Tyreek Hill Investigation

TommyBrady12 said:

There's a poll at the top of the page where 40% say the Chiefs should keep him. They are desperate to win a super bowl lol.

Click to expand...

Ah I didn't see that. Thanks.

I tend to agree. As some know I pop on that site every now and then. Overall they are good to me. A few of the decent ones there have told me the OT loss was sheer devastation. They are desperate.

In monitoring that site for the last few days it does seem the tide turned once the audio came out. There are a few that I guess are willing to let it go. That disgusts me but whatever

farn said:

Even with all their weapons, an arguably flawed NE team dispatched them last year... they are nothing. Kelce is nothing.

Click to expand...

I don’t think KC even wins their division next year with Hill, Houston, Hunt, Berry, and Ford gone

Hill and Hunt are four letter words.

Time to reinstate the fan who threw beer on this subhuman piece of **** yet?

What ever happened to the NFL's plan to punish teams who continually have players suspended? There should also be some sort of retribution to the teams for signing POS like Hunt, Hill, etc.

Hill is done, I think the only thing putting off his banishment from the NFL is the NFL doesn't want to overshadow the draft with this black eye.

I'm surprised the Chiefs didn't draft Simmons, he seems to fit their culture of women beaters.

bormio said:

I feel kinda bad for Mahomes, who may be a special player, and is watching his team implode spectacularly.

Click to expand...

I agree, but Mahomes will be fine and the Chiefs will be a contender because he's so good. Damien Williams is a good running back and he still has Kelce and Watkins. They'll probably draft a burner-type at the end of the 2nd round. While some good receivers are likely to go off the board before they pick, guys like Terry McLaurin and Mecole Hardman will be available and they're the type of player who could help replace Hill.

Hill should never have been in the NFL. Now he's done. Bye.

Nikolai said:

If the NFL does nothing and Hill hauls off and kills or maims someone, there will be some hell to pay. I'm sure they're thinking about that right now. IOW I hope their sense of self-preservation will prevail, since common sense never will.



I was just in Prague...visited the Museum of Communism, and there was a lot of space dedicated to the purges of 1948-1953, where people were "compelled" behind closed doors to cooperate with the kangaroo trial, self-incriminated in public in an orderly setting, and were either executed or sent to do hard labor. This was a pattern of legal process across the communist world within the last 50-60 years.

Fortunately, there isn't a nationwide problem or government directive to carry out this kind of activity (is this in the offing though?), but it could very possibly happen at the local level.

The fifth amendment is as valuable a tool to prevent government abuse as any of the other amendments.

Ben Rapistberger got suspensions even without being charged.

Click to expand...

With respect and appreciated to your contribution to the discussion, I still don’t understand why subpoenaing the actual defendant to testify in a trial in with our legal system has anything to do with torture, kangaroo courts, mass injustices, etc. You would still need a grand jury indictment and due process, an objective jury, etc. The only difference is, yes, the defendant him/herself would need to take witness stand like everyone else. It’s specifically the part about a defendant being exempt from testifying that I find illogical, not the entire 5th amendment (I’m very much skeptical of the government’s powers.). With all the legal protections that exist today (Miranda rights, right to an attorney, etc,) I wonder if the countries would have included this clause. I think a lot of what people aren’t arguing against here has to do with coerced confessions...but I think that’s a different issue.

I just listened to the recording..

https://dailysnark.com/tyreek-hill-recording-released-discussing-abusing-his-son/

Jesus, someone please save this kid, it sounds like they both beat him! He is three years old!! When he does something "wrong" he must hold out his arms while Hill punches him in the chest! And apparently they both beat him with a belt.

How the NFL can wait another minute before they banish this POS is incredible!

Miranda rights are a joke. I mean it's great that we have them, but it's not exactly hard for the cops to work around them.

I like the guy bringing up Stalinist terror as if there's someone in this thread arguing that actually, Stalinist terror was good

FreeTedWilliams said:

I just listened to the recording..

Tyreek Hill Recording Released Discussing Abusing His Son (AUDIO)

Jesus, someone please save this kid, it sounds like they both beat him! He is three years old!! When he does something "wrong" he must hold out his arms while Hill punches him in the chest! And apparently they both beat him with a belt.

How the NFL can wait another minute before they banish this POS is incredible!

Click to expand...

Mrs RW and I want to take this kid in, give him a great home and life and as a byproduct convert him into a Patriots Fan.

