The Unknown Poster

I dont know...probably not in North America. He's the current New Japan IC Champion which is sort of a big deal. Word is he will drop the title before leaving (unlike Alberto Del Rio). Thing about Styles is, he's doing the best work of his career right now...he'll be 39 this year. WWE made him a low offer a year ago. Suddenly they have interest because of their need in NXT and Styles work in New Japan. I think Samoa Joe helped pave the way a bit too because Aj Styles isnt the same unless he's AJ Styles and that was a huge WWE no-no. But they brought in Joe as Joe. AJ has to be AJ. Given the fact they signed Gallows and Anderson, I have a sneaking suspicion they might be doing the Bullet Club group in NXT. They've been pushing "Balor Club" and they were annoyed at the Bullet Club co-opting the nWo mannerisms. So it wouldnt surprise me to see Balor, Aj, Gallows and Anderson as the Balor Club and possibly "invade" RAW. A lot of people think Nakamura will flop in WWE. They have a hard time with Japanese workers.

I imagine AJ will report to NXT first although making his debut at RR would make a lot of sense too. They didn't want AJ a year ago. But they need talent for NXT. Whether it makes them change their mind on AJ as a top talent remains to be seen. At his age they need to strike while the iron is hot. He could be a Bryan-level fan favourite. Jericho's return was flat and boring. Social Injustice is awful. New a Day is passé. Roman still isn't very good but Vince bumping for him speaks volumes that they won't give up.

WWE announced today they have signed AJ Styles. In a surprise move Monday, WWE have reportedly signed former IWGP and TNA Champion AJ Styles, former IWGP Champion Shinsuke Nakamura, Doc Gallows and Karl Anderson away from New Japan Pro Wrestling

In the "old" days creative was probably mlore accountable. Three guys sitting around Vince's pool is easier to not only build upon each others ideas but to argue and point out problems. Now if faceless writer #24 provides a bad segment he just moves down the pecking order for a few weeks. It's been a long time since any senior writers were replaced. Reharding heel/face it's always been true that fans cheer who they want. It's only recently that wwe stops clearly defining those roles and muddying the waters and being defensive when the fans don't react the way they want. Ric Flair was often cheered all over the world when he was the #1 heel in the business. Hogan was boo'ed out of wwe in 92 and most of his run in WCW. Undertaker was turned on 92 based on the cheers he received. Sid was always cheered. It's always happened. And it's a good thing really.

Phasma?

Didn't the chargers and raiders also apply for relocation?

That's a good article with the film makers. I'm sure they privately have a thought on who the killer(s) are and Id love to hear it

Kasdorf might end up their best piece eventually.

Penton WRs coach Markus Howell is joining #Roughriders coaching staff, and DB boss Barron Miles is off to #Eskimos. #Bombers

Do you have to wait til yours is torn off to get a bionic Penis?

A Scottish man whose penis was torn off in a childhood accident plans to lose his virginity to a dominatrix who has volunteered her services for free. Mohammed Abad, 43, from Edinburgh, recently underwent Britain's first bionic penis implant. After a period of healing, he's now allowed to use his new manhood. Watch a video from the ITV talk show This Morning with Philip and Holly where Abad discusses how his implant works. Warning! The content may be graphic for some readers. London-area sex worker, therapist and advocate Charlotte Rose has agreed to take his virginity, the pair told the U.K. Daily Record. "I have waited long enough for this -- it'll be a great start to the new year," Abad told the Daily Record. "My penis is working perfectly now so I just want to do it." Rose learned about Abad's plight after he was featured on the British TV show Embarrassing Bodies. Rose recently appeared on Love for Sale - a TV documentary series on prostitution, hosted by British actor Rupert Everett. "I am so honoured that he chose me to take his virginity," Rose told the newspaper. "We plan to have a dinner date so we can get to know each other and then two hours of private time. I'm not charging him."

