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

[upstater1]

What I meant was "you don't have to do all this" and "it's not that big of a deal" are not direct admissions that a crime was committed and can be interpreted to mean all sorts of things, especially because the parties were engaged in an admittedly highly charged dispute over wages. And as the police had not yet contacted Diggs at that point, an argument can be made the texts were referring to something completely different unless evidence comes out that Diggs/his people were somehow forewarned that the cook had filed a complaint. The State has to prove this beyond a reasonable doubt, ambiguity helps the Defendant, especially when there is a collateral civil dispute going on and we have no idea what other things were done and said between the parties in that regard over that time.

I thought it was clear they got wind she went to the police but didn't press charges. Because it's referenced in the report. She wondered how Diggs knew about it. Also remember 4 days later she requested to the police that they contact him and his people because they were harrassing her. I also didn't say they were direct admissions. All I said was that they referred to an incident she was reporting to police. I don't think by itself it's evidence of anything. I'm saying that whoever sent that text could potentially be a witness.

 

[upstater1]

They need to put something out. It’s their job, and not doing it leaves a vacuum for more pernicious rumors to flourish.

They may not have known either was going to hit, they may have known both were going to hit. Either way they could do nothing to change anything about it. But they need to react, it’s expected and if 5hey don’t they’ll be asked incessantly until they do anyway so it just highlights their silence which will be interpreted in the most harmful way possible.

They always put something out. They never said before "we support our player"

 

[UGAPatsfan]

Post June 1 trade of Barmore is only about a $3MM cap hit per OTC. If I used it correctly.

If you can get a 2nd for him I say do it.

Just a bad feeling that guy is going to go full villain during one of his rages.

Let that be on the Cowboys or even Chiefs lol.

 

[n1997y]

They always put something out. They never said before "we support our player"

So I’d say that indicates they did their internal investigation and evaluation and decided to give him that public vote of confidence based on their evaluation. Just as you’ve made up your mind about him, they’ve done the same, just with a different conclusion resulting.

 

[Triumph]

He is entitled to a jury trial under the Constitution but can ask for a bench trial (no jury, just judge). My guess if it comes to it he will want a jury trial.

Thank you.

Interesting that the US Constitution plays a role here.

 

[PatsFanInVa]

A couple things, both of which were no doubt covered somewhere in these 42 pages...

1) Damn, it's amazing how guys eff up in winning seasons. It's almost as if it's not worth bringing a case when they're not big enough name. Two of 'em, right near the playoffs, with the Pats at 13-14 wins. I mean, when we were 4-14, everybody was a model citizen.

2) I tend to agree with @n1997y that they appear really sure of their facts on the Diggs case, and I had the same reaction as @upstater1 to the Pats actually unequivocally coming out on the side of a player. It was a shock -- and it looks like a chance they wouldn't take if there were any chance of being wrong.

It's almost like I can imagine the team saying "You're sure? Because we're going out with this statement..." At the same time, the SOP in New England (and elsewhere) has been "We have no comment until all harassment of the player and team are over..."

Feels like a "lesson learned" moment/shot across the bow, in a way. Rather than saying "We're sure the league will get it right," the Pats are entering the PR arena they tried unsuccessfully to stay out of in years past. I think it is a little bit of an acknowledgement that the league has shown its hand repeatedly vis a vis the Pats, in small ways that add up to exhaustion (e.g., 2007) and confiscation of draft picks (different types of ****ery, but ****ery nonetheless.)

This is definitely, absolutely a paranoid reading-into one press release on one player issue, overgeneralizing from a fan narrative.

Unless it isn't.

The individuals involved could certainly make the accusations without any evidence, and that's something all stars are subject to. This is a way for the Pats to say "You don't get to turn us against our own for free," whether "you" means an individual or the league.

 

[Gumby]

The irony of you using this as an example is that the reality of that case is: that old lady was burned like crazy from a product that was being made hotter to save money on refills. The **** literally melted her skin. It sent her into shock. McDonald's had 700 cases of customers getting third degree burns by that point.

The idea that the case was frivolous is a case of press management by McDonald's. It's wild to me that people use that case as an example of "frivolous" lawsuits. It is, if anything, an example of how effective social engineering/PR is when you have billions at your disposal.

Don’t believe what you say is 100% true. At least not the case I am aware of.

