jeffdfw said:
Wow...
According to the update on WFAA's website. He did assault a woman at his home last Monday and pulled a gun on her.
>>>Read More!
http://www.wfaa.com/sharedcontent/dws/wfaa/latestnews/stories/wfaa080721_wz_russmartin.782d00f5.html
Just read the PDF from Southlake PD that you posted as well.
Again – not to state what should be totally obvious here but at no point does it say that Russ Martin has done anything rather he has been accused.
“The warrant was the result of
allegations that Mr. Martin assaulted a woman at his Southlake home last Monday, July 14th”
“
According to the unnamed complainant, she and Martin engaged in a verbal altercation that turned physical.
She advises that Martin physically assaulted her and displayed a pistol during the altercation. The woman reported the incident to the police the following day”
Now – I’m not a lawyer here but I don’t see anywhere that he has been proven guilty of anything. All I can see is he has been accused and arrested. Nothing more than that. Seems like just ONE side of a story.
Also – turned physical can mean any number of things. No one knows exactly what if anything transpired.
I would imagine that if any of us were accused of such an incident – and had a high profile in the local media especially with local law enforcement – they would virtually have to be arrested. The flip side being – what if he was accused and not arrested? People would really be flipping out would they not? The only facts here are Mr. Martin has been
accused by an unnamed person of assault and displaying a pistol and was subsequently arrested. Anything else is just conjecture and hearsay, correct?
I highly doubt that if this were a radio personality that the vast majority of posters here liked that the resulting threads and posts would be so negative and accusatory. Point being that no one here knows exactly what happened (myself included) but the majority is ready to burn him in effigy. You don’t like his show or him – great! No big whoop – but to grandstand on the internet when you have
ONE side of story is immature and horribly irresponsible.
Hey – if it comes out that he did a bad thing whatever it may be – I will be the first to have egg on my face but that hasn’t happened yet.
I will wait along with the rest of the uninformed to
at least hear the other side of the story(and that’s just about everyone) But then that's the beauty of this - most of you had already made up your minds hours if not days ago based on little to no information - so why should the facts or the other side of the story get in the way? Or god forbid the legal process?!