So if you had two lottery picks, you'd have a greater shot at at least one top three pick. Are the rest weighted? For example, does the team finishing 6th last have a better shot at #1 than the team finishing 11th last?

And that's the sad part because we will probably never know. The best we can probably hope for is a new trial for Avery. I cant imagine the State or Federal government simply overturning the conviction and releasing them. They might in the case of the nephew because if they order a new trial all the evidence against him is pretty much useless so how do you prosecute? In the case of Steve, they might order a new trial. But the prosecution has a big problem with that evidence too and if the nephew is essentially exonerated, it eliminates their "best" evidence. Unless there is a lot we're missing (and I havent seen any "new" information that would change my mind), if I was the state, I'd call in a third party agency to do a full and complete investigation of the murder and the actions of the police. But generally they protect their own. I wonder, is there a way for the FBI to get involved? They likely wouldnt cotton to any shenanigans by local Podunk cops. If the petition to the White House gets 100,000 signatures, the federal government has to issue an official response.

I think this is exactly what happened. The prosecutor made an interesting comment in closing arguments, something like "If the police planted evididence it was because they were certain Avery did it". So much like your sense from the Defense lawyer, the prosecutor knew the cops had screwed around here. Unfortunately for Avery, the admission that the cops *might* have planted evidence should have been enough to end the trial. In fact, it should have been a mistrial I would think. And the Prosecutor should have investigated the cops. But they were all on the same side. And we later learned that prosecutor was a shady prick too, when he was forced to resign for sexual harassment and inappropriate behavior towards a victim of domestic violence. Someone killed the girl near the Avery property. They left the body in the car and abandoned the car. During the search, that cop who called in the plates found the car and drove it to the Avery compound and left it there. He took the body and had it disposed off with the remaining ashes put in Avery's bonfire pit and her belongings dumped in a "burn barrel" on the Avery property. He took the key and gave it to the other cop, Lenk, who, when no other evidence surfaced, planted it in the bedroom. Again, no other evidence surfaced, so they planted the bullet. They suspected the Averys would never give the cops permission to search their property but figured they would do a civilian search team so they had the room-mate's team arrange for the two women (including a PI) to go search and went directly to the car the cops knew was there. I heard someone's theory was, Avery did it and the cop called in the plates because he did an illegal search of Avery's property and found the car but couldnt declare it because he didnt have a warrant. But he specifically called in the plates which were missing from the car (and found inside another wreck on the property) so I dont buy that. Avery's brother indicated he had seen headlights driving down a road near where the car was left. I think the cop planted the car.

Yes but you have a far better chance of getting it with two picks then with one. Or so I'd guess. I dropped out of Statistics. Is the draft still weighted? In other words, if the Jets finish in last place, they have the best shot at first over-all?

Funny you say that Rich! I was just thinking the same thing and when he said it (as you wrote), the other lawyer sort of looked at him without comment. That one lawyer seemed to be arguing the case as his job. ie. guilt or innocence didnt matter. The second lawyer seemed more outraged and determined to prove his clients *innocence*. Keep in mind also, that that interview was quite some time after the trial. On that subject, I think the prosecution screwed themselves because of their crazy version of events. Steve might have killed her. But he didnt do it where they said or how they said. But once they got the nephew to confess to their crazy version of events, they were locked in. So in that way, the lawyers could think Avery was possibly guilty. He had opportunity. Everyone with access to that property at that time should have been a suspect. And the cops knew that the property was too wide and the list of suspects too long to pin it on Avery...so they planted the evidence to fit their theory. One thing not in the documentary was that the Defense had to submit a list of alternative suspects they might want to accuse at trial. We heard the issue of "third party liability" come up at trial and that they werent allowed to just wildly accuse mysterious "other parties" of doing it...but they had a specific list of potential other persons and everyone on their list were Avery relatives. Because, the defense knew, everyone with access to the property should have been a suspect.

