PATRIOTS NEWS Diggs being charged with Assault (According to Channel 25)

[PatsFan2]

It reeks of a money grab and false accusation.

If you were “smacked in the face” then asked if you sustained injuries your response would not be “maybe a little redness on my chest”

Everything started hurting after Stefon Diggs reached that milestone incentive *Three weeks after the fact*. She's knows a Lawyer who watches Football.

 

[upstater1]

Everything started hurting after Stefon Diggs reached that milestone incentive *Three weeks after the fact*. She's knows a Lawyer who watches Football.

Your timeline is way off. Reported on the 16th, pressed charges on the 20th.

 

[upstater1]

the thing that sticks with me is, nowadays, everybody videos everything, even their food, so for this woman to not have any video evidence is very suspicious. add on top of that she waited three weeks to report it ? again, nowadays, for a woman to get strangled and not call the police immediately is hard to believe. there's not a woman i know that would not call the cops right away, if it were true of course.

This is normal when it comes to these type of assaults. This is why prosecutors frequently decide not to press charges.

 

[upstater1]

I still come back to the text that was sent to her.

You don't have to go to the police. It wasn't a big deal.

Someone explain what that means to me.

 

[TheRainMaker]

Interesting comment I read online. There’s video proof of DK Metcalf attacking a fan - he got two games. There’s only an accusation and no proof with Diggs. Hopefully the NFL stays out of it.

 

[upstater1]

But the chef already supplied multiple rounds of texts from different people including ones she “thinks” are from Diggs’ girlfriend. If she had texted a friend about the incident I would imagine that would have been included. Even so, that is still not very weighty evidence as you’d think she would’ve taken pictures at that time and she’s already confirmed she did not.

How easy would it be to figure out whose phone that was that sent her the text referencing the incident?

Especially in a criminal case. The police would certainly investigate that and I'm sure the cell provider would turn over that info instantly.

 

[upstater1]

As for the communications by the possible girlfriend ("you don't need to do all this, it's not that big of a deal"), I am not sure how they play into things... Besides, even if the jury hears them, they fit into the civil nature of the dispute (labor/wage claims), and support Diggs contention that nothing happened.

Thanks for all this. I just had a question about how you came to this conclusion with the above quote.

Why do they only fit into the civil nature of the dispute? Why is the text only related to labor claims? How does it support Diggs contention that nothing happened?

When I read the report, this text is the only thing that stuck out to me, because I immediately supposed it referenced the bedroom incident, especially as it was proceeded by "You don't need to do this..." Diggs said nothing happened, but the text says something happened.

So I read it the opposite way that you do, and if it is admissable (if, for instance, they investigate who sent the text and determine whose phone it came from), then isn't it possible a prosecutor would bring a witness to the stand who could explain what they meant by sending that text? I should think this gets very complicated at that point.

 

[TommyD4207]

Thanks for all this. I just had a question about how you came to this conclusion with the above quote.

Why do they only fit into the civil nature of the dispute? Why is the text only related to labor claims? How does it support Diggs contention that nothing happened?

When I read the report, this text is the only thing that stuck out to me, because I immediately supposed it referenced the bedroom incident, especially as it was proceeded by "You don't need to do this..." Diggs said nothing happened, but the text says something happened.

So I read it the opposite way that you do, and if it is admissable (if, for instance, they investigate who sent the text and determine whose phone it came from), then isn't it possible a prosecutor would bring a witness to the stand who could explain what they meant by sending that text? I should think this gets very complicated at that point.

He didn't say 'nothing happened', obviously something did.
He said he categorically denies that there was an assault.

That's why they have courts.

Don't be shocked if the phone in question was a burner, either.

 

[upstater1]

He didn't say 'nothing happened', obviously something did.
He said he categorically denies that there was an assault.

That's why they have courts.

Don't be shocked if the phone in question was a burner, either.

Good point about the burner -- but these people are not criminal masterminds.

As for the first two statements, if you separate the two phrases in the text, then indeed you can say the "something that did happen" was not a physical assault.

But if you put the two of them together, what could have happened that wasn't a big deal and shouldn't be taken to the police? Put together, it seems the person who sent the text was saying, don't go to the police, what happened was not a big deal.

If we're talking about a labor dispute not being "a big deal," then why would anyone say, "don't go to the police."

That makes no sense.

 

[Triumph]

But did you buy it pre- or post-DOGE?? Big difference!

(That’s a joke. Please don’t answer it.)

For the record, I am 100% pro Isreal and Elon.

I was joking about owning a Tesla. I would love one, but an EV is not practical for me. Related, just to replace the battery on a Ford F150 EV is $40,000.

 

[Zuma]

If we're talking about a labor dispute not being "a big deal," then why would anyone say, "don't go to the police."

That makes no sense.

Because he is a famous sports star that does not want bad publicity?

 

[TommyD4207]

Good point about the burner -- but these people are not criminal masterminds.

As for the first two statements, if you separate the two phrases in the text, then indeed you can say the "something that did happen" was not a physical assault.

But if you put the two of them together, what could have happened that wasn't a big deal and shouldn't be taken to the police? Put together, it seems the person who sent the text was saying, don't go to the police, what happened was not a big deal.

