Vikings RB Adrian Peterson indicted for child abuse; deactivated for Pats game at Minnesota

Nice post, Timbo...the Dude abides...

FreeTedWilliams said:

I read someplace that almost none of that money is guaranteed and the cap hit for next year if they cut him would be minimal. Plus it would give the Vikings some serious cap room. Peterson might have made it much easier PR wise for the Vikes to cut him and save all that salary and cap room. He is a great back, but when was the last time the team with the leading rusher in the NFL even made it to the Superbowl?

Here is the article about the cap consequences:
http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.co...adrian-peterson-wont-be-a-viking-much-longer/

Click to expand...

I noted that earlier in the thread (viz., any signing bonus would disappear after 2015, and any non-guaranteed salary would disappear immediately if he's no longer a Viking).

https://twitter.com/AlbertBreer/status/511587850111176704/photo/1

If only he wasn't captured laughing it off after it happened. Even without the texts believing his statement would be hard.

I realize I'm taking an unpopular opinion here. Perhaps it's just how jaded I am with media. After all, 5 months ago John McCain was posing for photographs with ISIS, and all of television was demanding we arm them against the Syrian government, and Obama was the great appeaser for not giving them stinger missiles and attack helicopters, and now they're suddenly the greatest threat America has ever seen, and we should be engaged militarily against them at once.

I'm hesitant to believe a single narrative that ever comes from the news, whether it be political news, sports news, or whatever.

I'm also not one to come running to the defense of celebrities when they come out with their often carefully crafted public statements.

That said, I think Adrian Peterson is telling the truth when he says he didn't intend to mark up his son that bad and hurt him to that degree. I do not think, as of now, that this is a situation anywhere remotely close to the level of child abuse that goes on elsewhere and everywhere. This isn't torture and this isn't (or doesn't seem to be) a case of sadism, which IS the case in bad child abuse scenarios.

So the question becomes: Is this something Adrian Peterson should be thrown out of the league for?

Or is this something the legal system should handle by itself before the NFL deals out its own justice?

I realize the kid is 4 years old, so I'm not trying to draw apple and orange comparisons here, but if your rebellious teenage son calls his mother a "dumb *****" one day, and you grab him and throw him against a wall, and during that process he slams his hip against a table kind of awkwardly, and leaves a really bad bruise, should you lose YOUR job? Should CNN, MSNBC, FoxNews, ESPN, NFL Network and every poster on this forum come into your home to pass judgement?

Or should the court system determine what exactly it's dealing with first?

This is really not a Ray Rice situation or an Aaron Hernandez situation. This really is it's own.

PATS16N0 said:

I realize I'm taking an unpopular opinion here. Perhaps it's just how jaded I am with media. After all, 5 months ago John McCain was posing for photographs with ISIS, and all of television was demanding we arm them against the Syrian government, and Obama was the great appeaser for not giving them stinger missiles and attack helicopters, and now they're suddenly the greatest threat America has ever seen, and we should be engaged militarily against them at once.

I'm hesitant to believe a single narrative that ever comes from the news, whether it be political news, sports news, or whatever.

I'm also not one to come running to the defense of celebrities when they come out with their often carefully crafted public statements.

That said, I think Adrian Peterson is telling the truth when he says he didn't intend to mark up his son that bad and hurt him to that degree. I do not think, as of now, that this is a situation anywhere remotely close to the level of child abuse that goes on elsewhere and everywhere. This isn't torture and this isn't (or doesn't seem to be) a case of sadism, which IS the case in bad child abuse scenarios.

So the question becomes: Is this something Adrian Peterson should be thrown out of the league for?

Or is this something the legal system should handle by itself before the NFL deals out its own justice?

I realize the kid is 4 years old, so I'm not trying to draw apple and orange comparisons here, but if your rebellious teenage son calls his mother a "dumb *****" one day, and you grab him and throw him against a wall, and during that process he slams his hip against a table kind of awkwardly, and leaves a really bad bruise, should you lose YOUR job? Should CNN, MSNBC, FoxNews, ESPN, NFL Network and every poster on this forum come into your home to pass judgement?

Or should the court system determine what exactly it's dealing with first?