I just read the "additional information" you posted also. Didnt want to quote the entire thing but most of it is irrelevant. Past crimes were irrelevant as none of them were violent crimes. No one is arguing that Avery is a wonderful human being. Im not even arguing that he is innocent. Only that its absolutely reasonable doubt and his conviction is a complete miscarriage of justice. The information about him requesting the victim come out...that could be relevant. Same with him calling her three times. But only as additional evidence that he liked her/wanted her specifically there. It doesnt even rise to circumstantial I dont believe. The bullet is interesting. But if we accept that there is a chance it was planted then it doesnt matter what gun it came from. I wouldnt accept that bit of information as fact without something to back it up. The bullet, if I recall, was damaged. It had been shot. So Im not sure if they could say with certainty it came from Avery's gun. Even if they could, if the gun was present in Avery's home for the entirety of the searches then it could have been taken and shot by someone wishing to plant the bullet. Since there was no evidence whatsoever of a murder taking place in the garage, it seems likely the bullet was planted. At that point, it doesnt matter where it came from. The blood evidence is the truck is the most damning piece of evidence. Unfortunately, because his blood had been tampered with, you cant take it as evidence. Plus, it doesnt rise beyond common sense. Why did he trip blood? He cut himself (he *did* have a cut on his hand). Why didnt he leave any prints? He was wearing gloves. If he was wearing gloves, how did he drop blood? Uhhhhhhh Exactly. And I cant take anything the nephew says seriously. He's too simple minded and too prone to suggestion. Him calling his mom was a complete and utter set up by the cops who knew they were recording the phone calls. They convinced him to call his mom and confess before they could tell her. Thus, he calls her and tells her exactly what he told the cops (that if he says he did it, he gets off in 20 years instead of 90). He did exactly as they told him to do. As far as Avery's guilt or innocence, I think it's all or none. What I mean is, I dont think someone else killed her but he hid the car (which would explain his DNA). I think he would have admitted to his part and fingered the real culprit. In every other crime he committed, he fessed up. The only two he maintained his innocence were the rape he was exonerated on and the murder. I also see his interrogation tapes as signs of his innocence. I've been on both sides of the police interview and he didnt act like someone lying or avoiding anything. He didnt fall for any of the cops' tricks. The only way he was able to keep everything straight was because he was only telling the truth. I agree about the other nephew and the brother-on-law. There were the only two (other than, I suppose, Avery and the other nephew) that had access and opportunity. They were each other's alibi's. There is evidence the nephew lied on the stand. Why lie? The brother-in-law hated Steve and didnt seem to much like his step-son either.

If Edmonton was willing to trade a "lottery" pick for Buff, I'd be pretty interested. If the Jets went into the draft with two chances at first overall and no worse than two top level picks, I'd be happy.

I guess that depends on demand. Hamonic demanded a trade too but the Isles didnt trade him immediately. They are going to wait for demand. Tampa has all the leverage with Drouin other than if they keep him, they have a disgruntled player. But if he wants to play in the NHL he either has to get over being disgruntled or retire. Realistically, it wont come to the latter because even if he doesnt get over being disgruntled, the team will eventually opt to part ways. But they will do it on their time line, like with Winnipeg and Kane. Tampa's pressing issue is Stamkos.

We also dont know that Chevy didnt offer five years. If Frolik was at a team or players function and a fan asked him why he didnt resign, most players wont say "my wife hates Winnipeg".

