Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity
On Twitter: MrMichaelLee and PostSports  |  Facebook  |  E-mail alerts: Redskins and Sports  |  RSS

Arenas case could go to grand jury today

Courts reporter Keith Alexander writes on The Washington Post's Crime Scene blog:

Two law enforcement sources said Tuesday morning that prosecutors planned on presenting evidence to a Superior Court grand jury in the Gilbert Arenas gun case as soon as today.

The case would go to the existing panel. The Examiner reported this morning that a grand jury had been convened for the case and it was "mulling" bringing gun charges against the Washington Wizards guard.

If the grand jury decides to charge Arenas, the indictment could come later this week. The sources, who spoke on condition of anonymity because the case is ongoing, cautioned that they are still investigating. If they uncover more evidence, they would present that to the panel and that could delay charges, the sources said.

Here is the complete blog entry on the Arenas case.

By Alexa Steele  |  January 5, 2010; 12:30 PM ET
 
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Mike James defends Arenas
Next: Miller out, Haywood ill

Comments

Arenas will go down in history as the first and only sports figure to have a $111 million, fully-guaranteed contract voided if he's convicted of a felony.
It's really too bad for his family that nobody ever conviced him to grow up.

Posted by: and_1 | January 5, 2010 12:54 PM | Report abuse

...nobody ever convinced him...

Posted by: and_1 | January 5, 2010 12:56 PM | Report abuse

So this will be the third season in a row that has been derailed by Gilbert... As a season ticket holder, PLEASE get rid of this fool, PLEASE!!!

Posted by: S2DU | January 5, 2010 1:00 PM | Report abuse

nobody

Posted by: mopp04 | January 5, 2010 1:00 PM | Report abuse

if it goes in front a grand jury, prosecutors are not going to get an indictment. this dc baby

Posted by: prescrunk | January 5, 2010 1:03 PM | Report abuse

Arenas will go down in history as the first and only sports figure to have a $111 million, fully-guaranteed contract voided if he's convicted of a felony.
It's really too bad for his family that nobody ever conviced him to grow up.

I guess Michael Vick just doesn't exist anymore huh? I forgot how fast fans forget.

And don't try to pull the "it wasn't guaranteed" card. He lost that money and THEN some.

Posted by: SDMDTSU | January 5, 2010 1:12 PM | Report abuse

I hope he is NOT indicted...simply said!

Posted by: Gooddad | January 5, 2010 1:12 PM | Report abuse

Arenas is a wild child who turned down his mother, who has to tell him to grow?No matter bad his mather to her life and his child hood was it would have been appropriate that he should have given her a second chance.I am sure he is expecting a second chance to play in NBA after he finish his punishment if at all he get the right punishment.

Posted by: gtefferra | January 5, 2010 1:14 PM | Report abuse

Does this mean that DC_MAN_88 was right the whole time about everything?

Posted by: chinatown | January 5, 2010 1:16 PM | Report abuse

"I guess Michael Vick just doesn't exist anymore huh? I forgot how fast fans forget."

What doesnt exist for some reason is the perception that the NFL is a "thug" league along with the NHL.

How come Vick doesnt ruin people's perception of the NFL?

How come #1 pick in the NHL draft can assault a 62 year old man over $.20, but no one says the league is filled with thugs?

We all know the answers to these questions of course...

Posted by: divi3 | January 5, 2010 1:23 PM | Report abuse

Posted by: divi3 | January 5, 2010 1:23 PM | Report abuse

I asked about the Pat Cain story last year and nobody knew what i was talkin bout or maybe they just didn't care that a 23 year old white NHL millionare and his older brother hospitalized a cab driver over a 20 cent fare they were short on. yeah just the nbs with the thuggery.

Posted by: lilhollywood10 | January 5, 2010 1:45 PM | Report abuse

What the hell does Arenas' mother have to do with anything?

Posted by: kalo_rama | January 5, 2010 1:48 PM | Report abuse

Posted by: djnnnou | January 5, 2010 1:49 PM | Report abuse

Nice Post of Nickle's angle, kind of runs in the fact of guys like McG who are convinced -- to the extent that anyone who disagrees is "soft on crime" -- that he'll do five years. McG stands for McGod,Idon'tknowhowIcanstandmyselfI'msomuchsmarterthaneveryoneelse.

Posted by: mike8 | January 5, 2010 1:54 PM | Report abuse

hard to see wizards successfully voiding his contract over a misdemeanor.

Posted by: divi3 | January 5, 2010 1:57 PM | Report abuse

I can't be the only taxpayer who wishes we would devote this much energy and expense to actual dangerous criminals. The only thing Gilbert has ever hurt is the Wizards' salary cap.

Posted by: bryc3 | January 5, 2010 1:59 PM | Report abuse

Wow...is someone saying that Gil doesn't deserve a second chance in the NBA because he didn't give his mother a second chance?

