Discussion in 'NFL Football Forum' started by Quest4SevenHomie, Sep 6, 2019.
Fair enough, but that just came up a page or two back.
Big Ben wasn't suspended 30 seconds into an investigation, though. He was accused in March. The police investigated for a month and decided not to charge. Roethlisberger wasn't interviewed by the Ommissioner until April 13th, and he wasn't suspended until April 21st, after the police investigation had wrapped up.
Not sure. I have noticed many women AND men jump to defend women even if there's no proof AND HECK, there are men who jump to defend women even if they are the villains. However I do agree with your post.
We won't. In one summer he forced his way out of Pittsburgh and refused to meet with the owner, he then got himself released from the Raiders after skipping practices and threatening to fight the owner, he last one official day on the Patriots before a rape allegation came up. There is now the threat of league investigation, the exemption list and a possible suspension.
It's also nonsense. PR is a thing. Turns out a large number of people don't want to watch someone running around earning millions playing a game when that person has done something they consider heinous.
It's ridiculous to suggest that the league shouldn't care about public perception especially when it comes to violent/sexual assault crimes.
No. Not from a civil suit. From a criminal charge, yes.
Smart celebrities make their sex partners sign legal documents before entry. There is a difference between regretted sex and rape but they are equally bad if made public for all the celebrities.
She's a complaintant. It's a civil lawsuit.
AB, if you are innocent, this is the time to have all your recordings and taping of other people on point(I mean of the girl in regards to saving text messages and having actual proof of contact after the incident). Public opinion on this has already crossed the atlantic ocean enroute to Northern Europe, you barely have socks on to start the chase.
Those are very specific points. Seems like they'd have no problem proving them (ex. the woman asking for tickets, offering to train him, posting photos of Brown in a positive light on her social media, etc. -- all taking place after the alleged sexual assault). If so, then it really helps his case.
It doesn't matter. The exemption list is not some defined thing that mandates a criminal case. It literally defines the requirments as "unusual circumstances". It's vague by design.
If Goodell's motive to put Antonio Brown on his exempt list is to give KC the upper hand over the Pats in the AFC, then he is doomed to failure with that. With or without Brown, the Patriots are easily odds on favorites to win AFC. Aside from Brown, what they did to Pittsburgh two nights ago, without Van Noy, Damien Harris and N'Keal Harry should depress the entire league.
Hopefully, the truth comes out and justice is served either way. But football-wise, there's nothing I can see (other than a huge spate of injuries) that can derail the Patriots this year from the Super Bowl.
Too bad Kraft is in jail after what happened in Florida and the league forced Jonathan to take over the team. I hope the Patriots can beat Miami - their leading receiver is pretty shifty. It's unfortunate the Patriots had to cut him back in 2011.
I mean Chung is still playing even though he has that cocaine case against him and RK hasn’t been disciplined by the NFL yet and he has been charged. Will he still be allowed to play while an investigation is going on?
Yes, and there is precedent regarding how it's used.
Well, the league will hire investigators, and demand that Brown provide them with all information. The league will also ask the woman to provide them with all the information that she has. The investigation will check into the info and claims, via 3rd parties, documentary evidence, and the like. And, then, Goodell will rule based upon whatever the hell he feels like, as he's shown time and again.
Who said that was true? That’s surprising to me.
The crimes supposedly occurred in ‘17 and ‘18. Besides, is there any limit for serious cases like rape in the state of NY? Not that I’m aware of.
This still leaves the door open for he said/she said situations. Personally, I like having video/photo/audio evidence. If my home/car has a camera, I will always have an alibi.
When the actual statute is vague prior cases don't matter. The commissioner could easily say "the player is involved in a federally filed lawsuit that asserts a serious sexual crime which would be conduct detrimental to the league. Due to this unusual circumstance, we place him on the exempt list".
So, basically, we’ll all remember that one day back in ‘19 where Brown practiced with the Patriots.
Separate names with a comma.