This is really not a Ray Rice situation or an Aaron Hernandez situation. This really is it's own.

Click to expand...

Personally I dont think you can dismiss the fact that he is 4 years old, because that is what makes it even more horrific.
And you don't break the skin numerous times without 'intending' to.

PATS16N0 said:

I realize I'm taking an unpopular opinion here. Perhaps it's just how jaded I am with media. After all, 5 months ago John McCain was posing for photographs with ISIS, and all of television was demanding we arm them against the Syrian government, and Obama was the great appeaser for not giving them stinger missiles and attack helicopters, and now they're suddenly the greatest threat America has ever seen, and we should be engaged militarily against them at once.

I'm hesitant to believe a single narrative that ever comes from the news, whether it be political news, sports news, or whatever.

I'm also not one to come running to the defense of celebrities when they come out with their often carefully crafted public statements.

That said, I think Adrian Peterson is telling the truth when he says he didn't intend to mark up his son that bad and hurt him to that degree. I do not think, as of now, that this is a situation anywhere remotely close to the level of child abuse that goes on elsewhere and everywhere. This isn't torture and this isn't (or doesn't seem to be) a case of sadism, which IS the case in bad child abuse scenarios.

So the question becomes: Is this something Adrian Peterson should be thrown out of the league for?

Or is this something the legal system should handle by itself before the NFL deals out its own justice?

I realize the kid is 4 years old, so I'm not trying to draw apple and orange comparisons here, but if your rebellious teenage son calls his mother a "dumb *****" one day, and you grab him and throw him against a wall, and during that process he slams his hip against a table kind of awkwardly, and leaves a really bad bruise, should you lose YOUR job? Should CNN, MSNBC, FoxNews, ESPN, NFL Network and every poster on this forum come into your home to pass judgement?

Or should the court system determine what exactly it's dealing with first?

This is really not a Ray Rice situation or an Aaron Hernandez situation. This really is it's own.

Click to expand...

Whether he intended or not is irrelevant. You should never hit a four year old child with a stick on his bare skin repeatedly. He did it something like twenty times. What? One or two didn't make the point to a four year old?

And yes, if you throw a teenager against a wall for insulting his mother, you should risk losing your job.
People in the non-entertainment world lose their jobs for a lot of reasons. People in the real world have been fired for far less. People have been fired for having affairs, smoking pot, acting like an inappropriate at corporate functions, getting ARRESTED for domestic violence, DUIs, etc. If anything, NFL players get more leeway for things like this than the average person would.

I bet if most people on this board were arrested for what Peterson did last week, most of us would be unemployed today.

Thank you, Tedy Bruschi:

http://itiswhatitis.weei.com/sports...y-back/?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter

"........Violence, it’s a terrible excuse not to use your mind, not to think, not to find another alternative, not to find another way to solve a problem that you may have in your life. It’s just a shame to almost be a former player in the NFL right now with some of the issues having to dealt with....."

AndyJohnson said:

Personally I dont think you can dismiss the fact that he is 4 years old, because that is what makes it even more horrific.
And you don't break the skin numerous times without 'intending' to.

Click to expand...

Well, here's the thing. It's a `switch` They mark up the skin. Just like belts do, and lots of people use belts, and, in the south, lots of people use thin little branches (apparently) As I said earlier in this thread, I used to get the wooden spoon. I don't remember any time I got it that bad, but maybe if CNN was on scene to take photos of my ass in a certain light, right after it took a whuppin', maybe my Mother would look like a complete monster that she certainly WAS NOT, and this is what I mean by immediately latching on to media narratives.

Yes, the pictures look bad, but the pictures are seen in a complete vacuum. Maybe, just maybe, if we had elevator footage of Peterson disciplining his child, it would look horrible, or, maybe, just maybe, it wouldn't look much different than what goes on in many homes, which I would consider stern parenting more so than "child abuse."

This is why I believe this is a situation for the legal system to get to the bottom of, rather than a lynch mob with a photograph given to them by the almighty television.