I love this blog.

Posted by: SDMDTSU | January 5, 2010 2:03 PM | Report abuse

Wow...is someone saying that Gil doesn't deserve a second chance in the NBA because he didn't give his mother a second chance?

I love this blog.

Posted by: SDMDTSU

Agreed. These are the same people who ignore the "log in their own eye while rejoicing over the speck in Gilbert's eye".

Posted by: G-Man11 | January 5, 2010 2:07 PM | Report abuse

if gilbert's explanation is true, the grand jury shouldn't pursue charges. if it doesn't, the league should give him a slap on the wrist. it would be utter BS to void his contract due to moral turpitude if the guy was joking and had unloaded weapons. c'mon, wtf? an extremely dumb move? yes. but meriting police charges? no. meriting a huge david stern fine? no, although it wouldn't be the first time that jackass has ruined the goings on in his own nba (see., e.g. robert horry induced suspensions in phoenix v. spurs). meriting voiding his contract? come ON. this guy has been eccentric from the start. if the facts are true, and no one was endangered, everyone needs to chill out.

Posted by: PopeyeJones | January 5, 2010 2:08 PM | Report abuse

Popeye-

I cannot believe that you are trying to justify this child's actions....

In my workplace, and every other workplace I can think of, these actions would be a firable offense on the spot, no questions asked.

He is a selfish individual and has continued a losing culture in that lockerroom. I see absolutely no reason to give him sympathy.

Posted by: S2DU | January 5, 2010 2:13 PM | Report abuse

Stern has got to stop caring about what the Rush Limbaugh crowd think about the league. If it's determined Arenas was threatening with the guns and is facing felony charges, then the hammer drops on him.

If the city determines his actions warrant a misdemeanor and nothing more, the penalty Stern hands out should reflect that and Arenas' violation of nba rules- but not be designed to destroy his career due to the rantings of ill-informed bloviators making knee-jerk proclamations before the facts are known.

Posted by: divi3 | January 5, 2010 2:15 PM | Report abuse

"In my workplace, and every other workplace I can think of, these actions would be a firable offense on the spot, no questions asked."

And, again, the NBA (and pro sports in general) is not like any other workplace. The rules of one do not inherently apply to the other.

Posted by: kalo_rama | January 5, 2010 2:16 PM | Report abuse

Kalo you always beat me to my point...I'm tired of people comparing their lives and jobs to athletes.

Posted by: SDMDTSU | January 5, 2010 2:23 PM | Report abuse

The saying is that a prosecutor can get a grand jury to indict a loaf of stale bread. Well, that might be true, but what are the chances of indicting a black athlete in DC?

Posted by: hock1 | January 5, 2010 2:25 PM | Report abuse

Popeye-

I cannot believe that you are trying to justify this child's actions....

In my workplace, and every other workplace I can think of, these actions would be a firable offense on the spot, no questions asked.

He is a selfish individual and has continued a losing culture in that lockerroom. I see absolutely no reason to give him sympathy.

Posted by: S2DU | January 5, 2010 2:13 PM | Report abuse
to repeat kal the NBA isn't your Cubicle Farm. people need to stop hating. Yes Gil was wrong and apparently a crime was committed, so he'll be dealt with. but all this hate ;b/c he makes more money than us or that we spend time out of our work day talking about him, needs to slow down. how can it be that so many people are in their feelings about this issue? ........and the pro atheletes are the ones detatched from reality.

Posted by: lilhollywood10 | January 5, 2010 2:29 PM | Report abuse

Kalo...

So pulling a gun in a lockerroom is somehow different than pulling one in an office? Please explain. If he left the guns on his chair in his locker or someone leaves a gun on my chair at my desk, I fail to see the difference.

What, because lockerrooms have more blacks or "thugs" it is somehow a different work environment? Or should be more acceptable? Or that athletes shouldn't follow the rules of the NBA or their direct employer?

I fail to see the connection.

Posted by: S2DU | January 5, 2010 2:32 PM | Report abuse

"I fail to see the connection."

I'm sure you fail at any number of things.

It goes without saying, of course, that none of what you said has anything whatsoever to do with my point, so other than pointing that out, I won't actually bother responding to it.

Posted by: kalo_rama | January 5, 2010 2:37 PM | Report abuse

"If he left the guns on his chair in his locker or someone leaves a gun on my chair at my desk, I fail to see the difference."

If the person who left the unloaded gun on your chair was the CEO and guaranteed $111million in salary no matter what; and had generated untold millions for the company- do you think it would be an open and shut case of the Board firing him?

If you want to make analogies between where you work and where Arenas works, please make more accurate ones

Posted by: divi3 | January 5, 2010 2:43 PM | Report abuse

Wow...is someone saying that Gil doesn't deserve a second chance in the NBA because he didn't give his mother a second chance?

