tvc184

That’s it. Last practice over. Let the games begin.

PAM looked a lot better in 2nd half. No clue on starters.

Short pass and long run to Nederland 12. Three play drive for touchdown ending in 5 yard run. 4:59 in scrimmage, PAM 24-7.

No first downs on this series. Punt to Nederland 26. Nederland gets 6 yards in the series and punts to PAM at their own 20.

Nederland gets nothing after 2 penalties. PAM takes over punt at own 33. Runs twice for 2 yards. 3-8 when they swap ends of the field at the end if 3, PAM 17-7

It will from me because I am busy typing and not watching huddles or lack thereof.

Swing pass for 24 starts the drive. Then another for 18. Three plays for another 12 down to Nederland 22. Nederland stiffens and on 4-5 from 17, PAM gets 3. 17-7 at 3:07 in 3.

Nederland drives to PAM 10 on 2 runs, then 2 passes. On 4-13 a screen is incomplete. Ball over on downs after and 60 yards. Good thing this is practice.

Let’s see if PAM has found the answer or this was just a good series.

Been looking great until the last series PAM making offensive adjustments and drives 70 yards for touchdown. Last play being 35 yard pass. 14-7 at 11:09 in 3.

If any highlights so far it is Nederland defense pretty much shutting down PAM. PAM’s first drive was maybe 25 yards and nothing after that except a touchdown drive of 11 yards after interception. Nederland offense was a little better with 36 yard touchdown drive and the drives around 50 and 60 yards that get inside PAM 30 but PAM’s defense stepped up and stopped them.

Nederland has a long run to PAM 25 but negated by the classic holding by someone upfield nowhere near the play. They get the first down back with tw runs followed by a first down pass to PAM 14. Nederland turns ball over on fumble at PAM 10. PAM gets pass and run to Nederland 48. Holding on long incomplete pass makes it 1-20. PAM gets the first down anyway at Nederland 38 and ends the half with incomplete pass in end zone. 7-7

PAM gains 8 and punts to Nederland 32. Nederland drive is 22 yard pass to start it and offsides by PAM on 3-4 for two first downs. Offensive pass interference pushes Nederland to almost midfield but they get it back down to 27 of PAM before two sacks kills the drive at 40. PAM gains one yard and get a great punt to Nederland 15. Nederland has man wide open 10 yards behind everyone but qb throws to PAM player.... who drops it. Not to worry, next pass is way overthrown and PAM gets the interception this time to Nederland 11. One pass for 11 makes it 7-7 with 5:20 left in first half of practice.

The Nederland drive consisted of 45 yards gained on punt exchanges and a 36 yard 3 play drive. PAM ends the quarter with a hard hit 1 yard loss. 2nd quarter coming up.

Nederland makes a few yards and punts. PAM gets a first down and then punts to Nederland 5. Nederland gets ot out of hole with one first down and punts to midfield. PAM misses wide open receiver downfield but ends up with -1 yard on series and punts about 6 yards to Nederland 45. Nederland punts with the highlight of the series being 2 dropped passes for would have been first downs. PAM takes over at own 7. Nederland appears to be winning.... the battle of the punts. PAM ends series with 1 positive yards. Punts to own 36. Nederland with 5 seconds in the quarter ends the punt battle and makes it 7-0.

I believe that it could benefit either. It is according to what they have discussed to get to that point. From the police academy to today (almost 36 years) I have seen people want reasonable suspicion, probable cause and beyond a reasonable doubt defined by percentages. There simply is no way to do so. Those are concepts, not math. Typically a judge will simply read the definition that should have already been given to the jury in the charge. Sometimes they will add some explanation but no really detailed. I think this judge told them what I would say and that is it is not beyond all doubt. But how little doubt? As an example, let’s say a witness says they saw a blonde white male running away from a scene. DNA is gathered and it identifies a person that turns out to be a white male who is blonde. So it’s him right? But what if the DNA sample says the odds have someone else having the same DNA would be one in 5 million? Technically there might be 50 or 60 people in this country with DNA they cannot be distinguished from the suspect if that was true. Therefore in an area the size of Houston, there might be one match. What are the odds of it being another white male who is blonde who the prosecution can put In the area of the crime scene? Is it “possible” that it might be another person? Sure it is likely? Sure... at about the odds of winning the lottery but it is not beyond “all” doubt. Is that a reasonable doubt? Probably not but each juror has to make up his own mind. But what if the evidence made you believe there was about a 10% chance of innocence, is that reasonable doubt? In my opinion, absolutely. I have heard (and given) percentages like reasonable suspicion might be about 20%, probable cause might be around 50% (I have heard some explanations say it has to be greater than 50%... so 51%?.... but I disagree) and beyond a reasonable doubt around 98%. You will likely never actually see those in any official writing because it is impossible to define opinions by math and courts won’t do it. So why does it matter in this case? We don’t know which way one or more jurors was leaning to ask the question. Like this scenario above, was a juror saying, I think he is probably guilty but there’s maybe a 15 or 20% chance that he is not. Does 85% sure what he meant guilt? Or perhaps they are about to convict him and one lone juror says that he is not a 100% percent sure of guilt but has a 2% of doubt. Is that “reasonable“?