PATS16N0 said:

Well, here's the thing. It's a `switch` They mark up the skin. Just like belts do, and lots of people use belts, and, in the south, lots of people use thin little branches (apparently) As I said earlier in this thread, I used to get the wooden spoon. I don't remember any time I got it that bad, but maybe if CNN was on scene to take photos of my ass in a certain light, right after it took a whuppin', maybe my Mother would look like a complete monster that she certainly WAS NOT, and this is what I mean by immediately latching on to media narratives.

Yes, the pictures look bad, but the pictures are seen in a complete vacuum. Maybe, just maybe, if we had elevator footage of Peterson disciplining his child, it would look horrible, or, maybe, just maybe, it wouldn't look much different than what goes on in many homes, which I would consider stern parenting more so than "child abuse."

This is why I believe this is a situation for the legal system to get to the bottom of, rather than a lynch mob with a photograph given to them by the almighty television.

Click to expand...

What the NFL should do in case like this is subject to an intense debate, because there are many facets to that dynamic.
Whether this was child abuse is not subject to debate, even if we cite other cases of child abuse and say it happens all the time.

AndyJohnson said:

What the NFL should do in case like this is subject to an intense debate, because there are many facets to that dynamic.
Whether this was child abuse is not subject to debate, even if we cite other cases of child abuse and say it happens all the time.

Click to expand...

Whether or not it's a subject for debate it something for our legal system, armed with all the facts, to get to the bottom of. A mob with a photograph and a TV narrative isn't well equipped to make that judgement with a man's life and family on the line.

I don't think a parent that loses it one night and goes overboard is necessarily a "child abuser" or deserves to have the term "child abuser" thrown around their neck, per say.

I don't really get what people mean when they say "due process is for the court system, not the public arena." I guess that's essentially saying "We have our legal process to protect the innocent from people like me."

shmessy said:

Thank you, Tedy Bruschi:

http://itiswhatitis.weei.com/sports...y-back/?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter

"........Violence, it’s a terrible excuse not to use your mind, not to think, not to find another alternative, not to find another way to solve a problem that you may have in your life. It’s just a shame to almost be a former player in the NFL right now with some of the issues having to dealt with....."

Click to expand...

I came here to post exactly the same link.

What Teddy says pretty much lines up with what I was trying to say over in the "VP of Social responsibility" thread. The owners and the league are mostly cowards hiding behind "due process" as if something not being illegal would have any special meaning.

Congratulations, you managed to keep somebody employed who stays just above the very lowest possible standard that we have in our society...

PATS16N0 said:

Yes, the pictures look bad, but the pictures are seen in a complete vacuum. Maybe, just maybe, if we had elevator footage of Peterson disciplining his child, it would look horrible, or, maybe, just maybe, it wouldn't look much different than what goes on in many homes, which I would consider stern parenting more so than "child abuse."

Click to expand...

Those photos are of a 4 year old's thighs.

Its being reported that the child was also struck on his back, his ankles, and his butt -to say nothing of the strike(s) that got him in the scrotum.

Maybe Im wrong to do so, but Im guessing those photos actually help minimize the beating the boy took.

PATS16N0 said:

but maybe if CNN was on scene to take photos of my ass in a certain light, right after it took a whuppin', maybe my Mother would look like a complete monster that she certainly WAS NOT, and this is what I mean by immediately latching on to media narratives.

Click to expand...

It wasn't CNN that took those photos; it was either the doctor or the police, since in many states doctors are required by law to report what they suspect to be child abuse. [They were released by the Houston PD, but were apparently taken in Minnesota.]

And, by all accounts, the photos were taken a week after the incident.

Danger Zone said:

Those photos are of a 4 year old's thighs.

Its being reported that the child was also struck on his back, his ankles, and his butt -to say nothing of the strike(s) that got him in the scrotum.

Click to expand...

Again, I'm not defending AP. I'm defending the possibility that he isn't what we're being told he is.
Again, the possibility that he isn't what we're being told he is. I really don't understand why due process in this situation is so taboo. It appears he went overboard. It seems that even he understands he went overboard. Does this automatically make him a "child abuser?" Is he a danger to his children? Does he need to be thrown in prison for 20 years, exiled from the NFL, and forever forbidden from seeing his children again until they are over the age of 18 years old?

