Margarito cleared of wrongdoing in july 2008 over Cotto!

[AztecWanker]

Nothing in that cleared or convicted him so I'll reserve judgement.

we can learn alot from this short, yet powerful post.

[BOOMbip]

put yourself in his shoes, would you honestly cheat in your biggest fight ???

If I had been getting away with it for a while and there was no fear of discovery (and if there was frear of discovery why would he do it in the Mosley match they where both championship televised fights with humongus crowds and basicly the same exact sanctioned rules)....I would.


if I was a scumbag cheater that would do anything for a W

[Don Corleone]

So, you're saying that journalists do absolutely no investigation? Are you also saying that Lampley merely heard that Margarito was caught with plaster like substance and did not either himself or through an intermediary demand some sort of reliable confirmation that it actually was plaster like substance?

Are you saying that, as a journalist, Lampley is restricted solely to the means of heresay and is unable to verify his reports through even the slightest means of investigation before issuing his reports? I just want to get what you're saying clearly because it seems so ridiculous to me.

Respected journalists become respect through credibility which comes from reliability which is borne out of issuing well researched reports. Journalists who issue unreliable, incredible reports are not well respected. If Lampley were to go on air reporting that plaster-like substance was found in Margarito's gauze and locker one week. Then report on the discovery of alien life forms the next and they were both proven to be completely unfounded then he'd lose his respect and credibility very quickly.

The point I'm getting at is as follows: at a certain point you have to decide if you're doubting the report simply because you're trying to remain "neutral," whatever that means to you or if you're doubting the report because it's incomplete or unsubstantiated. If Lampley had reported that Richardson had accused Margarito of using plaster of Paris, but that nothing had been determined as of yet I'd have taken it with a grain of salt. That wasn't the report.

The report was that Richardson filed a complaint, CSAC agreed, Margarito's people were uncooperative at first, a search was done, more plaster-like substances were found in the locker and an investigation would follow. So, do you doubt the report because you haven't heard from Margarito? Do you doubt the report because you don't want to believe that about Margarito? Do you doubt the report because you feel Lampley just picked last Saturday night as a time to completely make up a provocative story and damn the consequences if it was completely off base? I mean, what do you think it is?

No I want a full investigation complete and then a confirmed result. If it's found out to be that he is guilty of such a thing then that's the result and I can't change it. Why would I want to? I'm no fan of Margarito at all especially being a big Mosley fan, there's no need to defend him. Yet as I've explained, I am a fan of the sport of boxing and I wouldn't want to see any boxer wrongly accused and disowned for something he did not do. If he did it then he's guilty and he loses much more respect then previously imagined.

However, I'd rather see results from the a through investigation than I would from a journalist. I'm not taking anything away from Lampley but as I've said, let the garbage men handle the garbage and the reporters to do what they do. Lampley isn't paid to investigate so going by what he says is not a sure fire way of determining whether Margarito is guilty. Also, if it were proven by Lampley that Margarito is guilty without a reasonable doubt than it wouldn't be a simple allegation. It would be a closed case. Are you saying we should all accept Lampley's reporting and only look to one side of the story or should we question everything and then judge from a through investigation done by actual investigators?

[AztecWanker]

If I had been getting away with it for a while and there was no fear of discovery.......and if there was frear of discovery why would he do it in the Mosley match they where both championship televised fights with humongus crowds and basicly the same exact sanctioned rules....I would.


if I was a scumbag cheater that would do anything for a W

Then it's clear, you are a Margarito HATER you get nothing from me, good sir.

[BOOMbip]

Then it's clear, you are a Margarito HATER you get nothing from me, good sir.

If Margarito gets vindicated by the commision and this was all a misunderstanding....

he has my respect as a profesional boxer...same respect i give to anybody that puts there well being on the line to make a living....

Now if he's a cheater i hope he rots in hell and gets ****d by demons and they all jizz fire ants into his eyeballs forever.

[AztecWanker]

If Margarito gets vindicated by the commision and this was all a misunderstanding....

he has my respect as a profesional boxer...same respect i give to anybody that puts there well being on the line to make a living....

Now if he's a cheater i hope he rots in hell and gets ****d by demons and they all jizz fire ants into his eyeballs forever.

This is a decent post, im glad i changed your mind about this whole thing.

[IwatchBoxing]

If Margarito gets vindicated by the commision and this was all a misunderstanding....

he has my respect as a profesional boxer...same respect i give to anybody that puts there well being on the line to make a living....

Now if he's a cheater i hope he rots in hell and gets ****d by demons and they all jizz fire ants into his eyeballs forever.

Even if they clear him hes a cheater, you dont get your wraps replaced for nothing its not like they air boxers out everyday, last fighter was Felix TRinidad and we know all the hell he got without a trail or jury...

[-EX-]

[QUOTE=BOOMbip;4662371]If Margarito gets vindicated by the commision and this was all a misunderstanding....

he has my respect as a profesional boxer...same respect i give to anybody that puts there well being on the line to make a living....

Now if he's a cheater i hope he rots in hell and gets ****d by demons and they all jizz fire ants into his eyeballs forever.[/QUOTE]

Damn homie...but yea lol

[My Name Is...]

hahahah You PR fans are ****** garbage posters.... You can accuse all you want, but it doesnt mean he did it......

[javelin_fangs]

No I want a full investigation complete and then a confirmed result. If it's found out to be that he is guilty of such a thing then that's the result and I can't change it. Why would I want to? I'm no fan of Margarito at all especially being a big Mosley fan, there's no need to defend him. Yet as I've explained, I am a fan of the sport of boxing and I wouldn't want to see any boxer wrongly accused and disowned for something he did not do. If he did it then he's guilty and he loses much more respect then previously imagined.

However, I'd rather see results from the a through investigation than I would from a journalist. I'm not taking anything away from Lampley but as I've said, let the garbage men handle the garbage and the reporters to do what they do. Lampley isn't paid to investigate so going by what he says is not a sure fire way of determining whether Margarito is guilty. Also, if it were proven by Lampley that Margarito is guilty without a reasonable doubt than it wouldn't be a simple allegation. It would be a closed case. Are you saying we should all accept Lampley's reporting and only look to one side of the story or should we question everything and then judge from a through investigation done by actual investigators?

Don't take this the wrong way, but I think you're being very willfully ignorant. I am not a big fan of Jim Lampley, but I understand his role and I understand that he doesn't issue irresponsible reports. He wouldn't have reported a "plaster-like" substance if he wasn't ABSOLUTELY sure that that was what was found. Do you understand what a false report like that would do to his career? Obviously not. Lampley is paid to investigate. He is. That's part of the job description. If he exaggerated his reports no one in the business would work with him. That's why I say you're being willfully ignorant.

Again, don't take that the wrong way. But you're acting like there was a possibility that this thing would have been resolved in a matter of 1 hour. You're acting like a perfectly accurate report by Lampley would have sealed the deal and that because it didn't that he must have missed the boat. In other words, you're not giving Lampley any credit at all and instead granting Margarito more than his fair share of reasonable doubt all in favor of what you seem to believe is a "neutral" position.

So, let's just say hypothetically that the investigation take one month. Let's say that everything Lampley reported was true, but that the California Commission let Margarito off with a warning. What would you say then?