Posted by: SDMDTSU

No I believe it was his "MATHER" he did not give a second chance to.

Yes I am confused too. Maybe it is a combination of his mother and father?

Posted by: millineumman | January 5, 2010 2:43 PM | Report abuse

S2DU

The difference is whether you are considered an asset to your agency. Just like some of you feel that Gil is not worth his contract. Well he was worth his contract before he got hurt. That contract was an investment by the wizards that he could come back near Agent0 level. You remember, back when the arena was packed. Now, the arena is not packed because the wizards are losing but does Ernie want to gamble that Gil won't get back, becuase he was always stupid. They knew he was stupid when they signed him to $100m. They signed him becuase despite that, he was an asset.

You say your company would fire you if you did what you did? Were you joking? Are you an asset to your company?

Tell me this, why am I, after being convicted of 3 felonies, than a 4th, am I able to work in my federal agency, after going being interrogated and going thru more "security clearances"? And I am black. It certainly isn't because I am a poor asset to my agency.

Posted by: G-Man11 | January 5, 2010 2:45 PM | Report abuse

"Cotton" MATHER? Oh. no can't be. This is the present and not NEW ENGLAND either.

Posted by: glawrence007 | January 5, 2010 2:50 PM | Report abuse

The saying is that a prosecutor can get a grand jury to indict a loaf of stale bread. Well, that might be true, but what are the chances of indicting a black athlete in DC?

Posted by: hock1 | January 5, 2010 2:25 PM

anyone who has had the pleasure of serving on a Superior Court Grand Jury knows that people often get off for a lot worse...

Posted by: prescrunk | January 5, 2010 2:51 PM | Report abuse

What's more likely to get someone killed, a guy bringing an unloaded gun to the Verizon Center, or a person driving home drunk from a game there?

Which shows worse lack of judgement?

Which is a better example of moral turpitude?

just wonderin...

Posted by: divi3 | January 5, 2010 2:52 PM | Report abuse

Kalo-

Fine, I will take the bait. Because you are so knowledgeable, explain how Gilbert's actions, if reported to be true, are acceptable in a NBA lockerroom? (I assume we agree that it would not be tolerated at traditional workplaces)

"And, again, the NBA (and pro sports in general) is not like any other workplace. The rules of one do not inherently apply to the other." But Verizon Center does not allow firearms on the property besides police. And the NBA forbids guns in the lockerroom.

So my question to you again, is why are the rules at my workplace not allowed to be broken, less I be fired, but Gilbert can break the rules at his work but they don't apply because he makes big money?

Posted by: S2DU | January 5, 2010 2:52 PM | Report abuse

divi3's point is the best I've seen on this blog in a long time. I bet every single one of us works for an organization where exceptions are made for exceptional performers. That's life.

If most of us brought unloaded guns to work, we'd likely be suspended or fired. But they probably wouldn't lock us up and throw away the key. And I think that's what the rational people are trying to argue here. Gilbert did a bad thing, but Gilbert is not a bad person.

And if you believe in "making an example out of him," chances are you've got some other agenda you might as well just come out and admit.

Posted by: bryc3 | January 5, 2010 2:53 PM | Report abuse

So my question to you again, is why are the rules at my workplace not allowed to be broken, less I be fired, but Gilbert can break the rules at his work but they don't apply because he makes big money?

Posted by: S2DU | January 5, 2010 2:52 PM

shut up.

Posted by: prescrunk | January 5, 2010 2:54 PM | Report abuse

thanks bryc3.

"And if you believe in "making an example out of him," chances are you've got some other agenda you might as well just come out and admit."

bingo

Posted by: divi3 | January 5, 2010 2:59 PM | Report abuse

So my question to you again, is why are the rules at my workplace not allowed to be broken, less I be fired, but Gilbert can break the rules at his work but they don't apply because he makes big money?

Posted by: S2DU | January 5, 2010 2:52 PM | Report abuse

Same reason your boss told dirty jokes at lunch with a glass of Scotch in one hand and the secretary's leg in his other, while you sat in your cubicle eating from the McDonald's Dollar Menu.

Because this is America.

Posted by: bryc3 | January 5, 2010 3:03 PM | Report abuse

What's more likely to get someone killed, a guy bringing an unloaded gun to the Verizon Center, or a person driving home drunk from a game there?

They don't wanna hear that G-Man...who really wants to have to think? LOL

Gil was wrong...but it's getting made into something it's not. It's been said they didn't pull guns on each other...but even today that's NOT what's being reported. This isn't felonious behavior. Regardless of how you feel about him or his money. Facts are facts.

No matter what 88, 78 or SD2U say.

Posted by: SDMDTSU | January 5, 2010 3:03 PM | Report abuse

G-man

No idea as to why you are still employed as I do not know you, but I would think if you threatened a fellow co-worker on company property with a firearm, loaded or not, you would be looking for work.

