Thanks Anthony, lets hope he comes out of this unscathed, he's a good player and we need him. Appreciate the link.

 

Dosen't change the fact that he had overloaded this car with more people than it is legal to hold.

They had every right to stop him because of his own decision to do that.
Silly decision especially during an event that is well known for having problems and because of that it is overstaffed with police looking to head off any possible trouble.

 

What lawyer isn't confident? I'd like to see a lawyer come out and say 'damn he's screwed!'.

 

:lol::lol:

 

To be fair, he apparently passed the Polygraph.

 

He passed a polygraph test. That in itself means little to nothing.
It's important to know who administered the test and what questions were asked.
If he did strike that cop with his truck, even inadvertently, he's still at fault. His truck was carrying too many people and that alone would hinder his ability to operate the truck safely. That much should be obvious.
I don't think he purposely drove into the cop.
But hey Stallworth didn't purposely run over that pedestrian, either.
No I'm not saying what Starks did is as bad as what Stallworth did. However, my point is that actions have consequences even if you "didn't mean to".

 

polygraph about what exactly?

THe viloation of an overfilled vehicle is documented.
That's enough to warrant the pullover.

THe only thing the polygraph could have been administered for is intent to hit the officer. I don't think many of us suspected he had intended to. Not a criminal act just a really stupid one.

 

Refresh memory.... (seriously, refresh my memory...)

Didn't Starks say that the officer wasn't in any danger of getting hit, or something to that effect?

 

That I don't know brother. All I know is we have two different stories. That's why I said "if" he hit the cop.
However, I will say this; if the cop is lying about being hit by Starks' truck he's really, really stupid. He's jeopardizing his entire Law Enforcement career because it would be too easy to prove he made it all up.
I'm withholding judgment for now.

 

Yeah I think that more that just a few people are under the mistaken belief that merely "passing a polygraph test" carries some real significance. Perfunctorily, it does sound pretty impressive. Unless you think about how easy it is to manipulate the test simply by controlling the questions.

 

Randy Starks Attorney Remains Paid for saying that.

If he said, "I don't think we'll win" I'd love it.

 

As people have said, he'd be a pretty bad lawyer to say.."Man, we're cooked."

Not saying Starks is guilty of the most serious charge or not. I'm just going to say;

-There is a reason that Polygraphs are not legal evidence. Why do you think that is?

Also, the officer had every right to search the vehicle. I'm guessing that since he is charging Starks attempted to hit him, he did a felony stop. That's PC right there.