippers Not For Sale Moments Before NBA Announcement

Apr 29, 2014 3:23 PM EDT

Sterling_Donald_lac_140429.jpg

Donald Sterling spoke with Jim Gray shortly before Adam Silver announced his lifetime ban.

"I just spoke with Donald Sterling just moments ago," said Gray.

"The team is not for sale and he will not be selling the team."

Sterling was unaware of Silver's decision just moments before the announcement.

Sources tell Zach Lowe of Grantland that the NBA will control the sale of the Clippers in the event they get the required 3/4 required vote to force it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member

I fully support the life ban and the attempt to try and force him to sell the team. Here's the problem: Sterling made his money as an ambulance chaser. He sues everyone. I don't see him just peacefully letting the NBA sell the team out from under him. He's going to fight and this could be in the court for years. Sterling is 81 and he's been nationally humiliated. What does he have left but to go down swinging?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Moderators

I fully support the life ban and the attempt to try and force him to sell the team. Here's the problem: Sterling made his money as an ambulance chaser. He sues everyone. I don't see him just peacefully letting the NBA sell the team out from under him. He's going to fight and this could be in the court for years. Sterling is 81 and he's been nationally humiliated. What does he have left but to go down swinging?

I think they expect that and took this hard a line to motivate him to settle for something better than this (like sale plus sweetner).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The NBA must think he will go quietly. I don't think taking the team will stand up in court.

I don't think it will for several reasons one of which is that in the state of California I don't believe these tapes are admissible in court. If they aren't admissible there is no proof.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Moderators

The NBA must think he will go quietly. I don't think taking the team will stand up in court.

I don't think it will for several reasons one of which is that in the state of California I don't believe these tapes are admissible in court. If they aren't admissible there is no proof.

His girlfriend can provide the proof directly without the tapes.

I don't think any of us know enough to predict the legal side of things since we don't have the constitution, etc. It may be written to give the NBA broad discretion to force a sale if there is a 75% vote from the owners. Just don't know enough to go very far down that road.

I will speculate that he is unlikely to go quietly unless he is content to cash in at this point. It will be an incredibly profitable investment and he is done enjoying the celebrity angle of being an NBA owners regardless of how this shakes out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

smh @northcyde, you do know what racism/systematic white supremacy is?

It's not name calling or any nonsense like that. It's the ability to feel you are superior and affect someone's livelyhood like Sterling has done.

It is extremely rare if even possible you will fine a Black man or woman who is racist. A bigot? Anyone can be a bigot. Prejudice? Anyone can be prejudice. But racist or someone who pretakes in systematic white supremacy? It's damn near impossible to find a black man or woman who has that power and can use it for supremacy purposes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I fully support the life ban and the attempt to try and force him to sell the team. Here's the problem: Sterling made his money as an ambulance chaser. He sues everyone. I don't see him just peacefully letting the NBA sell the team out from under him. He's going to fight and this could be in the court for years. Sterling is 81 and he's been nationally humiliated. What does he have left but to go down swinging?

Yeah Sothron...that would be my guess. He'll likely drag it out as long as he can and then sell to Belkin :^)

Whatever happens though, at least he won't be able to attend games and will have to slug it out in court over the $2.5 mil fine (although I doubt Silver would fine him if he can't make it stick).

I'm a tad skeptical as far as whether the other owners will really force him out though - even as much as they despise what he has done. Not that they won't want him out, and fast, but they all likely realize that it can be a "slippery slope" and they will want to protect their own interests.

The litigation that will come from this will be a primer for up-and-coming young sports attorneys.

Bottom line is that he has gotten slammed - and hard - good for Silver for doing what he has done.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Moderators

Let the race begin: http://mediacentral.nba.com/media/mediacentral/NBA-Constitution-and-By-Laws.pdf

Looks like they released the constitution and by-laws (http://deadspin.com/that-secret-nba-constitution-is-now-online-1569509012). OH GOD I NEEDED TO BE PRODUCTIVE THIS WEEK!

Very nice.

So here is the key provision:

ARTICLE 13
TERMINATION OF OWNERSHIP OR MEMBERSHIP
The Membership of a Member or the interest of any Owner
may be terminated by a vote of three fourths (3/4) of the Board of
Governors if the Member or Owner shall do or suffer any of the
following:
(a) Willfully violate any of the provisions of the
Constitution and By-Laws, resolutions, or agreements of the
Association.
(b) Transfer or attempt to transfer a Membership or an
interest in a Member without complying with the provisions of Article
5.
© Fail to pay any dues or other indebtedness owing to
the Association within thirty (30) days after Written Notice from the
Commissioner of default in such payment.
(d) Fail or refuse to fulfill its contractual obligations to the Association, its Members, Players, or any other third party in such a
way as to affect the Association or its Members adversely.
(e) Wager or countenance wagering by its officers or
employees on any game in which a Team operated by a Member of the
Association participates.
(f) Willfully permit open betting, pool selling, or any
other form of gambling upon any premises owned, leased, or otherwise
controlled by the Member or an Owner, except, subject to Article 8(a),
for gambling activities that are lawful in the applicable jurisdiction and
do not involve in any way, directly or indirectly, gambling with respect
to any aspect of the Association’s games, events, property, players, or
other personnel.
(g) Offer, agree, conspire, or attempt to lose or control
the score of any game participated in by a Team operated by a Member
of the Association, or fail to suspend immediately any officer or any
Player or other employee of the Member who shall be found guilty, in
a court of law or in any hearing sanctioned by this Constitution and By-Laws,
of offering, agreeing, conspiring, or attempting to lose or control
the score of any such game or of being interested in any pool or wager
on any game in which a Team operated by a Member of the
Association participates.
(h) Disband its Team during the Season, dissolve its
business, or cease its operation.
(i) Willfully fail to present its Team at the time and
place it is scheduled to play in an Exhibition, Regular Season, or
Playoff Game.
(j) Willfully misrepresent any material fact contained in
its application for Membership in the Association.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Moderators
Continuing:

(j) Willfully misrepresent any material fact contained in
its application for Membership in the Association.
It looks like the two sections I haven't crossed out would be where they could potentially terminate. I did not see any non-discrimination language in a quick flip through the by-laws and constitution but I may have missed that somewhere. It could be part of the "resolutions and agreements" mentioned but not available. I have a hard time thinking it is part of a player contract (or that such a contract would be in breach without something specific to the player) so it seems like there is likely some general conduct language somewhere that is the source of the violation -- or I just haven't read it all the way through yet.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Moderators

On a separate issue - does this read that tanking (such as sitting healthy players or deliberately stocking a weak roster) could be the basis for removal? This section is clearly directed towards gambling but it certainly opens the door on that to me:

(g) Offer, agree, conspire, or attempt to lose or control the score of any game participated in by a Team operated by a Member of the Association, or fail to suspend immediately any officer or any Player or other employee of the Member who shall be found guilty, in a court of law or in any hearing sanctioned by this Constitution and By-Laws, of offering, agreeing, conspiring, or attempting to lose or control the score of any such game or of being interested in any pool or wager on any game in which a Team operated by a Member of the Association participates.
Think of Golden State desperately seeking to lose to keep their lottery pick a few years ago, etc. Certainly interesting to consider.
Edited by AHF
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...