But good point about Gilbert and being an asset. If we were 21-10 and Gilbert was playing all-star level basketball, many people would feel differently about him and the situation.

Unfortunately his knee problems have cost this team two seasons, and his potential suspension for games this season has a strong chance of sinking this one as well.

As Rock Cartwright said yesterday, "some guys are rules guys and some guys are guidelines guys...". Unfortunately Gil still think he is a guideline guy, when his talent, skill level, and worth are more in line with a rules guy-

Posted by: S2DU | January 5, 2010 3:07 PM | Report abuse

I hope you don't have to answer any questions and be held to that level of accountability in the end. Especially if Gil was joking and there were no bullets

Judge not or you will be judged.

Posted by: G-Man11 | January 5, 2010 3:07 PM | Report abuse

I would think if you threatened a fellow co-worker on company property with a firearm, loaded or not, you would be looking for work.

what does that have to do with Gilbert?

Unfortunately his knee problems have cost this team two seasons

which is why we did better two years ago, without him?

As Rock Cartwright said yesterday

who?


Posted by: prescrunk | January 5, 2010 3:11 PM | Report abuse

G-Man

Guess I just don't see the humor in what Gil did? And I feel confident in judging someone who uses guns as either a prop in a joke or as a ways to intimidate. Crazy me-

Posted by: S2DU | January 5, 2010 3:12 PM | Report abuse

No idea as to why you are still employed as I do not know you, but I would think if you threatened a fellow co-worker on company property with a firearm, loaded or not, you would be looking for work.

Posted by: S2DU

First, I don't Gil was threatening Javaris. It seems to me he was telling Javaris to pick which gun he wanted for payment of the bet.

Secondly, I was convicted of worse than what Gil is rumored.

Posted by: G-Man11 | January 5, 2010 3:13 PM | Report abuse

So you're saying if we were 21-10 you would feel differently about Gil?

So much for that blind justice huh?

Posted by: SDMDTSU | January 5, 2010 3:15 PM | Report abuse

S2DU

I never said what Gil did wasn't stupid. It was. In fact, I don't believer for a second that the guns were in the lockerroom because he didn't want his kids to get hold of them. He has enough money to buy a gun cabinet.

But again, is it worth termination? No. Again, judge not.

Posted by: G-Man11 | January 5, 2010 3:16 PM | Report abuse

I thought the guns were supposed to be a joke from Critt saying he was going to shoot him in the knee....like pick one.

That's why Critt said I have my own.

Maybe I interpreted it wrong.

Posted by: SDMDTSU | January 5, 2010 3:16 PM | Report abuse

I guess Michael Vick just doesn't exist anymore huh? I forgot how fast fans forget.

And don't try to pull the "it wasn't guaranteed" card. He lost that money and THEN some.

Posted by: SDMDTSU | January 5, 2010 1:12 PM


You corrected yourself. VICK'S CONTRACT WAS NOT GUARANTEED!!! So don't pull that "he lost that and then some" crap. It wasn't guaranteed. That is a fact.

Posted by: and_1 | January 5, 2010 3:24 PM | Report abuse

VOID! VOID! VOID!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Please take advantage of this gift.

VOIIIIIIIIIIIIDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Posted by: beas13 | January 5, 2010 3:25 PM | Report abuse

SDMDTSU-

"So you're saying if we were 21-10 you would feel differently about Gil?

So much for that blind justice huh?"

No you did not read what I wrote, I think if the record was different the town would feel pretty much like you do, no big deal. Most people that I have spoken to since the news broke, besides this board it seems, think this is completely absurd.

For me, this is one of the bigger "no-no's" you can do in pro sports, and maybe the biggest I can remember. And I am an enormous Gil fan, shoot his signed jersey hangs on my wall, but this is something I cannot overlook or accept. And obviously cannot understand those who justify this as just Gilbert being Gilbert.

Posted by: S2DU | January 5, 2010 3:27 PM | Report abuse

You corrected yourself. VICK'S CONTRACT WAS NOT GUARANTEED!!! So don't pull that "he lost that and then some" crap. It wasn't guaranteed. That is a fact.

Posted by: and_1 | January 5, 2010 3:24 PM | Report abuse
maybe the 100 mill wasn't guaranteed, but he lost the job that would earn him the 100 mil and had to pay them back some of the guaranteed signing bonus potrion of said 100 million about 6.5 mill that year in addition to the forfeited salary from being suspended w/out pay and then missing 2 seasons. but yeah like you said the money wasn't guaranteed so he didn't lose anything.

Posted by: lilhollywood10 | January 5, 2010 3:35 PM | Report abuse

FIRE EG

Posted by: prescrunk | January 5, 2010 3:36 PM | Report abuse

I said it yesterday, and I'll say it today- I'd probably show up at the courthouse in his jersey (like those Vick lunatics) if the team was 21-10. I love me some Wizards.