If we're talking about a labor dispute not being "a big deal," then why would anyone say, "don't go to the police."

That makes no sense.

They're not criminal masterminds, but Cardi B has been a celebrity longer than Steph Diggs has.
They change phones regularly, and in many cases don't have them registered to their name.

 

[condon84]

But did you buy it pre- or post-DOGE?? Big difference!

(That’s a joke. Please don’t answer it.)

I saw a sticker on a Tesla the other day that said "I bought this before Elon went crazy"

 

[shmessy]

I don't understand why these guys getting paid $20+ million per year don't simply WALL THEMSELVES OFF from their household employees with their business manageers?????

Why was DIGGS even discussing the monthly salary payments with his chef????? If she had a question he should simply say - 'call my biz rep at SMAC Entertainment'. End. Of. Freaking. Subject.

He'd be a freaking idiot if he even was dealing with that. Every highly paid athlete should have it DRILLED into their head to make like a Chasid with Pork regarding personal employees' pay issues. Why was he trying to be ADP or Paychex?????? He's paying SMAC and Adisa Bakari to do this. It's akin to him getting up on his roof to replace the shingles.

It's complete idiocy

.

 

[Zoomnbyu]

How easy would it be to figure out whose phone that was that sent her the text referencing the incident?

Especially in a criminal case. The police would certainly investigate that and I'm sure the cell provider would turn over that info instantly.

Whatsapp and other similar encrypted apps make that much more difficult.

 

[festy1986]

It's crazy I don't see the same people who came at me for calling this dude a piece of **** giving that same energy to those declaring this nothing more than a false accusation money grab.

Keep in mind I simply said he was a piece of ****. Not that he did what he's being accused of.

Crazy but not surprising.

 

[Ring 6]

Thanks for all this. I just had a question about how you came to this conclusion with the above quote.

Why do they only fit into the civil nature of the dispute? Why is the text only related to labor claims? How does it support Diggs contention that nothing happened?

When I read the report, this text is the only thing that stuck out to me, because I immediately supposed it referenced the bedroom incident, especially as it was proceeded by "You don't need to do this..." Diggs said nothing happened, but the text says something happened.

So I read it the opposite way that you do, and if it is admissable (if, for instance, they investigate who sent the text and determine whose phone it came from), then isn't it possible a prosecutor would bring a witness to the stand who could explain what they meant by sending that text? I should think this gets very complicated at that point.

The text wasn’t from Diggs.

And the text isn’t probative.
It can easily be stated by whoever sent it that you don’t need to do this means you dont need to make up lies to blackmail Diggs.
Thats a real possibility of what is going on here.

The text doesn’t acknowledge an incident it acknowledges am accusation. And we have no clue who the text came from other than it wasn’t Diggs so it wouldn’t be admissible.

 

[Ring 6]

I don't understand why these guys getting paid $20+ million per year don't simply WALL THEMSELVES OFF from their household employees with their business manageers?????

Why was DIGGS even discussing the monthly salary payments with his chef????? If she had a question he should simply say - 'call my biz rep at SMAC Entertainment'. End. Of. Freaking. Subject.

He's a freaking idiot for even dealing with that. Every highly paid athlete should have it DRILLED into their head to make like a Chasid with Pork regarding personal employees' pay issues. Why was he trying to be ADP or Paychex?????? He's paying SMAC and Adisa Bakari to do this. It's akin to him getting up on his roof to replace the shingles.

It's complete idiocy

.

Part of the report was that Diggs did tell her to call the business manager.

 

[JoeSixPat]

Interesting comment I read online. There’s video proof of DK Metcalf attacking a fan - he got two games. There’s only an accusation and no proof with Diggs. Hopefully the NFL stays out of it.

While the NFL likes to say they hold themselves to a higher standard than law enforcement, if the charges get dropped and/or there's a financial settlement, I can't see them having any justification to take any action.

If they did it would probably have to be for next season assuming they aren't going to go the "guilty until proven innocent" route

Diggs knew this story was coming too - so if anyone thinks it will impact his play, just look at his performance on Sunday

 

[Ring 6]

Good point about the burner -- but these people are not criminal masterminds.

As for the first two statements, if you separate the two phrases in the text, then indeed you can say the "something that did happen" was not a physical assault.

But if you put the two of them together, what could have happened that wasn't a big deal and shouldn't be taken to the police? Put together, it seems the person who sent the text was saying, don't go to the police, what happened was not a big deal.

If we're talking about a labor dispute not being "a big deal," then why would anyone say, "don't go to the police."

That makes no sense.

She had already gone to the police, so you don’t have to go to the police is not in the context you are assuming.

But no matter what the texts say they didn’t come from Diggs.

This very likely that the reference in the texts is you don’t have to makevuo
a lie to black mail him, because the story about the incident smells foul too.

If we are focused on concluding Diggs did something based on the motivation you think an unknown person sending a text had, why don’t we delve into how believable a story is when she says she was smacked in the face, but when asked if there were any injuries she said maybe a little red mark on her chest.
How does an NFL player smack a woman in the face and cause not only not injury but not leave a mark?