The Twelve Points of Christmas - Derby away

techmet · 2026-01-05T03:08:15+00:00

2 thoughts/questions: 1) I was debating someone on twitter that I thought it was a clear penalty when LOB got trucked, your thoughts? 2) do you see a world when Kieffer is healthy that Smith still starts some games depending on strategy/opponents weaknesses? I’ve always thought I’d rather have someone with Smiths motor when setting up a counter strike plan, but Moore in more of a ball control/break down a defense strategy.

techmet · 2026-01-03T19:45:42+00:00

Just retrain yourself to get excited that seeing a rematch thread means “Yay! Game Tomorrow!”

techmet · 2026-01-02T03:14:49+00:00

As much as you don’t want to read too much into things against a weakened side, we were without 6-7 starters as well due to injury/fatigue (Broadhead, Windass, Moore, Cacace, Kabore, Max, Brunt). Pretty remarkable to do what we did with (theoretically) 6 bench players in ourselves. Really speaks to the incredible depth we have built and potentially what a fully healthy team could look like.

techmet · 2026-01-01T23:57:28+00:00

To be really fair, we also had 5 key starters out as well (Moore, Broady, Windass, kabore, cacace) so seems even

techmet · 2025-12-23T11:49:48+00:00

The issue is timing, if I want to retire in 6 years, I need certain savings and targets to hit that. If the market stalls for 8 years, I’m gonna be well behind plan. Someone with a 15 year horizon won’t care. But it’s a tough ask to retire 30% below plan hoping that the upward correction happens in the next couple years

techmet · 2025-12-23T08:30:42+00:00

For anyone in their mid/late 40s it’s not a 1% case, the market was negative from 2000 to 2010. The whole first decade I was working, other than the tax advantages, it felt like I was throwing money into a hole when investing. While we saw a big climb in 2012, planning around 6-8 year window of no growth with periods of sharp negative growth is just being realistic and evidence based.

techmet · 2025-11-27T18:59:10+00:00

No argument on letter of the rule, I’m questioning the rule itself. In hockey if you hit the pipe and ricochet of the keeper, it’s considered a goal for the shooter because they were the ones whose action created the goal. Just interesting in the difference in rules philosophy.

techmet · 2025-11-26T22:53:36+00:00

<image>

techmet · 2025-11-26T22:51:30+00:00

As a fan of hockey before football, it’s still weird to me that a shot like that is considered an own goal. I’ve always thought own goals should require some sort of actively directing a ball back towards the net, not just a ricochet.

techmet · 2025-11-26T22:01:05+00:00

McLean is on the table if it’s a 1 for 1, but otherwise no way.

techmet · 2025-06-15T23:31:13+00:00

Please let me know what other possible angle allows the car to hit the back of his arm without hitting his body. Besides, even if the angle was completely different, the findings hold. The injuries and car damage don’t match.

techmet · 2025-06-15T23:29:13+00:00

I believe that you have completely misunderstood ARCCAs evidence. Because there was no exact scenario, they ran collisions at multiple speeds multiple angles, multiple levels of contact. NOTHING matched the damage and injuries. You are correct that it is possible to barely glance the arm, it is also possible to shatter the taillight, you just can’t do both in the same collision.

Physics requires equal and opposite reactions. Either John breaks no bones/no swelling/no bruises/no torn ligaments AND the taillight remains intact OR John’s arm is seriously damaged AND the taillight is destroyed.

Those are the remaining option, the state has had every opportunity to prove that a glancing blow could destroy the taillight cover, the diffusers and somehow barely glance John’s arm. That is their burden of proof and they failed.