He’s not just a domestic abuser, by his own words he is a domestic terrorist. He should be banned for life.

FreeTedWilliams said:

There should also be some sort of retribution to the teams for signing POS like Hunt, Hill, etc.

Click to expand...

And Aaron Hernandez, Willie Andrews, Alfonzo Dennard, Kenyatta Jones, Albert Haynesworth, Brandon Browner, Cierre Wood...

I get that the league doesn't even want to utter Hill's name with the draft going on but that's not an acceptable explanation for Fraudger not immediately placing him on the commissioner's exempt list. Not only does decency call for it but the Chiefs as a member organization deserve some assistance from the league from the surfeit of scorn they are facing for having him on their roster when the GM that selected him isn't even there anymore. If they cut him Dorsey the jackwagon would pick him up in a cocaine heartbeat at no cost to the Browns. Putting Hill on the exempt list at least applies a tourniquet to staunch the bleeding while the audio is being verified and the firing squad is being arranged. A decent commissioner would have dealt with this immediately

realtime said:

And Aaron Hernandez, Willie Andrews, Alfonzo Dennard, Kenyatta Jones, Albert Haynesworth, Brandon Browner, Cierre Wood...

Click to expand...

Your response has nothing to do with the players he listed. All you did was rattle off a bunch of losers that wore a NEP uniform.

...and bundling a 1 month PSer like Wood is ********.

robertweathers said:

Your response has nothing to do with the players he listed. All you did was rattle off a bunch of losers that wore a NEP uniform.

...and bundling a 1 month PSer like Wood is ********.

Click to expand...

Fans in glass houses....that was my point.

Thanks for having the backs of other posters. It is what makes this online community so magical!

realtime said:

Fans in glass houses....that was my point.

Thanks for having the backs of other posters. It is what makes this online community so magical!

Click to expand...

Ha. Thanks!

I'm not trying to have anyone's backs or attack you. Apologies if I came across that way. I think context is important to understanding what happened. All I'm trying to do

I think my overall point is how the team reacts to players who step way out of bounds.

AH had questions at UofF and the Pats pulled the trigger. Once the **** hit the fan they cut him. Same with Dennard and Jones.

Andrews was a hooch possession. They gave him a chance. Just like KFaulk. Once he got nailed for dealing he was gone.

Browner was all kinds of stuff. Once he cleared the suspension, he was a good boy here.

Wood clearly had brewing problems. Not sure why he waived from the PS?

And now Dale Arnold is going full Dale Arnold. This case is yet another great example of why the NFL should not be policing its players, and should be leaving the policing to the ....... police.

In this case, it's because, pretty much no matter how the league acts with this, it's going to be wrong in the eyes of many.

I loath child abusers. That poor kid. I hope they take him away or next we will hear that he is dead.

Ice_Ice_Brady said:

With respect and appreciated to your contribution to the discussion, I still don’t understand why subpoenaing the actual defendant to testify in a trial in with our legal system has anything to do with torture, kangaroo courts, mass injustices, etc. You would still need a grand jury indictment and due process, an objective jury, etc. The only difference is, yes, the defendant him/herself would need to take witness stand like everyone else. It’s specifically the part about a defendant being exempt from testifying that I find illogical, not the entire 5th amendment (I’m very much skeptical of the government’s powers.). With all the legal protections that exist today (Miranda rights, right to an attorney, etc,) I wonder if the countries would have included this clause. I think a lot of what people aren’t arguing against here has to do with coerced confessions...but I think that’s a different issue.

Click to expand...

Have you considered the whole innocent until proven guilty concept?
By requiring a defendant to testify you are now putting the burden upon him to disprove the prosecutions theory and case.
Additionally if the prosecution has a weak case but really believes he is guilty (which happens a lot) they get to grill him on the stand and try to make him slip up and replace evidence with instinctual impressions of a jury. (I suppose this would be a bad thing for minorities, uneducated, or people who have a bad temper, poor communication skills, contempt for being accused, and righteous indignation).
We would be back to “prove thy is not a witch” .

The defendant will only choose not to testify when he believes they haven’t proven his guilt or when his testimony will hurt him. In your view those people would be forced to take the stand, answer “did you do it” and then have a skilled, trained litigator try to convince the jury they did. Keep in mind it’s not even a debate where he can argue the point. It’s an interrogation where he is only allowed to answer the questions.

It’s interesting that you are so anti law and order in the Kraft case but are arguing here that defendants have no rights.