Pacman Jones suspended for season, Henry for 8 games

[Michigan Dave]

I really havent read the entire thread, but I have a hard time being silent when I see something offensive. I was using 'grammar' to cover the entire 'write like a 4th grader' slam.

Just curious, you didn't see anything offensive in these responses:

Wow I just read this again. So you have great respect for law enforcment but you find Jones just as trustworthy as the police. WOW. Take the blinders off man. I will tell you my friends would be welcome in my house any day of the week, you want to invite "pac" over to your house by all means go ahead. Maybe he can bounce a female friend of yours head off a table since it doesn't seem to be such a big deal to you and he isn't responsible for his actions it seems. Wow "pacman" is as trustworthy as the police...HAHAHAHAHAHAHA....

Oh and my friends don't get into trouble like "pac" does....seems he can't always blame someone else for the crime....didn't his MOM take the fall for some marijuana of his a while back??? This is hilrious, maybe he should apply for the police department since he is as trustworthy as the police. Don't worry I will never by that bridge back...

well I guess my friends aren't trustworthy and the interviews and video that they watched isn't enough but thanks I will believe them rather than third or fourth hand accounts of a version from "pac" the thug you can stay in your world it will serve you well in court.

 

[Ring 6]

I don't know. As of right now, if he is convicted of this, I have no qualms with a yearlong suspension. But if he is acquitted, well, that's rough. Where do you draw the line? Can I call up 15 friends in Indianapolis, and have them follow Peyton Manning around town causing trouble and accusing him of crimes? The charges wouldn't stick, but only one of Jones' thusfar has. This is why I like a clearly defined disciplinary system. A yearlong suspension for a CoC violation that produces no convictions would be a tough precedent to set.

Are you really saying that he was set up?

Come on. The guy finds trouble everywhere he goes. I dont have to jump to much of a conclusion to conclude he probably has committed quite a few crimes.

I dont have a problem saying give him the chance to prove he is innocent before judging him.
But the fact is the chances are 100000 times greater that he is simply the arrogant, ignorant thug that appearances suggest than that he is just an unlucky guy who has done nothing wrong.

I lose you when you start assuming he should be given as much benefit of doubt as someone without such a horrendous track record.

Truth is, if the facts match the reports, he is scum. I agree you cannot be convinced he is scum until the whole story comes out, but I will be completely surprised if the facts bear out anything other than that he is scum.

 

[pats-blue]

I criticized the grammar out of frustration, and I apologize. However, reading the condescending tone of the posts by Pats-Blue in this thread toward me is annoying. I've no problem hearing his argument and giving it merit, and I've made every attempt to keep it civil. I lost my cool and apologize.

Just keep in mind that Jones was suspended because he gave the league a black eye, not because the NFL has found him guilty in this case. There is a big difference. CoC is not guilty/not guilty. He can be suspended for being in a place he shouldn't have been, doing things he shouldn't have been. I agree he did both, and my issue is with the harshness of his suspension, not that it was laid down in the first place.

Condesending tone? Maybe you should read your posts. The bridge comment here it is.."except Jones made threats to the effect which were carried out a short time earlier by an associate of his (which he denies knowing, which if you believe that I have a bridge to sell you)." Wow that is soooo condesending. I'm sorry if you believe that "pac" is telling the truth about not knowing the guy that IS naive. That is not condesending it simply is not reasonable at all to think he doesn't know the guy.

Then pretty much you called my friends liars and insulted my profession if you read YOUR posts. Yet YOU jump to the defensive and claim I called your friend liars. Yet if you re-read my post I never did any such thing. Yet you accuse me.

If you think my posts were condesending but you need to read YOUR posts. You pull out the bridge comment? Maybe I'm wrong but I see no condesention in that scomment at all. Hard to take your 4th grade comment any other way.

 

[Michigan Dave]

Are you really saying that he was set up?

Come on. The guy finds trouble everywhere he goes. I dont have to jump to much of a conclusion to conclude he probably has committed quite a few crimes.

I dont have a problem saying give him the chance to prove he is innocent before judging him.
But the fact is the chances are 100000 times greater that he is simply the arrogant, ignorant thug that appearances suggest than that he is just an unlucky guy who has done nothing wrong.

I lose you when you start assuming he should be given as much benefit of doubt as someone without such a horrendous track record.

Truth is, if the facts match the reports, he is scum. I agree you cannot be convinced he is scum until the whole story comes out, but I will be completely surprised if the facts bear out anything other than that he is scum.

No. I am not saying he was setup. Christ. My argument deals with the PRECEDENT THAT THIS SETS. Hence an unrelated example. Understand? Every CoC violation in the future must be treated like this, or else the commish is just appeasing the media and public backlash on Jones, which I think he's doing. Give Jones a suspension equal to Henry's. What's wrong with that? Pulling a season long suspension is a big trump card in my book when no conviction is on the record yet.

 

[Ring 6]

Just curious, you didn't see anything offensive in these responses:

Not really.
I find it more offensive to say a guy with the track record of Pacman Jones is equally likely to be honest, or lying, as the legal system of our country much more offensive that to take the short jump to the conclusion that someone who has been involved in so much trouble probably is what he appears to be.