If you think you can answer any of those questions justly with a photograph and a television narrative, my position is simply that you're wrong. Adrian Peterson has been a father for X amount of minutes, hours, days and years, and we have two photographs and a news story with which to pass supreme judgement on all of it.

That's just not enough for me to march into his living room with decrees that will ruin his life and family before I go on on my merry way.

The courts aren't going anywhere.

BTW, the Vikings cut AJ Jefferson the day he was arrested for domestic violence. So not only would the average person most likely be fired if they were arrested for what Peterson was arrested for, so would scrub NFL players.

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.co...se-a-j-jefferson-after-monday-morning-arrest/

I agree Pats16N0. I completely understand why some are reacting so passionately to this and view it as more egregious than the Ray Rice situation. I can also appreciate why others seem more lenient, whether due to their own upbringing, philosophies on child discipline, or other factors.

I think this case is more divisive, multifaceted and complex than the Ray Rice case, and there are a few key issues IMO that differentiate it.

First is Peterson`s intent. We obviously have no way of knowing if he actually was angry, but based on the reports it seems he had no intentions of seriously injuring his son. Of course, I think we all agree the outcome was excessive at best and horrific at worst. Whether you think intent should even matter given the outcome, I guess, is the point of debate. I truly believe Michael Vick saw nothing wrong with dog-fighting due to his upbringing, but he still received a maximum sentence.

Second is the age of the child. I think this is the most damning knock against Peterson. Administering that kind of punishment to a child, whose brain cannot understand primary perception concepts like the conservation of liquids and is just beginning to appreciate that there can be other viewpoints than their own, will simply humiliate and potentially traumatize the child with minimal understanding of what`s happening.

Last is the cultural background of the discipline. I don`t want to say that society has a tolerance for using a switch for discipline; rather, I think stances on the issue are more divisive and partially rooted in upbringing. This results in a less-universal outcry as compared to domestic violence IMO. I won`t think so highly of network television to say they wouldn`t use domestic violence as a source of comedy, but I have seen them use a switch:



I honestly don`t know what I think Peterson deserves. While I`m not necessarily opposed to physical discipline, and personally believe Peterson did not act with intent to injure, the extent of the discipline and most importantly to me, the age of the child makes me believe he should not escape from this unscathed.

PATS16N0 said:

Again, I'm not defending AP. I'm defending the possibility that he isn't what we're being told he is.
Again, the possibility that he isn't what we're being told he is. I really don't understand why due process in this situation is so taboo. It appears he went overboard. It seems that even he understands he went overboard. Does this automatically make him a "child abuser?" Is he a danger to his children? Does he need to be thrown in prison for 20 years, exiled from the NFL, and forever forbidden from seeing his children again until they are over the age of 18 years old?

If you think you can answer any of those questions justly with a photograph and a television narrative, my position is simply that you're wrong. Adrian Peterson has been a father for X amount of minutes, hours, days and years, and we have two photographs and a news story with which to pass supreme judgement on all of it.

That's just not enough for me to march into his living room with decrees that will ruin his life and family before I go on on my merry way.

The courts aren't going anywhere.

Click to expand...

I can justly call repeated strikes with a switch to a 4 year old that makes him bleed child abuse.

As for the pattern of abuse -if any and what -if any legal consequence he suffers, Im happy to leave that to the authorities.

Nothing I said mentioned a thing about marching into his livingroom and ruining his life by my judgemental decrees.

Rob0729 said:

BTW, the Vikings cut AJ Jefferson the day he was arrested for domestic violence. So not only would the average person most likely be fired if they were arrested for what Peterson was arrested for, so would scrub NFL players.

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.co...se-a-j-jefferson-after-monday-morning-arrest/

Click to expand...

OTOH, the Patriots did not cut Julian Edelman after his 2011 arrest.

ctpatsfan77 said:

OTOH, the Patriots did not cut Julian Edelman after his 2011 arrest.

Click to expand...

Each case is different. The Edelman case was a he said/she said until the video was release (and the Pats could have had the club's video that exonerated Edelman in less than 24 hours). The Peterson case is cut and dry. We have pictures and Peterson admits to the crime.