festy1986
Veteran Starter w/Big Long Term Deal
- Joined
- Jan 17, 2006
- Messages
- 7,709
- Reaction score
- 5,857
Tannenbaum says no because its civil.
Awesome.
Registered Members experience this forum ad and noise-free.
CLICK HERE to Register for a free account and login for a smoother ad-free experience. It's easy, and only takes a few moments.Tannenbaum says no because its civil.
I don't like the sounds of this. WTF does the league need to investigate regarding a civil suit? If it was a criminal charge, sure -- but a civil suit? I just hope Baddell isn't fishing for a way to keep Brown away from the Pats to help his Chiefs-to-Super Bowl agenda.
Actually this is my point and what I am afraid of, you are placed on the exemption list until investigation is over no? Is that not what they did to Peterson?It says that the league is opening an investigation. You figure that investigation will wrap up before Sunday? If so, there will be a howling that might never end, given how the league went about its way during the Hill situation.
We don’t know if the case was already investigated without charges or not. We also don’t know how the victim proceeded to handle things after they occurred. For example, I’m guessing that she probably didn’t follow through the normal procedures that a normal rape victim does, in terms of going to the hospital and getting swabs, etc. It’s possible that there wasn’t much evidence to present.(Hypothetically) Is there any reason why she’d go the civil route if it did actually happen?
Fair enough, I had forgotten that.How old are you? Do you not know what happened to Edelman in 2011?
I understand rape is terrible. However I don't jump to save women just because its a female. Yes, I believe some men are swayed because they want to defend a defenseless female. If there's proof, ill be on her side. However im on NEITHER side til we get more info.
I was on board until Schefter started crazy talk on ESPN and I have taken some steps back.Tannenbaum says no because its civil.
Right, but if the press release is correct, what could the league possibly determine by "investigating" a civil suit? It doesn't make sense.This is just another example of why I say that the league should not be in the business of punishing players for non-NFL issues.
Actually this is my point and what I am afraid of, you are placed on the exemption list until investigation is over no? Is that not what they did to Peterson?
This is just another example of why I say that the league should not be in the business of punishing players for non-NFL issues.
Right, but if the press release is correct, what could the league possibly determine by "investigating" a civil suit? It doesn't make sense.
We also don’t know how the victim proceeded to handle...
It was question as I was not sure btw.Again, that's not what they did to Peterson. He was criminally indicted. Could we resist posting before knowing historical facts?
CYA is a thing.
Actually this is my point and what I am afraid of, you are placed on the exemption list until investigation is over no? Is that not what they did to Peterson?
Big Ben was suspended for four games for a civil suit as well.
Conduct detrimental to the league. That's what it falls under. If a women accused a player of abuse and filed a civil suit for damages, the league could still investigate and suspendRight, but if the press release is correct, what could the league possibly determine by "investigating" a civil suit? It doesn't make sense.
For the disagreers out there I respect your opinion. I thought this guy was nuts and a mess for the last several years, and the jersey switch doesn’t change that. Again I don’t want to pre-judge him in a broad or legal sense but this is a highly volatile environment we live in, the narrative might be annoying but it can matter, and it’s not as simple as “he’s super famous and bangs lots of chicks so of course he’s going to get accused of rape for money”. Anybody ever come at Gronk? Chandler Jones? Jules? Tom? Pick a player? A lot of our guys have been out and about in situations rife for this kind of claim. McGinest had the issue that was false, so that’s a thing, sure. I’m just thinking of a potentially historically great football team being distracted by **** like this ALL year. And NONE of this was on the table for the 2019 Pats 3 days ago. Not thrilled about it, that’s all.
It was question as I was not sure btw.
Actually this is my point and what I am afraid of, you are placed on the exemption list until investigation is over no? Is that not what they did to Peterson?
Big Ben was suspended for four games for a civil suit as well.