REAL FOOTBALL Thread

yeezus said:
And then it was dismissed when he exercised his right to a jury trial. So again, tell me what happened exactly with the evidence you have.
Click to expand...

I'm going to side with the judge who obviously had enough evidence to convict Hardy. An appeal isn't a declaration of innocence.

So unless you think that woman was a fantastic liar (which btw, in domestic violence cases the rate of women recanting their stories is extremely low which definitely implies a payoff), then I'm going to side with the court that was actually held in which Hardy was convicted of doing those despicable things. Obviously the NFL and Tampa Bay discovered evidence that was in line with what the judge had.

But your right "technically" he is innocent, since the girl went MIA after Hardy wrote her a check. Continue arguing how unfair Hardy is being treated based off that technicality and support the incentive athletes have to use their wealth to avoid accountability. Just as long as he is "back for the Eagles game" like you said.
 
chop2chip said:
I'm going to side with the judge who obviously had enough evidence to convict Hardy. An appeal isn't a declaration of innocence.

So unless you think that woman was a fantastic liar (which btw, in domestic violence cases the rate of women recanting their stories is extremely low which definitely implies a payoff), then I'm going to side with the court that was actually held in which Hardy was convicted of doing those despicable things. Obviously the NFL and Tampa Bay discovered evidence that was in line with what the judge had.

But your right "technically" he is innocent, since the girl went MIA after Hardy wrote her a check. Continue arguing how unfair Hardy is being treated based off that technicality and support the incentive athletes have to use their wealth to avoid accountability. Just as long as he is "back for the Eagles game" like you said.
Click to expand...

Not innocent, just not necessarily guilty.
Also, on top of the evidence you have that her story is 100% true (still waiting for that), please provide proof of a payoff.
Again, settling out of court can be done for many reasons. It doesn't make someone guilty of whatever the other person is accusing them of.
The DA had all the evidence the judge had and decided not to move forward after the appeal. If he were found guilty up and down, I'm in favor of whatever his punishment would be. Since he wasn't, based on past NFL (in)decisions, 10 games is a lot. And will likely be brought down.
LOL Tampa was in on Hardy until he told them he was going to the Cowboys; they knew everything that supposedly happened and had still players lobbying for him. They wanted him. Love how Tampa is always brought up, but these things are ignored. They "dropped out" two hours before he signed with Dallas, lmao.
 
yeezus said:
Not innocent, just not necessarily guilty.
Also, on top of the evidence you have that her story is 100% true (still waiting for that), please provide proof of a payoff.
Again, settling out of court can be done for many reasons. It doesn't make someone guilty of whatever the other person is accusing them of.
The DA had all the evidence the judge had and decided not to move forward after the appeal. If he were found guilty up and down, I'm in favor of whatever his punishment would be. Since he wasn't, based on past NFL (in)decisions, 10 games is a lot. And will likely be brought down.
LOL Tampa was in on Hardy until he told them he was going to the Cowboys; they knew everything that supposedly happened and had still players lobbying for him. They wanted him. Love how Tampa is always brought up, but these things are ignored. They "dropped out" two hours before he signed with Dallas, lmao.
Click to expand...

"It is ok because the Bucs almost did it too!"
 
gilesfan said:
http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/1...na-panthers-guilty-2-counts-domestic-violence

Panthers Pro Bowl defensive end Greg Hardy was found guilty Tuesday night of assaulting a female and communicating threats.

Mecklenburg County Judge Rebecca Thorn-Tin sentenced Hardy to 18 months' probation. A 60-day jail sentence was suspended.
Click to expand...

And that was taken to trial where case was dismissed. You do know how the justice system works don't you?

I'm not arguing that he didn't do it. Clearly he did. I'm just pointing out that it sets a bad precedent by suspending a guy when he technically is not guilty. But its a move I agree with given this particular case.
 
Carp said:
And that was taken to trial where case was dismissed. You do know how the justice system works don't you?

I'm not arguing that he didn't do it. Clearly he did. I'm just pointing out that it sets a bad precedent by suspending a guy when he technically is not guilty. But its a move I agree with given this particular case.
Click to expand...

The only reason the case was dismissed was because a civil suit was settled so the chick got paid to go away. He was found guilty by a judge, who heard the facts of the case. The case was dismissed without hearing the facts of the case because the girl ran away.

The NFL is right in this instance. Hardy was never found "not guilty."
 
Carp said:
And that was taken to trial where case was dismissed. You do know how the justice system works don't you?

I'm not arguing that he didn't do it. Clearly he did. I'm just pointing out that it sets a bad precedent by suspending a guy when he technically is not guilty. But its a move I agree with given this particular case.
Click to expand...

How many NFL players get pulled over for a DUI and plead to something else? They're not really guilty.
 
Carp said:
And that was taken to trial where case was dismissed. You do know how the justice system works don't you?

I'm not arguing that he didn't do it. Clearly he did. I'm just pointing out that it sets a bad precedent by suspending a guy when he technically is not guilty. But its a move I agree with given this particular case.
Click to expand...
So he's clearly guilty, but the NFL shouldn't suspend him?

You guys do realize the NFL is an employer who have personal conduct policies that are not connected to the justice system. They are justified in extending punishment that isn't based upon a guy pleading out of court
 
yeezus said:
Not innocent, just not necessarily guilty.

Also, on top of the evidence you have that her story is 100% true (still waiting for that), please provide proof of a payoff.

Again, settling out of court can be done for many reasons. It doesn't make someone guilty of whatever the other person is accusing them of.

