What do you think about the Mark Chmura case?

mr chmura is at the very least horrificly stupid…

I’m neither famous nor a pro-athlete, but I always choose to leave places where minors are drinking (and I’m still young enough that I could reasonably have sub-21 friends)…

<peronsal thought>
he did something stupid… he possibly did someting illegal… but I doubt it was non-concensual (given all the conflicting testimonies thus far)… but it was still stupid… just dumb dumb dumb… all around… dumb dumb dumb
</personal thought>

Michael Kleber also admitted to having FOUR vodka and mountain dews before the event and he also said that he was “hanging around” Chmura all night, admires him, looks up to him and wants to ‘work out’ with him as well as asked him for advice as to which college to go to. You can read his testimony by following the link in the OP

Could it be that he’s a rabid fan of Chmura’s and would do anything to engratiate himself to him? Probably.

Perhaps I worded this incorrectly, or stupidly or whatever. My point was that just like people should be innocent until proven guilty, I believe we should believe Allison is telling the truth and not jump to the conclusion that she’s doing this to make money or just ‘be a bitch’.

If a girl comes up to me and says “I’ve been raped”, my first inclination is to say, “oh my god, what do we do, I BELIEVE YOU”, not “You money grubbing bitch.”

No, but if she was a friend of your family’s who had been in your home several times, babysat your children, attended your parties…if she was someone you liked and knew, and you claimed to be a golden hearted, well meaning Christian boy, it could mean your a cold as stone, unfeeling robot

I DO watch CourtTV. I’m following this case like a bloodhound because it sickens me that we’ll get to watch him walk. Hell, he’ll probably have a prom party next year…what’s to stop him?

I feel that she had some pretty strong emotional reactions, be they anger, fear, embarrassment , that Chmura all but smirked at. By the by, I’d be pissed at the defense attorney, too. He was a dick (which I realize is his job). I’m always pissed when people accuse me of lying. I guess we’re only to believe rape victims when they’re little quivering, weak waifs.

Just curious, how long did you “try” to side with her?

There have been women who have abused the word rape for monetary gain, and they’ve dug the grave for the rest of us…because now whenever ANYONE says they’ve been raped, it’s easiest and most comfortable to assume that they’re lying.

oh well. I see I’m in the minority here.


The whole case just grosses me out utterly. What was a 31-year-old married man doing at a post-prom party? Why was he in a hot tub in his underwear with his babysitter? I’ll never know for sure what happened in that bathroom, & I don’t believe that there is enough evidence to convict, but…eeww. Eww. I’m gonna say it again…EWW!!! If some old guy (even if he WAS a pro football player) had stripped down to his shorts & gotten into the hot tub at the post-prom party I went to, I would have gotten out of the tub, put my clothes back on, & spent the rest of the evening shuddering in abject disgust. EEEEEEWW!!!

Mark Chmura may or may not be a rapist, but what’s with all these weasel words like “stupid” and “bad judgment” on the part of his defenders.

Even if Mark Chmura didn’t use force, even if he just took advantage of a willing girl, what he did wasn’t “stupid,” it was just plain ROTTEN!

When a man who poses as a good Christian role model (as Chmura always has) does what he did (assuming that his version is the truth), he deserves our scorn and contempt.

Bouncing a check is “stupid.” Calling Mike Tyson a fag to his face shows “bad judgment.” But having sex with a teenage babysitter is disgusting, and (by Chmura’s own alleged standards of morality) sinful.

He may not deserve to go to prison, but do NOT let him off so easily.

I think the only thing for that we know for sure about Chmura was that he was “stupid” and used “bad judgement”. We don’t know what he did beyond simply being at a high-school post prom party (not even a bad thing in itslef), and then drinking and partying with the kids (theres the “stupid” “bad judgement”). Its quite possible that he didn’t do anything else that would go beyond that. Its also quite possible that he did go beyond that, in which case he is a prick that should be punished.

I do think that this whole post prom party was a good idea to begin with. It was a good idea for the Gessert’s to have a party where kids could have adult supervision, since I really think that if the kids didn’t drink here, they would have found somewhere else to go and to drink. It was even a nice gesture of Robert Gessert’s part to arrange for his friend Mark Chmura to be at the party, since it was obviously a big deal to a lot of the kids. Once Gessert and Chmura decided to get drunk and “party” with the kids however, it became a horrible situation that it never should have if the adults would have acted like adults.