I dont mean to call into question the veracity of the guy on the plane. But you never know. I find people who think they have "inside" information often exaggerate where they got it to make it sound more true. So "friend of a friend who knows the cop that responded to the call" becomes "My friend is a cop who was at the scene". Frolik signed a 5 year deal. It wouldnt surprise me if the Jets were fine with that. Nor would it surprise me if the Jets wanted a 3-4 year deal. But Frolik was highly thought of and the right age to sign a longer deal. I recall Chevy seeming annoyed when the deal happened and made a comment he seemed to wish he could take back, something to the effect of the Jets' offer being better "in some ways". So to be better, it would mean either more money per year or more years. I'd be surprised if the Jets offered $4.8m over 4 years and werent willing to match the $4.3 over 5 year deal if Frolik wanted to be here, all things being equal. Maurice also made the remark recently that he liked Frolik until "he decided he didnt want to be here". Now that could simply be a general reply to the idea that Frolik signed elsewhere to a better deal. But it could also support the idea that all things were equal and Frolik chose to leave.

Did you talk to Frolik?

Just roll it into provincial debt and be done with it. Perhaps let the Bombers be responsible for the CIBC loan and future improvements/upkeep. But as far as the construction of the stadium is concerned, province should just take it on themselves and be done with it.

It's possible this isnt true.

Freep: Manitoba's Progressive Conservatives say they'll re-examine the financing for Investors Group Field if they're elected this spring, with an eye to reining in ballooning interest charges on what initially was a $160-million loan. According to University of Manitoba financial statements, the principal and interest outstanding on the primary stadium-construction loan was $186.7 million at the end of March. That figure was $8.3 million more than it was the previous fiscal year due to additional interest charges. Reg Helwer The maximum possible payments against the loan in 2015, by the city, province and Winnipeg Football Club, amounted to $5.8 million. While the Winnipeg Blue Bombers met their obligation to contribute $4.5 million, that sum was applied against a separate $10-million loan taken out by Triple B Stadium, the shell company that owns Investors Group Field. 'We'll have to see whether there's a better way to do this' -- Progressive Conservative infrastructure critic Reg Helwer As well, the combined city and provincial contribution of $1.3 million in 2015 fell short of business-plan projections. The Selinger government blames it on Winnipeg retail market conditions, as the city-provincial contributions are equal to the property taxes generated from the former Canad Inns Stadium site, whose redevelopment is thus far limited to an empty former Target store. Nonetheless, the prospect of the combined principal and interest on the loan growing to the point where it cannot be repaid has the opposition Tories vowing to look into the financing deal if the party forms Manitoba's next government on April 19. "At that point, we'll have to see whether there's a better way to do this," Progressive Conservative infrastructure critic Reg Helwer (Brandon West) said in an interview. He called the deal to finance Investors Group Field needlessly complex. It calls for the Winnipeg Football Club to first pay the principal and interest on Triple B Stadium's $10-million CIBC loan and then pay off $85 million of the $160-million stadium-building loan. The city and province are responsible for the remaining $75 million of the principal, using property taxes from the old stadium site. The agreement also calls for the city and province to assume all the interest on the $160 million until Dec. 15, 2017, when the Bombers will then be responsible for interest on their portion of the loan. The financing deal also included $30 million worth of grants from the city and province and $8.5 million in additional provincial spending. The running cost of the stadium to date, including construction and financing charges, is no less than $235 million. "There were too many people involved, too many levels and that makes it difficult for the public to follow," Helwer said. "This should be easy for the public to understand." The Tories have called for an audit into the stadium project, which is also marred by a construction lawsuit that may determine who will pay for $35 million worth of repairs underway at the stadium, which suffers from cracked concrete, improper drainage and other issues. Premier Greg Selinger has stated the provincial auditor is free to decide what to examine. Manitoba's Liberals, meanwhile, are opposed to a stadium audit. "This would simply spend money unnecessarily to establish what we already know," said Mike Brown, communications director for the Manitoba Liberal Party. Brown said the stadium project serves as a lesson regarding how not to fund public works. "The stadium is an asset for the province, but the government clearly doesn't take the public purse seriously or it would have been more diligent with costing and financing of the stadium in the first place," he said. No one within the Selinger government was available for comment. Triple B Stadium chairman Andrew Konowalchuk declined to comment. bartley.kives@freepress.mb.ca