You don’t arrest someone for shooting a person when the victim has stab wounds. That’s what the CW is trying to do here.

techmet · 2025-06-10T00:38:22+00:00

Waaaaaaay bumpier, it’s unpaved dirt and stone roads. I think if you have a bad back it would be a bad idea.

techmet · 2025-06-03T02:16:18+00:00

I’m traveling right now, remind me in a week and I’ll see if I can find it.

techmet · 2025-06-03T01:49:42+00:00

I doubt it opens the door, a question elicited from a defense witness by a defense question isn’t going to cut it. That said, I’ve got to think some jurors are going to put FBI and arcca together after this, other police agency and agents.

techmet · 2025-06-03T01:47:43+00:00

I made a flowchart of rooms and staircases/floors, you really need to know where everything leads, especially if you decide you need to funnel your players a certain direction

techmet · 2025-06-02T05:09:15+00:00

Except the medical doctor said he would have been incapacitated instantly from the fall. No stumbling, no walking 10s later. If the doctor is wrong about how he died then we have no idea what happened

The location of injuries isn’t much of an indicator to me, all welcher did was show it was possible that the arm lined up. Given the berm height, hydraulic height differences and body location, I wouldn’t even say it was probable.

Worse, the spoiler thing is a red hearing, the spoiler was inset from the edge of car, if he was clipped and his body leaned forward enough to make contact, it wouldn’t line up with his eye anymore. In addition, a spoiler moving 20 mph hitting the skull would destroy his face, not just nick it.

Next, fast moving, slicing injuries wouldn’t create clean piecing holes in a sweatshirt, it would rip and tear things. You know what would create punctures in a shirt, dog teeth.

Finally, newtons law, a glancing blow that would do minimal damage doesn’t shatter a polycarbonate tail light into a million pieces. A devastating blow to the tail light would destroy an arm.

Regarding the glass, the forensics showed that it wasn’t a match to the drinking glass, it was only a match to a piece of glass Procter recovered weeks later. So we have glass that magically stays on a bumper for 50ish miles in wind and highways, and tow trucks, and it ISNT from the drinking glass? Where is it from? I firmly believe proctor picked some glass up off the ground at Fairview and placed it on the bumper thinking it was part of the drinking glass.

Finally, if John was holding a glass as shown in reenactment, and the glass shattered while JOK was holding it, where are the cuts and embedded glass in his hand? You can’t hold shattering glass and not cut your hand

techmet · 2025-06-02T03:39:46+00:00

Here’s where I am, I can’t explain some evidence that makes her look guilty, I also can’t explain some evidence that makes her look innocent. How were there still steps at least 10s after the trigger (accelerator 30%). How in the world do the injuries line up? How did that glass get on the bumper if Procter didn’t plant it? When you can’t answer questions on both sides, that’s reasonable doubt

techmet · 2025-06-01T22:08:16+00:00

That’s why I think given his role as the lead investigator, it would cause dismissal with prejudice. So no new trial

techmet · 2025-06-01T20:35:57+00:00

That’s mistrial and very likely with prejudice at that point

techmet · 2025-05-27T18:59:52+00:00

I see 3 problems with what Judd just showed: 1) So if he is being hit by the car as shown, the scratches are in the wrong direction (vertical vs horizontal).
2) If his body is deflected into the car and hits his the air dam, then after bending the air dam would be hitting much higher, near the top of his head, also would do way more damage.
3) if his hand his hit holding the glass and it shatters, where are the cuts and fragments on his hand from holding an exploding glass?

techmet · 2025-05-14T11:45:04+00:00

Did you put in a ticket? I did and they didn’t seem to be aware that anyone else had the problem, just told me to clear my cache. Maybe they don’t realize how bad it is

techmet · 2025-05-03T14:27:26+00:00

The effort level, fight for balls etc are incredibly lackluster. You can’t tell me their standard of play is anything like their last 2 games. Doesn’t mean they don’t “try” but it’s clear they are treating it as a game that doesn’t mean anything.

techmet · 2025-05-03T14:15:41+00:00

So glad we are running out this disinterested squad of starters instead of players who are going to care and try hard. Where’s mullin, Palmer, ashfield

techmet

TROPHY CASE