Pete Rose and Shoeless Joe Jackson Reinstated by MLB

[Mark17]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Come now Greg, he was never convicted of same, ergo he is innocent. And besides, they all consented, as doubtless did Epstein's mislabeled victims. Laissez faire, bro!! I would take it one step further than our resident egomaniac -- if Rose preferred 12 and 13 year old girls, he had a right to self-fulfillment.

Several of the Black Sox, notably Cicotte, admitted to throwing games in the 1919 World Series, and went into great detail about how it was done. However, they were obviously lying when they confessed, because a court of law found them Not Guilty.

And it always frosts me when some guy is released from prison because DNA evidence proves he was actually innocent. Forget that DNA "proof!" If the original trial resulted in a Guilty verdict then he's guilty, period.

[SyrNy1960]

Originally Posted by Mark17

And it always frosts me when some guy is released from prison because DNA evidence proves he was actually innocent. Forget that DNA "proof!" If the original trial resulted in a Guilty verdict then he's guilty, period.

What! Are you being serious? Or did this go over my head?

[Mark17]

Originally Posted by SyrNy1960

What! Are you being serious? Or did this go over my head?

I was providing the Baltic Fox take.

It does sound ridiculous, doesn't it?

[SyrNy1960]

Originally Posted by Mark17

I was providing the Baltic Fox take.

It does sound ridiculous, doesn't it?

Yes, insane! Thanks!

[Balticfox]

Originally Posted by Mark17

I was providing the Baltic Fox take.

No you weren't. I said a man is innocent until convicted. I said nothing about anyone found guilty. It's a logical error to leap from my statement to the assumption that any and all those convicted are actually guilty.

Originally Posted by Mark17

And it always frosts me when some guy is released from prison because DNA evidence proves he was actually innocent. Forget that DNA "proof!" If the original trial resulted in a Guilty verdict then he's guilty, period.

Originally Posted by Mark17

It does sound ridiculous, doesn't it?

Yes, those words of yours do indeed sound ridiculous.

[Mark17]

Originally Posted by Balticfox

No you weren't. I said a man is innocent until convicted. I said nothing about anyone found guilty. It's a logical error to leap from my statement to the assumption that any and all those convicted are actually guilty.





Yes, those words of yours do indeed sound ridiculous.

Cicotte was found not guilty of throwing games. Are you saying he was, in fact, not guilty of doing so? Because he said he was guilty, and described in detail how he did it, right from his very first pitch.

[Balticfox]

Originally Posted by Mark17

Cicotte was found not guilty of throwing games. Are you saying he was, in fact, not guilty of doing so? Because he said he was guilty, and described in detail how he did it, right from his very first pitch.

Don't know and don't much care. The only thing I'll repeat is that a man is innocent until found guilty in a court of law.

What then about Cicotte being banned from the game? Well MLB is a private entity and can make its own rules. MLB can ban anyone for any reason and didn't owe Cicotte anything. If Cicotte didn't like the treatment he got from MLB, he could play elsewhere or start his own league for that matter. I actually wish he had. Competition is a good thing.

What I hate though is hypocrisy. It's been touched upon in two places in this thread. With respect to Pete Rose being banned from MLB for gambling, I actually support it. He knew the rule and he broke it. What riles me now though is that MLB has cozied up to gambling and gamblers because it's found a way to turn gambling into a cash cow. Well that's gross hypocrisy in my book.

Secondly, I understand that the Baseball Hall of Fame has always claimed to be independent of MLB. Well constantly acting as MLB's toady while making this claim constitutes hypocrisy. Given that Pete Rose is justifiably famous for both his exploits on the field and for having been banned from MLB, he should therefore be in the Baseball Hall of Fame. But since he needs to be voted in by others, they're entitled to ignore my advice. And I'm entitled to sneer and refer to the Hall of Fame with Johnny Rotten's chosen expression.