S2DU is this worse than:

Shooting your limo driver (Jason Williams)
Choking your coach (Latrell Spreewell)
Beating up fans (Ron Artest)
Appearing in a video discouraging people from cooperating with the police (Carmelo Anthony)

This isn't even worse than commonplace NBA things like adultery/domestic abuse/low-budget tattoos.

Posted by: bryc3 | January 5, 2010 3:37 PM | Report abuse

If he's not available to play when next season starts because he's serving a multi-year prison term, Gilbert Arenas will find out just how much the NBA and "regular world" workplaces have in common. Further, that contract is toast if he's not able to render his basketball services to the Wizards due to being in the clink.

Posted by: and_1 | January 5, 2010 3:38 PM | Report abuse

Please let this happen. Void the contract get rid of EG and start over

Posted by: beas13 | January 5, 2010 3:42 PM | Report abuse

but yeah like you said the money wasn't guaranteed so he didn't lose anything.

Posted by: lilhollywood10 | January 5, 2010 3:35 PM


Never said he didn't lose anything. I said Vick's contract was not guaranteed. He can't really make a claim to something that was really never his (i.e., the non-guaranteed portion).

Posted by: and_1 | January 5, 2010 3:44 PM | Report abuse

Bryc3-

"This isn't even worse than commonplace NBA things like adultery/domestic abuse/low-budget tattoos."

Oh really? Have someone threaten you with Desert Eagle and tell me a tattoo is worse. You really must struggle in society with such a lack of intelligence.

Posted by: S2DU | January 5, 2010 3:45 PM | Report abuse

It wasn't guaranteed but he was going to make that money. Let alone the endosements he lost (Nike included)

He lost A LOT of money.

Posted by: SDMDTSU | January 5, 2010 3:54 PM | Report abuse

Aside from the basketball do we ever talk about their charity work on these blogs?

Posted by: jefferu | January 5, 2010 3:55 PM | Report abuse

That's like saying Gil isn't losing anything because he hasn't made the money yet...come on man. Vick got screwed.

Posted by: SDMDTSU | January 5, 2010 3:56 PM | Report abuse

Posted by: S2DU | January 5, 2010 3:45 PM | Report abuse

I hate to say I've had my fair share of guns (although never a Desert Eagle) pointed at me. While scary, I find bad ink worse. Observe Richard Jefferson, for example:

http://i50.tinypic.com/2yzfo5c.jpg

I mean come on, dude. Spend some money and get that touched up.

Posted by: bryc3 | January 5, 2010 3:59 PM | Report abuse

giving second chance is a positive social issue.I did not say NBA /wiz shoud deny Arenas a second chance, but i want him to remember the fact he did not try to give a second chance to his mother as soon as he is getting a second chance to play in NBA.

Posted by: gtefferra | January 5, 2010 4:00 PM | Report abuse

It wasn't guaranteed but he was going to make that money. Let alone the endosements he lost (Nike included)

He lost A LOT of money.

Posted by: SDMDTSU | January 5, 2010 3:54 PM

To "make that money" he would had to stay healthy for the duration of that contract, which is far from a given in the NFL and especially unlikely given his playing style.
Words have meaning. Look up "guaranteed".

Posted by: and_1 | January 5, 2010 4:04 PM | Report abuse

That's like saying Gil isn't losing anything because he hasn't made the money yet...come on man. Vick got screwed.

Posted by: SDMDTSU | January 5, 2010 3:56 PM


No, it's like saying, "Vick's contract wasn't guaranteed."

Posted by: and_1 | January 5, 2010 4:10 PM | Report abuse

To "make that money" he would had to stay healthy for the duration of that contract, which is far from a given in the NFL and especially unlikely given his playing style.
Words have meaning. Look up "guaranteed".


Posted by: and_1 | January 5, 2010 4:04 PM | Report abuse


If Michael Vick would've gotten hurt...you act like the Falcons would've cut him. He was the face of the franchise. He was going to make that money. Regardles...he had his contract voided and it cost him a lot of money especially money outside of football.

Posted by: SDMDTSU | January 5, 2010 4:11 PM | Report abuse

No, it's like saying, "Vick's contract wasn't guaranteed."

Posted by: and_1 | January 5, 2010 4:10 PM | Report abuse
but that's not true either, his contract wasn't fully guaranteed ( the same as some NBA contracts). there was guaranteed money. i know i'm splitting hairs but it seems like you are too.

Posted by: lilhollywood10 | January 5, 2010 4:29 PM | Report abuse

For those of you who didn't see it, Mike Lee's take on the possible charges:

1) "a felony for carrying a pistol without a license, which carries a maximum $5,000 fine and five years in prison" OR
2) "misdemeanor possession of an unregistered firearm...a 12-month maximum sentence."