This was a case study in law portion of my MBA way back in the 90s. She was a moron enough to ALWAYS put the coffee between her legs instead of in a cup holder. On appeal the multi-million dollar jury-result / headline was thrown out and resulted in effect in a nothing burger. Maybe she got 5 figures, if that. Can’t recall exactly.
True she complained repetitively over months about it being too hot at same McDonald’s franchise. But you can see that two ways:
A. If she knew it was always hot -why put it there/ & if no one else was complaining, why should the franchise change.
B. If a regular customer complained routinely about something they should react somehow.
Obviously jury saw it one way & “cooler heads” later saw it different.

 

[Clonamery]

Don’t believe what you say is 100% true. At least not the case I am aware of.

This was a case study in law portion of my MBA way back in the 90s. She was a moron enough to ALWAYS put the coffee between her legs instead of in a cup holder. On appeal the multi-million dollar jury-result / headline was thrown out and resulted in effect in a nothing burger. Maybe she got 5 figures, if that. Can’t recall exactly.
True she complained repetitively over months about it being too hot at same McDonald’s franchise. But you can see that two ways:
A. If she knew it was always hot -why put it there/ & if no one else was complaining, why should the franchise change.
B. If a regular customer complained routinely about something they should react somehow.
Obviously jury saw it one way & “cooler heads” later saw it different.

Liebeck v. McDonald's Restaurants - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[Gumby]

Liebeck v. McDonald's Restaurants - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Yeah so my memory from 1998 a little bit off. Thanks for wiki “facts” version.

But the wildly different opinions about frivolous vs real tort measure are at least alluded to.
Obviously my lawyer in mba class was on the frivolous side of argument.

 

[Huckleberry1]

Let’s get away from politics and back to the topic of the thread, please.

...........

 

[Patjew]

Thank you.

Interesting that the US Constitution plays a role here.

Not all that interesting. Sixth amendment, baby!

 

[maust]

Not all that interesting. Sixth amendment, baby!

You know what would be really interesting? If the Constitution suddenly didn't play a role here

 

[maust]

In fairness to Triumph he lives in his sisters barn in East Podunk, and his status makes it pretty much impossible to leave, as there are schools literally everywhere.

It's unfortunate he didn't attend one of them. On the plus side it may be a good thing trolls aren't taught to have a sense of shame, 'cause this is just flat out embarrassing...

 

[Huckleberry1]

They always put something out. They never said before "we support our player"

Amazing how the Cult of Belichick is dying for something to **** on Vrabel about.


Belichick brought Aaron Hernandez in despite character questions the rest of the league avoided like the plague. Including questions about his involvement in a murder in Florida. And lo and behold what he turn out to be?

The only thing we have seen with Diggs and Barmore are allegations, which both deny, there's nothing wrong with supporting them when there is zero evidence either did anything. If that changes I'm sure we will se something more from the Patriotsvthen.

 

[Real fan 02]

I bet you it was a lot less than that. No personal chef is getting paid anywhere that much. Maybe between 50-75k at the most and that's for a professionally trained chef.

And she was a live in chef... agreed I doubt she is making a killing while she's living in his property at the same time..

 

[upstater1]

So I’d say that indicates they did their internal investigation and evaluation and decided to give him that public vote of confidence based on their evaluation. Just as you’ve made up your mind about him, they’ve done the same, just with a different conclusion resulting.

I haven't made up my mind about anything. I just interpreted a text to mean something happened. That's all.

But the support line kind of already blew up in their face a little bit because as with Barmore, people will be looking for that line in all future statements.

 

[upstater1]

Amazing how the Cult of Belichick is dying for something to **** on Vrabel about.


Belichick brought Aaron Hernandez in despite character questions the rest of the league avoided like the plague. Including questions about his involvement in a murder in Florida. And lo and behold what he turn out to be?

The only thing we have seen with Diggs and Barmore are allegations, which both deny, there's nothing wrong with supporting them when there is zero evidence either did anything. If that changes I'm sure we will se something more from the Patriotsvthen.

You have some absurd and bizarre derangement syndrome about Belichick.

I love Vrabel

Nowhere did I say anything about Vrabel.

How bizarre is it that you believe I think Vrabel is putting out PR statements that are clearly from the Patriots front office?

Your entire response to anything begins with, "Does this poster like Bill Belichick or does he hate him?" Your posts in the Belichick thread/forum are a colossal embarrassment.

 

[Real fan 02]

Yeah so my memory from 1998 a little bit off. Thanks for wiki “facts” version.

But the wildly different opinions about frivolous vs real tort measure are at least alluded to.
Obviously my lawyer in mba class was on the frivolous side of argument.

Was so much easier in the 90s and early 2000s to lodge a lawsuit..

 

[upstater1]

.

 

[Tunescribe]

Interesting that the US Constitution plays a role here.