The DA had all the evidence the judge had and decided not to move forward after the appeal. If he were found guilty up and down, I'm in favor of whatever his punishment would be. Since he wasn't, based on past NFL (in)decisions, 10 games is a lot. And will likely be brought down.

LOL Tampa was in on Hardy until he told them he was going to the Cowboys; they knew everything that supposedly happened and had still players lobbying for him. They wanted him. Love how Tampa is always brought up, but these things are ignored. They "dropped out" two hours before he signed with Dallas, lmao.
Click to expand...

This is a circular argument. Either you believe he is guilty or you do not. I clearly believe he's guilty based on circumstantial evidence (the judge conviction (which btw, in 49 other states that would have been upheld. Lucky for Hardy he beats women in North Carolina), the NFL's ruling, Tampa Bay coming out publically saying they weren't going to sign Hardy based on their own private investigation.)

You don't believe he's guilty for your own reasons. I personally question those reasons with you making statements like "back for the Eagles game", but that is neglible to the argument. So I apologize for the implication. But because of some agreement between Hardy and the accuser we will never know for certain, but I support the NFL for taking a stand against what they clearly feel was a wicked act.
 
I thought he'd get 6-8, still might after appeal.

But beating up women is a no-no so not too crazy.
 
zitothebrave said:
How many NFL players get pulled over for a DUI and plead to something else? They're not really guilty.
Click to expand...

Except, unlike those other players with a DUI, he didn't plead to anything. He will have no criminal record for these actions whatsoever. Not even a lesser charge that he made a deal for. The case was dismissed and the charges were dropped.
 
chop2chip said:
So he's clearly guilty, but the NFL shouldn't suspend him?

You guys do realize the NFL is an employer who have personal conduct policies that are not connected to the justice system. They are justified in extending punishment that isn't based upon a guy pleading out of court
Click to expand...

I never said that. In fact, I said the opposite of that. I agree with the suspension. But I do think it sets a bad precedent that someone can be suspended without actually being convicted of a crime.
 
gilesfan said:
The only reason the case was dismissed was because a civil suit was settled so the chick got paid to go away. He was found guilty by a judge, who heard the facts of the case. The case was dismissed without hearing the facts of the case because the girl ran away.

The NFL is right in this instance. Hardy was never found "not guilty."
Click to expand...

I never argued against anything you just mentioned, other than the fact he is not guilty by virtue of the case being dropped. The latest decision is the only decision that legally matters.

And I still agree with the suspension.
 
Oh he definitely won't get 10 games, Goodell always tries to look like a badass when it's against a team he CAN push around, like the Cowboys, the Redskins, the Saints, etc. If it was the Vagiants, the Pats, Steelers (to a slightly lesser extent) or the Ravens it wouldn't have been 10, no way in hell. Of course that doesn't mean Hardy doesn't deserve it. Any man who hits a woman, other than in self defense, deserves to have the book thrown at him. It's just that Goodell has ZERO credibility IMO to punish Charles Manson, let alone a pro athlete. Hardy will get between 2-4 games when it's all said and done and Goodell can act like he tried to get more but the darn trial lawyers or the darn union scumbags shot him down and he'll go back to what's he really good at, performing fellatio on the Maras and Rooneys of the NFL, a scumbag who happens to be a terrific football player will go back to playing football instead of getting when he really should have gotten.

Hey, I wonder if we could dress Goodell's sorry arse up as a woman and let nature take its course?
 
Carp said:
I never said that. In fact, I said the opposite of that. I agree with the suspension. But I do think it sets a bad precedent that someone can be suspended without actually being convicted of a crime.
Click to expand...

This precedent was established by many employers in various fields (including every sport).

You don't need to be found guilty to violate company policy, in this case the personal conduct policy.

It's not as if this suspension was being served out of nothing. The league had evidence.

Among other things, the NFL investigation concluded Hardy, now 26, used physical force against Holder "in at least four instances" during the altercation on May 13, 2014, including one "which caused her to land on a futon that was covered with at least four semi-automatic rifles."

"The net effect of these acts was that Ms. Holder was severely traumatized and sustained a range of injuries, including bruises and scratches on her neck, shoulders, upper chest, back, arms and feet," Goodell wrote in his letter to Hardy.

"The use of physical force under the circumstances present here, against a woman substantially smaller than you and in the presence of powerful, military-style assault weapons, constitutes a significant act of violence in violation of the Personal Conduct Policy."
 
chop2chip said:
This precedent was established by many employers in various fields (including every sport).

You don't need to be found guilty to violate company policy, in this case the personal conduct policy.

It's not as if this suspension was being served out of nothing. The league had evidence.

Among other things, the NFL investigation concluded Hardy, now 26, used physical force against Holder "in at least four instances" during the altercation on May 13, 2014, including one "which caused her to land on a futon that was covered with at least four semi-automatic rifles."

"The net effect of these acts was that Ms. Holder was severely traumatized and sustained a range of injuries, including bruises and scratches on her neck, shoulders, upper chest, back, arms and feet," Goodell wrote in his letter to Hardy.

"The use of physical force under the circumstances present here, against a woman substantially smaller than you and in the presence of powerful, military-style assault weapons, constitutes a significant act of violence in violation of the Personal Conduct Policy."
Click to expand...

Which is why I said that feel the suspension was justified in this particular case. But it still allows the possibility for someone else to be suspended for crime they are found to be innocent of. The NFL already passed a couple rules this past yr about automatic suspensions just for an arrest, before any judgement is made.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top