You negated your own argument. You seem to want a jury of peers but then make it appear that you want legal scholars making the decisions. Those are not peers. The “regular jury” as you call it are the peers. If the state can’t convince a bunch of people that don’t understand legal mumbo jumbo, the defendant walks.

Glad to know that I wasn’t blind.

Nederland went on offense first and ran 20-25 plays in a scrimmage format. Then Lumberton had their turn. They also played a half game like conditions but with no kicking except extra points. Even that didn’t allow a defensive rush. Nederland put up about 3-4 touchdowns combined between scrimmage and game conditions and I don’t remember Lumberton scoring. Nederland had a couple of other deep drives and Lumberton had at least one good drive getting inside the Nederland 30 before shooting themselves in the foot. I don’t know the players numbers from either team so I really can’t name anyone except Nederland’s qb. RB #22 from Nederland had some good runs and showed some pretty good acceleration inside. Receiver #9 looked pretty good. Lumberton has a big tight end that looks like he will a handful for other teams. He seemed like a big part of their offense with short passes over the middle and they can hit him deep. I think it was him that also took an inside handoff maybe going off tackle or like an inside reverse a time or two. He looked big, good hands and apparently they didn’t mind giving him the ball on the line of scrimmage.... assuming that was him but I wasn’t paying attention to numbers. He seemed pretty hard to miss unless they have a clone of him. Both teams did okay and what scrimmages are for, pointing out timing issues and such. A couple of times Lumberton got men open deep in the secondary and overthrew passes. One had a guy deep and the pass really wasn’t that close on what should have been a Raider touchdown. Of course that could happen anytime but it looks like something that can be corrected. Overall Nederland had the upper hand if someone wants to count scores and yardage but Lumberton seemed pretty scappy and swarmed to the ball several times on defense. If anything between the two teams that seems the biggest issue it would be Lumberton needing more work on offense. I think both teams got in some good work for an opening scrimmage.

More fake news? Lets look at the article as 100% fact The “minority” of whites according to the article will have more than twice the number of the next..... well, not really race. The claimed minority of white people will have more than twice the number of Hispanics.... which isn’t a race. In fact a large percentage (probably a majority) of Hispanics are caucasion or white. Blacks according to the article will be statistically identical as they are today, gainibg nothing. In fact many blacks of Spanish mix/descent are in the Hispanic column also. So many of the blacks are also included in the Hispanic ethnicity (not race). So according to the article, in 2045 whites will have 1/10th of 1% less than all other races and ethnicities combined, some of white are...... uhh.... white.... and more than twice the number of the next group, which isn’t a race and includes whites... and so whites are “the minority”. Oooookay....... Yep, fake news or at least headlines.

Great news and welcome back.

Great news again!!

What is truly shocking is that it was a 5-4 vote. The bimbo justice Sotomayor is a pure idiot and chose personal feelings over the law.

Yes, theft is terrible. Theft from children is worse. But as gun owners we make the same argument. It isn’t the gun but the person. If a person is willing to commit mass murder for which there is significant chance if death at the scene or the death penalty later, what is another law or rule going to do? I think that two signatures is reasonable and my union does that. It might give a person a bit of pause and rethink the issue. A person who is addicted to gambling and willing to risk prison time to keep it up? I am not sure that anything will stop that except getting caught.

Absolutely...... but if I was willing to steal $70,000, don’t you think that I could justforge the other person’s signature? I am not sure that any law can stop a criminal. The only thing that stops a person from a theft crime is honesty or fear of paying a penalty. Once the crime has been committed then the law only provides a punishment and no deterrent at that point.