[bk400]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

I don't remember all the details now, but I think a good argument could have been made that his flight was suggestive of guilt.

The United States Supreme Court has long held that evidence of flight after committing a crime is relevant to establish a defendant's consciousness of guilt, even though not sufficient in and of itself to sustain a conviction. See, e.g., Allen v. United States, 164 U.S. 492, 499, 17 S.Ct. 154, 41 L.Ed. 528 (1896); Alberty v. United States, 162 U.S. 499, 510-11, 16 S.Ct. 864, 40 L.Ed. 1051 (1896); Illinois v. Wardlow, 528 U.S. 119, 124-25, 120 S.Ct. 673, 145 L.Ed.2d 570 (2000).

I don't think we will find any other post in the history of online sports forums where there is even one, much less three, perfectly composed Supreme Court case citations. (And two of them are from the 19th century!)