It's actually the 14th amendment they were thinking of but otherwise BR provides a top notch blend of sports reporting and legal analysis unlike some other sports blogs who have literally zero idea about the 1st amendment, et al.

I guess there's no such thing as free speech any longer, I give up.

This is exactly what makes me mad about the Riley Cooper matter, last time I checked the Constitution says we have the right not to assemble with people we don't care for.

That must have been very shocking, to lose to a heavier girl like that.

It's definitely not the Giro d'Italia because I heard they throw bananas to all the athletes over there.

By giving all of this confusing and conflicting information they are trying to get the consumer to waver. But in most states a waver is not valid unless it is in writing and knowing so it will be interesting to see how this works out in the judiciary.

Since Arod has had so much time away from the game to relax, I was hoping one of these distinguished legal scholars could perhaps opine on the impact that rest judicata may have here.

People are always going to say stupid things on the internet, there's nothing we can do to stop it.

I guess I shouldn't expect an editor on this site to understand the right to free speech.

If they had already tested him before the Olympics it sounds like he could have made a compelling argument that he was a victim of double jeopardy.

I feel bad for the kid probably because I don't believe in getting caught up in the letter of the law.

I guess no one's heard of the right to free speech.

Since the alleged victim had no homestead it is possible that Jones was afraid the homeless man was going to attempt adverse possession, which is still a crime in most states.

You can see on the video that he is totally outside the baseline when he slides. Ergo by rule he was out any way.

Considering that most of these teams play in public stadiums I think a prior restraint on free speech like this raises some very interesting 1st Amendment arguments.

This is something his lawyer has already thought of but given his young age you could argue he doesn't have a mens' rea. Can't be guilty without that.

Tom, a bit of unsolicited legal advice from a soliciter (not the lawyer kind, that's my brother - I am just a soliciter). Obviously you are aware of the dangers of liable, so you may want to publish a retraction as to the first picture since it is obviously of another player.

Sean I hope you also had a great weekend. I missed reading your weekly running playlist column; I trust it is not because you've fallen off the wagon and have resumed your fatly activities.

I was going to say the same thing to you but I don't think you're quite with us yet.

Houston we have a problem! And that problem is the statute of frauds.