Antonio Margarito vs. Floyd Mayweather Jr. - who's more disgraceful now?

Nope, I know when a poster will NEVER change their mind. You're too stubborn, and scared to say you support a guy who does what Mayweather was convicted of. So instead of accepting it, like almost every other fanboy has, you look for ANY reason, any excuse, to introduce any form of doubt, no matter how weak or lame or UNRELATED. Bring up all the other cases, or other people, but none of them are mayweather.

NOTHING you say will excuse the fact that Floyd admitted to the lawyer about what he did. Or that you think with a case with no evidence, high power attorneys, and a multi millionaire with representation and resources, could NOT beat a case that you know if false. atsch

You are in the minority kid. I don't know many who refuse to accept reality as hard as you are doing here. It's weird, crazy, ****ed up, and just pathetic.:-(

 

Maybe like quoting yourself?

 

LMAO, Lance has the court transcripts now!

 

As a boxer id say Margarito as Floyd outside of his novocaine use does not really do anything sketchy, where as Margarito tried to use a weapon in the ring.
That said outside the ring Floyd assaulted a woman and threatened children which makes him a worse human being in general to me.

Both are pretty much lowlifes though, kinda hard to seperate between vomit and ****.

 

And you have no reply to anything of substance...just trying to create doubt. And just to protect the boxer your worship. How old are you anyway dude? :huh

I know very few intelligent adults who cling to hero worship this much.

 

Stop it, just stop it. I've responded to every question you've asked or presented ad nauseum. Nothing is good enough.

It's not hero worship, I just get tired of the broad assertions when people don't even understand how u.s. courts work. You fall into that category.

Whatever, you don't bother me Lance, I just disagree with you. :think

 

Nope, you have not. You THINK you have, but all you did was give some lame attempts to create doubt. All the answers you think hold water that you've given, are NOT relevant to this. You don't get that.

You cannot deal with the fact that Floyd ADMITTED to acts. NOT just pleading GUILTY as a form of admittance, but admittance to the crimes to the judge. Why the **** do you just act like that means nothing? All you keep coming back with is some smart ass "it's the plea that he has to give" bull****. Have you even looked at other articles on this? Or is that too close to taking your head outta the sand? :huh

The fact that you think Floyd did nothing, had two good attorneys, and could STILL not get out of it, says you are vary naive or that much stuck in denial. And do you realize he could have said no contest, which would make more sense for someone who is innocent, but pleading anyway.

Again, you don't get it. But somehow, you know more then attorneys who study law I guess. Floyd should have hired you dude!

BTW...do you think the other assault on women case he pleaded guilty to as well was bogus?

 

This makes no sense. I don't care if I create doubt. I'm explaining to you what is. You just have a hard time accepting things you don't agree with.

I've already gone into this. No need to continue.

If you're going to put what I say in quotations, at least get what I said right.:deal

I've already addressed this in past posts.

Maybe.:think

Oh this?

"He was convicted in 2002 of misdemeanor battery stemming from a fight with two women at a Las Vegas nightclub. He received a suspended one-year jail sentence and was ordered to undergo impulse-control counseling."

Yea, that's a pattern. He got into a squabble at a nightclub, probably with two drunk chicks, and that's a pattern.

He also got into a bar fight, :good.

 

No offense or anything, but this is quite ironic.

 

What a waste of time. This addresses nothing. :-( Lets make this easy.

WHY did Floyd not get off scott free if he didn't do anything? What did his attorneys miss Hawk? Serious question, if Floyd did nothing, why couldn't two high profile attorneys get him off? And BTW, you can try top pull that court costs **** where this case with NO EVIDENCE costs tens of millions. But I prefer to work in reality.

This case has NOTHING SOLID on Floyd remember? No evidence other then what his ex said. What did his attorneys miss? And again, why not no-contest instead? Posting some article on "no-contest" doesn't explain jack **** BTW.

 

You really don't know what Irony means do you? What about this case should I change my mind about? :huh

 

You were suggesting he's stubborn to a point. From what I've seen, you're one of most stubborn posters here, right or wrong.

Just a passing comment. :conf

 

:verysad

Your reality is, it doesn't matter what I say. Find another playmate Lance.

 

this is pretty much spot on.

 

Not really. I pick my battles well. I don't jump into discussions I am not familiar with. Maybe you should try it rather then focusing on *******s. :roll: