• Welcome to PurpleFlock! Sign up here so that you can chat with your fellow Ravens fans.

Marlon Humphrey Arrested

Status
Not open for further replies.
RayRayRaven said:
I saw the Lafell assignment, though I have a higher opinion of LaFell than you perhaps. But Humpf didn't distinguish himself and is not a corner. He doesn't have the grey matter skill set for it.

This incident with the cell phone charger spells big big dummy, but already knew that.

Humpfs unraveling is gonna be painful for most here, but I think theres a silver lining. It should be the last straw to ease old oz out the door.
Click to expand...

RayRayRaven said:
Rather...no one wants to confront a coming problem.

Just read the report.

It was cited as a misdemeanor, due to the low value of the item in question. However, any force to take possession of an item raises the stakes to "ROBBERY". And in charging the offense was elevated in court. The fact the charger didn't fit Humpfs phone tends to indicate it was not his and dismisses any drunken claim it was.

If witnesses indicate he balled up a fist and shoved the driver, he's in legal trouble.

3 am. Drunk. girls...robbery

Yeah, that's my kind of character. Nice pick Ozze.
Click to expand...

Ray, you should really stop as some are questioning your “wunderlick” score. lol
 
Tank said:
Right? LMAO! And he’s actually just 21.
Click to expand...

Wholelotta, out there in Thug Life World, folks get killed for a dime piece of rock. The age of the offender and the value of the contraband have no bearing upon whether Thug Force, Robbery Force, was used in a crime. Humpf is "not" a juvenile. Humpf is an "adult" with an even greater standard of conduct due to the privilege of being a member of the NFL and the Baltimore Ravens. There is no room for claiming excuse due to age or excuse due to inebriation. Those are Thug Life excuses that carry no water in court. We'll see how this goes down, but he is a POS and we should all want his substandard carcass off this team.

All those that are trying to frame this as de minimis, as a wilding by a "yute" with excuses, are not doing the Ravens any service. It's mirrors Humpfs character flaws right back upon them.

Stevie Biscuit got burned looking to give Ray Rice a pass and then overreacted the other way. He's a predictable character at this juncture.
 
Last edited:
Yes.. Because the idiotic drunk act that Marlon did is totally equatable to knocking his now-wife out. Punish him all the same.
 
Lost_In_Translation said:
http://www.al.com/alabamafootball/index.ssf/2018/01/former_alabama_db_marlon_humph.html

Fucking idiot. Are you kidding me dude?

I mean seriously... Third degree robbery charge? You're a fucking 1%er dude.. Idiot.
Click to expand...

Lost_In_Translation said:
Dude does know what we do to players that get arrested right?

I mean we won't cut him but this might put him into some kind of a doghouse.

What a moron.
Click to expand...

Two Game Suspension...then Lifetime Ban...without a conviction.

Here's what Stevie B. is doing. He's watching the press reports. If he hasn't talked with Goodell yet, he's weighing when. There's been an indictment, but the first hearing in court for trial scheduling and/or plea bargaining hasn't occurred yet. Its possible it could be pled to a lesser included offense, but taking property by intimidation is a very tough nut to ignore. Especially intimidation which was within the context of inebriation. There is no excuse in the law for that type of "wilding".

Now Ray Rice faced no Felony Conviction. If a Felony Conviction appends to this situation and even if it doesn't the NFL has to act.

Once again, my view is Trade Bait or Cut, without regard to ultimate conviction and its pretty clear he is not tradable at this juncture.
 
RayRayRaven said:
Two Game Suspension...then Lifetime Ban...without a conviction.

Here's what Stevie B. is doing. He's watching the press reports. If he hasn't talked with Goodell yet, he's weighing when. There's been an indictment, but the first hearing in court for trial scheduling and/or plea bargaining hasn't occurred yet. Its possible it could be pled to a lesser included offense, but taking property by intimidation is a very tough nut to ignore. Especially intimidation which was within the context of inebriation. There is no excuse in the law for that type of "wilding".

Now Ray Rice faced no Felony Conviction. If a Felony Conviction appends to this situation and even if it doesn't the NFL has to act.