Blunt, no matter how common it is nowadays…supplying seventeen year old’s with alcohol is in fact not only “stupid” it’s “illegal”


Yeah jarbabyj, I did somehow seem to overlook the fact that Chmura didn’t prevent the minors from consuming alcohol. He was initally charged with somehting like that (I don’t remember the exact term), but the charge was dropped, I don’t know why. I don’t know if you can really say that Chmura supplied the kids with alcohol though. I’m not sure if simply filling up a kids glass is “supplying” or not, mabye it is. Either way this is a bad thing that Chmura did, definitely immoral, probably illegal.

Well, we’ll know what happens in 45 minutes. The jury has reached its verdict, and court will re-convene at 9:45.

Not Guilty!

I’ll have to admit that I’m happy with this verdict. There was simply not enough evidence to convict. If the jury had voted guilty, it would have been just to punish Chmura because they thought he did something wrong, and not becasue he was legally guilty of the charges against him. I’m still not totally convinced that Chmura didn’t do it, but if I was forced to give a yes or no answer regarding Allison’s accusations I would have to say no.

Well, I think we all agree that he was guilty (morally) of something. He’s lost his career though (if the back injury didn’t do that already). The real question will come with the civil trial that certainly will follow.

The scumbag will forever be known primarily not for his outstanding play but for his role in this whole sordid fiasco. And while he’ll defend himself by saying he wasn’t convicted, I have little doubt Chmura will be known as The Guy Who Boinked His Babysitter Yet Refused to Go to the White House Due to Moral Objections. He’ll never be able to moralize again.

And then there’s Mrs. Chmura to answer to…

He’s lost his NFL career.
He’s lost the possibility of coaching high school or college.
He’s lost his holier-than-thou credibility.
He’s probably lost his marriage.

That was the fumble that keeps on giving.

Chmura’s NFL carrer is not over. He has passed 2 physicals for NFL teams recently, so his neck problems are no longer holding him back. He has been aquitted of all charges agains him, so there is no reason for him not to go back to work. I think the only question is whether he returns with the Packers or another NFL team (I’d say its 50/50).

I guarantee he will never be Packer again. And I give him 1:4 odds of ever playing in the NFL again. He’d fit in fine with XFL though, for another two weeks that is…

wow… four whole vodka and mountain dews… the guy weighs, what 275? I doubt it really affected his perception all that much…

you’re also talking about a young man that is quite worried about losing his football scholarship(s) because of an MIP, this is just a judgement call but I think that a perjury conviction would pretty much screw up all that stuff…

also… who are you to accuse a good student and otherwise decent kid of perjury???

so you’re going to believe her over him, just because you should believe her and not accuse her of lying… while thereby negating the very idea of innocent until proven guilty, and thereby negating the founding principle of your arguement…

ok… I’ll acquiesce on that point… he probably should have been a little more emotionally bothered by hearing that story… but I also bet that he was coached by this attorney to show no reaction because the jury might take it the wrong way…

how long did I “try”??? well I succeeded in assuming that he was rapist asshole from the first moment I heard about the charges (cnn.com and sports-illustrated broke the story a while ago)… but after hearing the ‘victims’ testimony I started to wonder why she was so foggy on so many details… but I chaulked that up to the extreme emotional distress of the incident…

after I heard a number of defense witnesses testify about conflicting stories, I officially started doubting her…


  • michael kleber, invitation to the bath room -vs- invitation

  • female party guest (I can’t remember the name)… that the ‘victim’ told her a different version of the assault than the ‘victim’ testified about

  • female officer talking the report… that the ‘victim’ told a different version for the police report than she did on the stand

  • defense nurse… the ‘injuries’ were consistant with several other possible causes, not just rape… and that the lack of tears/rips was rare in forced intercourse

and now that the jury has returned it’s “not guilty” verdicts (there are 12 people that were able to watch every moment (not just the televised ones)… and could see the expressions of all parties involved)… I think we should all respect the law and recognize that this is an innocent man that was wrongly accused…
unfortunately now there will civil trials where this allison girl tries to “win the lottery” as my wife put it…

so jarbabyj, what’s your take on the verdict?