As far as NBA discipline, he faces a "fine of up to $50,000 and.. suspension that is up to the discretion of NBA Commissioner David Stern."

Just wanted to insert a couple facts in the discussion.


Posted by: Samson151 | January 5, 2010 4:30 PM | Report abuse

and_1: "Words have meaning. Look up "guaranteed"."

LOL you had to pick one of the ten most abused words in the English language...

Posted by: Samson151 | January 5, 2010 4:31 PM | Report abuse

If Michael Vick would've gotten hurt...you act like the Falcons would've cut him. He was the face of the franchise. He was going to make that money. Regardles...he had his contract voided and it cost him a lot of money especially money outside of football.

Posted by: SDMDTSU | January 5, 2010 4:11 PM

Don't you understand? You keep saying Vick was "going to make that money" as if the Falcons had no say in the matter (and like if you say it over and over it'll somehow morph into "the money was guaranteed"). Vick had no control WHATSOEVER over the non-guaranteed portion of his contract. NONE.
Gil has a guaranteed contract. If his performance declines or he, for example, gets a bum knee and is a shell of his former self, the Wiz have to pay him. In full. That was not Vick's situation no matter how much you wish it were. End of story.

Posted by: and_1 | January 5, 2010 4:33 PM | Report abuse

you Pu$$ ies and this fear of the unloaded gun. I bet none of yall have been pistol whipped or seen someone pistolwhipped, so your fear of the unloaded handgun is a on par with the ignorance that folks say Gil displayed. the only bad that comes from an unloaded gun is having to carry the heavy focker, and maybe dropping it on your foot.

Posted by: lilhollywood10 | January 5, 2010 4:34 PM | Report abuse

s2du: "So pulling a gun in a lockerroom is somehow different than pulling one in an office? Please explain. If he left the guns on his chair in his locker or someone leaves a gun on my chair at my desk, I fail to see the difference."

I'm probably beating a thoroughly dead horse, but three differences are:

1) the person who had the weapon is under a multi-year negotiated contract which guarantees the club exclusive rights to his services;

2) his professional association has a collectively bargained agreement with his employer that addressed procedures for employee discipline;

3) his attorney is really, really good.

That's just part of the difference. But in the law, it's a big part.

Posted by: Samson151 | January 5, 2010 4:36 PM | Report abuse

but that's not true either, his contract wasn't fully guaranteed ( the same as some NBA contracts). there was guaranteed money. i know i'm splitting hairs but it seems like you are too.

Posted by: lilhollywood10 | January 5, 2010 4:29 PM

No, I'm splitting about 93 million dollars. That's how much of Vick's 130 million contract was non-guaranteed.
How anybody could say that's splitting hairs is beyond me. Arenas and Vick aren't even in the same neighborhood.

Posted by: and_1 | January 5, 2010 4:42 PM | Report abuse

Don't you understand? You keep saying Vick was "going to make that money" as if the Falcons had no say in the matter (and like if you say it over and over it'll somehow morph into "the money was guaranteed"). Vick had no control WHATSOEVER over the non-guaranteed portion of his contract. NONE.
Gil has a guaranteed contract. If his performance declines or he, for example, gets a bum knee and is a shell of his former self, the Wiz have to pay him. In full. That was not Vick's situation no matter how much you wish it were. End of story.

Posted by: and_1 | January 5, 2010 4:33 PM | Report abuse

but those weren't and aren't the circumstances. no the wiz cannot terminate Gil's contract becuz his skills slip, as they do routinely in the NFL. He will be owed the full amount if the team decides to cut him, whereas the falcons would only have to pay vick the guaranteed portion of his contract if they cut him for his skills slipping. However that wasn't the case, the falcons used the same type of "out" that some "wizards fans" are looking for the organization to take with respect to Gils 111 mil. Vick didn't even get the "guaranteed" portion of his contract because he was convicted of a crime. However, i'd have to ask how guaranteed is Gil's contract if it can be voided for 1 reason or another. Sure it would take a lot, but it took a whole lot to get ATL to void vicks contract. If it weren't for the legal problems Mike Vick easily would've earned 1/2 to 3/4 of that contract. If you dispute that you are a boob.

Posted by: lilhollywood10 | January 5, 2010 4:44 PM | Report abuse

you Pu$$ ies and this fear of the unloaded gun. I bet none of yall have been pistol whipped or seen someone pistolwhipped, so your fear of the unloaded handgun is a on par with the ignorance that folks say Gil displayed. the only bad that comes from an unloaded gun is having to carry the heavy focker, and maybe dropping it on your foot.

Posted by: lilhollywood10 | January 5, 2010 4:34 PM

Surely you jest.
The only person who knows it's unloaded is the person holding it, no? Even then, mistakes have been made ("I thought it was empty! I swear!").