Once again, my view is Trade Bait or Cut, without regard to ultimate conviction and its pretty clear he is not tradable at this juncture.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure any reasonable prosecutor would take this case. The only witness the state has would be the Uber driver, and his story already has a ton of holes in it. Unless there is some kind of video or something, there isn't really any worthwhile evidence that supports a Robbery charge.
 
jboy19 said:
I'm not sure any reasonable prosecutor would take this case. The only witness the state has would be the Uber driver, and his story already has a ton of holes in it. Unless there is some kind of video or something, there isn't really any worthwhile evidence that supports a Robbery charge.
Click to expand...

The prosecutor has already taken the case. The police report comes in, which in this case was "Theft". The prosecuting State Attorney reviewed it and said, "this is robbery", and charged it so.

Now the facts will be developed in "Discovery".

"A Hard rains..gonna fall".
 
jboy19 said:
I'm not sure any reasonable prosecutor would take this case. The only witness the state has would be the Uber driver, and his story already has a ton of holes in it. Unless there is some kind of video or something, there isn't really any worthwhile evidence that supports a Robbery charge.
Click to expand...

You are being biased towards your HOME team player. He took the charger. The Uber driver obviously caught him. Yet Humph ended up with the charger in his possession. Fill in the lines. I’m sure the Uber driver informed him it was his and attempted to keep his charger he needed for work. Yet Humph showed his masculinity in front of the girls. And forcefully took the charger. And the charger didn’t fit Humphs phone so it clearly wasn’t his. The police found enough evidence to upgrade the charges to forced robbery. He was drunk. So drunk he thought a charger was his that didn’t even fit his phone.
 
RayRayRaven said:
The prosecutor has already taken the case.
Click to expand...

Sledge Hammer said:
You are being biased towards your HOME team player. He took the charger
Click to expand...

Yes he has been charged, but the Prosecutor has a tremendously weak case and a reasonable one likely would have passed. There are a lot of dumb prosecutors out there though, so I'm not surprised. Really the only evidence he has is that the charger ended up with Humphrey.

Robbery, essentially, requires the State to prove beyond a reasonable doubt (1) that Humphrey intended to deprive the Uber driver of the Uber driver's phone charger, (2) that Humphrey used force or threatened force to obtain the phone charger or prevent the Uber driver from recovering the phone charger, and (3) that Humphrey in fact obtained the phone charger.

They can prove that Humphrey obtained the phone charger but that is about it. Humphrey would likely prevail on the fact that he mistook the phone charger for his own (supported by the fact that it didn't fit his phone, and he would have no motive to steal a phone charger for a different phone). You can't be convicted of Robbery for taking property that you think is yours- even if you use force to prevent the owner from taking it back.

The Uber driver is the stereotypical bad witness complete with the "strike that left no mark" and the missing fist full of chargers that he also alleged that Humphrey stole. So unless there's some kind of security tape or something like that, I don't understand why this has progressed as far as it did.
 
jboy19 said:
Yes he has been charged, but the Prosecutor has a tremendously weak case and a reasonable one likely would have passed. There are a lot of dumb prosecutors out there though, so I'm not surprised. Really the only evidence he has is that the charger ended up with Humphrey.

Robbery, essentially, requires the State to prove beyond a reasonable doubt (1) that Humphrey intended to deprive the Uber driver of the Uber driver's phone charger, (2) that Humphrey used force or threatened force to obtain the phone charger or prevent the Uber driver from recovering the phone charger, and (3) that Humphrey in fact obtained the phone charger.

They can prove that Humphrey obtained the phone charger but that is about it. Humphrey would likely prevail on the fact that he mistook the phone charger for his own (supported by the fact that it didn't fit his phone, and he would have no motive to steal a phone charger for a different phone). You can't be convicted of Robbery for taking property that you think is yours- even if you use force to prevent the owner from taking it back.

The Uber driver is the stereotypical bad witness complete with the "strike that left no mark" and the missing fist full of chargers that he also alleged that Humphrey stole. So unless there's some kind of security tape or something like that, I don't understand why this has progressed as far as it did.
Click to expand...
We all know he realized it was an NFL player and knew this was his chance to strike some real cash lol
 
DeVito52 said:
We all know he realized it was an NFL player and knew this was his chance to strike some real cash lol
Click to expand...

I actually do get why the Uber driver is upset lol he probably missed a couple rides while he was waiting for the police to recover his phone charger. Marlon should probably have given him a pretty big tip for all the inconvenience he caused him.
 