blunt mentioned that a post prom party was a good idea since if the kids couldn’t party there, they’d find some place else to party, some place that’s probably less safe…

anyhow… this is probably gonna spawn a new thread, but a well deserved new thread atleast…
why not allow your kids to party at home with their friends, and party hard… with a few stipulations…

back when my wife and I were still considering having children we talked about this idea at length… she and I both did stupid things as kids (getting drunk at parties, sobering up enough that we thought we could drive home, etc, etc, etc)… and we know that the average kid will get f’ed up at some time during highschool, if not get f’ed up repeatedly… so why not allow your kids to have parties at home??? then you know that the drinks are safe (well as safe as alcohol can get, I bet we all have some stories), and you know that no one is driving (part of the rules for the party), and you know that the parents of those involved know about it (release forms are the key for parties like this… as it stands I bet the gesserts are liable for the emotional suffering of allison from this whole ordeal)

seriously parents… be open and honest with your kids… you KNOW they’re gonna party… and you know they’re gonna do stupid things… why not let them do that stupid stuff in the safety of their home (just don’t invite pro-football players ;)) let em party with their friends, but make them party in a safe place, and make them all get safe rides home or stay where they’re partying…

sounds like common sense to me, but hey, I don’t ever plan on having kids (god bless vasectomies… oh wait, that’s self mutiliation, the catholic god doesn’t like that, thank allah)…

DOH… invitation -vs- barging-ing
doh doh doh… I hate typing too fast to proof read…

DOH DOH DOH… smack smack smack…
I really should proof read…

that should have said


doh doh doh

Well bobo, I don’t know his height and weight and tolerance level, but if he’s indeed seventeen, I hope and pray to the lord that his drinking career hasn’t been a long one, and I think it would make him at least a little fuzzy. Have you ever watched a teenager mix a drink? It’s like a trainwreck.

Who are you to accuse an seventeen year old girl of lying about being raped to make money? Did she tell you that or are you assuming it?

No…I’m saying that I choose to hear all the facts in a case BEFORE saying EITHER party is guilty. I did that with O.J. Simpson, too, and was branded a fool for not screaming guilty from day one. I’ve already admitted (three times I think) that this girl is a little squirrelly and it’s an unclear case. I also know that Mark Chmura has a reputation at the very least of being a cocky son of a bitch…and he WAS drunk at a highschool prom party and so I was anxious to see what would happen, as it seemed like the prime situation for a crime like this to occur.

My original point in this whole thread was that in a case of He Said/She Said…the world will always side with HE, because of the minority of women who HAVE lied about being raped.

Well, I suppose I respect the law of WAUKESHAW (sp?), WISCONSIN, the heart of PACKER COUNTRY. It’s not like I’m going to go out and distribute street justice. I do think it’s sad for everyone involved. It’s not like I ever respected him in the first place, either as a football player or a christian role model…but this has assured that I never will. But I don’t think he’s worried about the public. He’ll go on to make millions and live a perfectly happy life.

I love football. I love football players. I am not anti-NFL or anti-sports heroes or whatever. FOOTBALL IS JUST ABOUT MY LIFE…but I’m tired of them 'allegedly" getting away with anything because they’re football players.

What’s my take? It was not guilty…I knew it would be from day one.

I only hope Mrs. Chmura has the balls to ask him for the truth.

And don’t worry about his career as a football player either…his mysterious ‘neck’ injury seems to be all cleared up and he’ll be back on the field in no time.

let’s close it bobo…we’ll have to agree to disagree and there’s nothing we can do about it anymore anyway…


My only comment on this is, if there is nothing but “he said/she said,” then the accused would have to be found not guilty due to the presumption of innocence. In this case there seemed to be a lack of evidence that the alleged crimes occured. I don’t think it had anything to do with how many women have lied about being raped, nor do I think that the location of the trial affected the outcome.

So now there will be a civil suit. What is a civil suit? How is it different than the criminal trial that just happened? I remember that OJ had the long, high profile criminal and was found not guilty. Then there was a civil trial where less evidence is needed, and has was found guilty. He lost most his money from that.

Can we expect the same thing with Chmura? So he isn’t guilty of rape. What about sex with a minor, enticement, supplying alcohol to minors? Aren’t those crimes he should be charged with?

Why did the DA think they could charge him with rape? Sounds like they didn’t have evidence.