Posted by: and_1 | January 5, 2010 4:46 PM | Report abuse

No, I'm splitting about 93 million dollars. That's how much of Vick's 130 million contract was non-guaranteed.
How anybody could say that's splitting hairs is beyond me. Arenas and Vick aren't even in the same neighborhood.


Posted by: and_1 | January 5, 2010 4:42 PM | Report abuse

i'm just saying he lost (by your account of a 130 mil contract with 93 non guaranteed) 37 million dollars of guaranteed money which to guys like me and you would be like losing 111 mil.

here's your first comment
Arenas will go down in history as the first and only sports figure to have a $111 million, fully-guaranteed contract voided if he's convicted of a felony.
It's really too bad for his family that nobody ever conviced him to grow up.

Posted by: and_1 | January 5, 2010 12:54 PM | Report abuse

it really didn't deserve a response earlier given it's truly speculative nature (if...then...
)so let's stop blowing life into this windbag and put this one to bed.

Posted by: lilhollywood10 | January 5, 2010 4:54 PM | Report abuse

However, i'd have to ask how guaranteed is Gil's contract if it can be voided for 1 reason or another. Sure it would take a lot, but it took a whole lot to get ATL to void vicks contract. If it weren't for the legal problems Mike Vick easily would've earned 1/2 to 3/4 of that contract. If you dispute that you are a boob.

Posted by: lilhollywood10 | January 5, 2010 4:44 PM


I'll answer your question about Gil's guaranteed contract with a question - How guaranteed would that contract be for you if it were yours. Would you find a way to not bring four weapons to the locker room, when it is expressly forbidden by the NBA and is not permitted in DC? Would you successfully sidestep felonious crimes?
Don't make it sound any ol' reason is sufficient to terminate a contract.

WRT what Vick would have likely earned if not for the crimes comitted, you make my point for me. You see, it's a guessing game with Vick's contract.
With Gil there would have been no guessing. Keep your nose clean and keep your money. Doesn't get any simpler.
If you fail to see the difference between the two situations, then there's really not much to discuss, is there?

Posted by: and_1 | January 5, 2010 4:58 PM | Report abuse

Posted by: and_1 | January 5, 2010 4:58 PM | Report abuse

what if i told u that i commit a crime everyday when i come to work, and that i trust my coworkers and the security staff here at my federal gov't building enough to commit this same crime daily, knowing i won't be told on.

and btw i din't say that any old reason could temrinate a contract, but since you all are soo geeked up to terminate gil's contract despite him not being charged or found guilty please tell me, what is a sufficient reason to terminate an NBA contract, i'd like facts this time not the hypothetical if gil gets charged, then he might get covicted and then stern might decide to suspend. how bout you bring out some facts and precedants.

Posted by: lilhollywood10 | January 5, 2010 5:21 PM | Report abuse

Posted by: and_1 | January 5, 2010 4:58 PM | Report abuse

what if i told u that i commit a crime everyday when i come to work, and that i trust my coworkers and the security staff here at my federal gov't building enough to commit this same crime daily, knowing i won't be told on.

and btw i din't say that any old reason could temrinate a contract, but since you all are soo geeked up to terminate gil's contract despite him not being charged or found guilty please tell me, what is a sufficient reason to terminate an NBA contract, i'd like facts this time not the hypothetical if gil gets charged, then he might get covicted and then stern might decide to suspend. how bout you bring out some facts and precedants.

Posted by: lilhollywood10 | January 5, 2010 5:23 PM | Report abuse

Posted by: and_1 | January 5, 2010 4:58 PM | Report abuse

what if i told u that i commit a crime everyday when i come to work, and that i trust my coworkers and the security staff here at my federal gov't building enough to commit this same crime daily, knowing i won't be told on.

and btw i din't say that any old reason could temrinate a contract, but since you all are soo geeked up to terminate gil's contract despite him not being charged or found guilty please tell me, what is a sufficient reason to terminate an NBA contract, i'd like facts this time not the hypothetical if gil gets charged, then he might get covicted and then stern might decide to suspend. how bout you bring out some facts and precedants.

Posted by: lilhollywood10 | January 5, 2010 5:24 PM | Report abuse

Posted by: and_1 | January 5, 2010 4:58 PM | Report abuse

what if i told u that i commit a crime everyday when i come to work, and that i trust my coworkers and the security staff here at my federal gov't building enough to commit this same crime daily, knowing i won't be told on.

and btw i din't say that any old reason could temrinate a contract, but since you all are soo geeked up to terminate gil's contract despite him not being charged or found guilty please tell me, what is a sufficient reason to terminate an NBA contract, i'd like facts this time not the hypothetical if gil gets charged, then he might get covicted and then stern might decide to suspend. how bout you bring out some facts and precedants.