Sledge Hammer said:
You are being biased towards your HOME team player. He took the charger. The Uber driver obviously caught him. Yet Humph ended up with the charger in his possession. Fill in the lines. I’m sure the Uber driver informed him it was his and attempted to keep his charger he needed for work. Yet Humph showed his masculinity in front of the girls. And forcefully took the charger. And the charger didn’t fit Humphs phone so it clearly wasn’t his. The police found enough evidence to upgrade the charges to forced robbery. He was drunk. So drunk he thought a charger was his that didn’t even fit his phone.
Click to expand...

This could be a Steeler and I still wouldn't give a damn. Has nothing to do with purple shades or favoritism. Dumb drunk act. Not that serious from what I've read.
 
redrum52 said:
This could be a Steeler and I still wouldn't give a damn. Has nothing to do with purple shades or favoritism. Dumb drunk act. Not that serious from what I've read.
Click to expand...
As a fan who did nothing but condem ray rice before the video was even released... same. This is minor and stupid. He stole a $15 phone charger(which was later returned to the owner anyway). Marlon makes enough money to buy this guy a car and that would probably just shut him up(wouldn't be surprised if that was the outcome). I highly doubt anything is going to happen to him on an NFL level tbh. Jimmy Smith was arrested for disobeying a cop a few years ago and nothing happened.
 
jboy19 said:
Yes he has been charged, but the Prosecutor has a tremendously weak case and a reasonable one likely would have passed. There are a lot of dumb prosecutors out there though, so I'm not surprised. Really the only evidence he has is that the charger ended up with Humphrey.

Robbery, essentially, requires the State to prove beyond a reasonable doubt (1) that Humphrey intended to deprive the Uber driver of the Uber driver's phone charger, (2) that Humphrey used force or threatened force to obtain the phone charger or prevent the Uber driver from recovering the phone charger, and (3) that Humphrey in fact obtained the phone charger.

They can prove that Humphrey obtained the phone charger but that is about it. Humphrey would likely prevail on the fact that he mistook the phone charger for his own (supported by the fact that it didn't fit his phone, and he would have no motive to steal a phone charger for a different phone). You can't be convicted of Robbery for taking property that you think is yours- even if you use force to prevent the owner from taking it back.

The Uber driver is the stereotypical bad witness complete with the "strike that left no mark" and the missing fist full of chargers that he also alleged that Humphrey stole. So unless there's some kind of security tape or something like that, I don't understand why this has progressed as far as it did.
Click to expand...

Your missing something. The Uber driver caught him. And more than likely put up some resistance. Yet after his resistance the charger was in Humphs possession. Which indicates Humph pushed over his attempt to keep his phone charger. Which indicates force
 
Sledge Hammer said:
Your missing something. The Uber driver caught him. And more than likely put up some resistance. Yet after his resistance the charger was in Humphs possession. Which indicates Humph pushed over his attempt to keep his phone charger. Which indicates force
Click to expand...

Even that doesn't matter if Humphrey genuinely thought it was his phone charger. The lack of any kind of discernable intent makes this pretty much a waste of time and money. Unless you're getting a jury that is truly and unanimously more willing to believe that Humphrey formed the specific intent to steal a phone charger he could not use than they are to believe he drunkenly thought that the phone charger was his, there really is nothing.

Usually the explanation that makes the most sense is the most likely. And there obviously wasn't any signficant physical altercation or Humphrey would have been booked for assault on the night this all happened.
 
jboy19 said:
Even that doesn't matter if Humphrey genuinely thought it was his phone charger. The lack of any kind of discernable intent makes this pretty much a waste of time and money. Unless you're getting a jury that is truly and unanimously more willing to believe that Humphrey formed the specific intent to steal a phone charger he could not use than they are to believe he drunkenly thought that the phone charger was his, there really is nothing.

Usually the explanation that makes the most sense is the most likely. And there obviously wasn't any signficant physical altercation or Humphrey would have been booked for assault on the night this all happened.
Click to expand...

Taking something with force or threats is robbery by force
 
Sledge Hammer said:
Taking something with force or threats is robbery by force
Click to expand...

Theres still no alleged intent. Plus the threat/force element is negated if Humphrey thought the charger was his. You are allowed to try to prevent people from taking something that is yours with threats and nonlethal force.

In other words, assuming Humphrey genuinely believed it was his charger, he couldn't have used force/threat to commit a robbery since any force/threat he used would not have been in the furtherance of taking what (in his mind) was another person's property.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top