Posted by: lilhollywood10 | January 5, 2010 5:27 PM | Report abuse

sorry work comp was acting super janky and i went ham on the enter button.

Posted by: lilhollywood10 | January 5, 2010 5:28 PM | Report abuse

a misdemeanor weapons charge resulting in no jail time aint enough to void Gil's contract, that's for sure.

Posted by: divi3 | January 5, 2010 5:29 PM | Report abuse

"what if i told u that i commit a crime everyday when i come to work, and that i trust my coworkers and the security staff here at my federal gov't building enough to commit this same crime daily, knowing i won't be told on."

Honestly, I would hope the moderators here would look up your IP address and email address and forward it to the police... both for knowingly committing a crime and for being stupid enough to out yourself in a public chat forum.

Posted by: S2DU | January 5, 2010 5:36 PM | Report abuse

@div3
i didn't think so

Posted by: lilhollywood10 | January 5, 2010 5:37 PM | Report abuse

It's very interesting how Gilby's position takes a clear 180 turn after his lawyer puts out a statement from Gilby.

First it was "I'm Goofy...." and then after the lawyer scrub, it's "I'm sorry."

Note also that Gilby said (aka lied) that he brought the guns on Dec. 9th to VC because of his baby, but then pulled those weapons out on Dec. 24th.

If he indeed wanted to turn them into security, was Security not available for almost 2 weeks?

Gilby = F'n liar.

Posted by: DC_MAN88 | January 5, 2010 6:02 PM | Report abuse

It's very interesting how Gilby's position takes a clear 180 turn after his lawyer puts out a statement from Gilby.

First it was "I'm Goofy...." and then after the lawyer scrub, it's "I'm sorry."

Note also that Gilby said (aka lied) that he brought the guns on Dec. 9th to VC because of his baby, but then pulled those weapons out on Dec. 24th.

If he indeed wanted to turn them into security, was Security not available for almost 2 weeks?

Gilby = F'n liar.

Posted by: DC_MAN88 | January 5, 2010 6:08 PM | Report abuse

It's very interesting how Gilby's position takes a clear 180 turn after his lawyer puts out a statement from Gilby.

First it was "I'm Goofy...." and then after the lawyer scrub, it's "I'm sorry."

Note also that Gilby said (aka lied) that he brought the guns on Dec. 9th to VC because of his baby, but then pulled those weapons out on Dec. 24th.

If he indeed wanted to turn them into security, was Security not available for almost 2 weeks?

Gilby = F'n liar.

Posted by: DC_MAN88 | January 5, 2010 6:11 PM | Report abuse

what if i told u that i commit a crime everyday when i come to work, and that i trust my coworkers and the security staff here at my federal gov't building enough to commit this same crime daily, knowing i won't be told on.

and btw i din't say that any old reason could temrinate a contract, but since you all are soo geeked up to terminate gil's contract despite him not being charged or found guilty please tell me, what is a sufficient reason to terminate an NBA contract, i'd like facts this time not the hypothetical if gil gets charged, then he might get covicted and then stern might decide to suspend. how bout you bring out some facts and precedants.

Posted by: lilhollywood10 | January 5, 2010 5:27 PM


WRT you being a criminal and people covering for you, I bet you don't have a $100+ M guaranteed contract, do you?

WRT all the facts, precedants, etc., nice move to shift the subject. I posted something and SDMDTSU (and later, apparently, you) took umbrage to it, because Vick had somehow been overlooked. My point being IF Gil is convicted of a felony and must serve multiple years in prison, his contract would be voided for breach of contract because he cannot render his services to the Wizards for an exted period of time.
However, if you wish to show (with facts) why Gil would never lose his guaranteed contract, I be happy to see you show why.

Posted by: and_1 | January 5, 2010 6:17 PM | Report abuse

It's really not fair as a previous poster stated, and I goggled the article to read the details. The aid to Sen. Webb entered the Capitol Bldg (Senate) filled with vistors, families, school kids, etc with a loaded gun and ammunition and I didnt see all of this outrage over him. Total double standards...Gil's gun's were unloaded, and he apologized. (The aid claimed he forget he had the guns also).
Count me as one on Gil's side, he apologized, spoke to the media, accepted responsibility.

Posted by: washwiz | January 5, 2010 6:39 PM | Report abuse

It's very interesting how Gilby's position takes a clear 180 turn after his lawyer puts out a statement from Gilby.

First it was "I'm Goofy...." and then after the lawyer scrub, it's "I'm sorry."

Note also that Gilby said (aka lied) that he brought the guns on Dec. 9th to VC because of his baby, but then pulled those weapons out on Dec. 24th.

If he indeed wanted to turn them into security, was Security not available for almost 2 weeks?

Posted by: DC_MAN88 | January 5, 2010 7:25 PM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company