 

[Ring 6]

No. I am not saying he was setup. Christ. My argument deals with the PRECEDENT THAT THIS SETS. Hence an unrelated example. Understand? Every CoC violation in the future must be treated like this, or else the commish is just appeasing the media and public backlash on Jones, which I think he's doing. Give Jones a suspension equal to Henry's. What's wrong with that? Pulling a season long suspension is a big trump card in my book when no conviction is on the record yet.

How many crimes has he been at the scene of, question about, suspected of being part of?
That number is extremely high.
I have no problem setting the precedent that anyone else who has the VOLUME of conduct violations that Jones has gets a year. I dont think that will ever actually happen, though, because the league will now step in before it reaches that level.
I think that Jones had quite a few more violiations than Henry. The other side of your point would then be why does Henry deserve half a season if Jones only got half a season?

 

[Michigan Dave]

Condesending tone? Maybe you should read your posts. The bridge comment here it is.."except Jones made threats to the effect which were carried out a short time earlier by an associate of his (which he denies knowing, which if you believe that I have a bridge to sell you)." Wow that is soooo condesending. I'm sorry if you believe that "pac" is telling the truth about not knowing the guy that IS naive. That is not condesending it simply is not reasonable at all to think he doesn't know the guy.

Then pretty much you called my friends liars and insulted my profession if you read YOUR posts. Yet YOU jump to the defensive and claim I called your friend liars. Yet if you re-read my post I never did any such thing. Yet you accuse me.

If you think my posts were condesending but you need to read YOUR posts. You pull out the bridge comment? Maybe I'm wrong but I see no condesention in that scomment at all. Hard to take your 4th grade comment any other way.

Wow. You said I was getting information secondhand from a liar. Jones. You never said anything about my friends being liars. That's fine. I did not say that about your friends, either. All I have ever said here is that I will not make a decision on an open case about someone's guilt without first hearing the facts in the open myself. I don't even believe what I've been told that Jones said from people who know him.

Read closely here: I do not think you are a liar. I do not think your friends are liars. I do not think the Las Vegas PD are liars. I also do not think Jones is a liar.

I do not know. I want to follow as things come out, and the charges are/aren't filed and a case is made so that I can determine these things for myself. I would figure as someone in law enforcement, you would understand and embrace this. Perhaps I've done too much mediation in my day.

 

[pats-blue]

Quote:
Originally Posted by AndyJohnson
I really havent read the entire thread, but I have a hard time being silent when I see something offensive. I was using 'grammar' to cover the entire 'write like a 4th grader' slam.

Just curious, you didn't see anything offensive in these responses:

Hey MD you forgot to include YOUR pos which I was responding too..... quote Michigan Dave : "So my friends are liars, but yours aren't because they are conducting an investigation? I have great respect for law enforcement, but to insinuate that those investigating are 100% truthful, or that law enforcement/prosecutors sometimes don't go out of their way to charge high profile cases, well, you may be buying that bridge back. I will take the statement I've heard from Jones through my friends as credibly as the statements from the LVPD. The truth is probably somewhere in between. "

Lets see you get all defensive when I doubt a third hand or more version of what happened that night from one source "pac" himself who has the most to lose...what is he going to say besides he was an innocent bystander? If you don't think your post insults MY friends and thier prfessionalism then YOU need to work on your "grammer". Though it was nice that you cherry pick my post and don't include what you posted that I was responding too where you pretty much insult my friends and my profession....so WHO exactly is condesending here?



Quote:
Wow I just read this again. So you have great respect for law enforcment but you find Jones just as trustworthy as the police. WOW. Take the blinders off man. I will tell you my friends would be welcome in my house any day of the week, you want to invite "pac" over to your house by all means go ahead. Maybe he can bounce a female friend of yours head off a table since it doesn't seem to be such a big deal to you and he isn't responsible for his actions it seems. Wow "pacman" is as trustworthy as the police...HAHAHAHAHAHAHA....

Oh and my friends don't get into trouble like "pac" does....seems he can't always blame someone else for the crime....didn't his MOM take the fall for some marijuana of his a while back??? This is hilrious, maybe he should apply for the police department since he is as trustworthy as the police. Don't worry I will never by that bridge back...

Quote:
well I guess my friends aren't trustworthy and the interviews and video that they watched isn't enough but thanks I will believe them rather than third or fourth hand accounts of a version from "pac" the thug you can stay in your world it will serve you well in court.

 

[Michigan Dave]

How many crimes has he been at the scene of, question about, suspected of being part of?
That number is extremely high.
I have no problem setting the precedent that anyone else who has the VOLUME of conduct violations that Jones has gets a year. I dont think that will ever actually happen, though, because the league will now step in before it reaches that level.
I think that Jones had quite a few more violiations than Henry. The other side of your point would then be why does Henry deserve half a season if Jones only got half a season?

Henry has several convictions, no? I don't know a lot about Henry's problems, or what they are, but I'm under the impression that he's been convicted multiple times.

Jones has been questioned A LOT and let go A LOT. That leads me to question his decision making, and ability to represent the league positively. At this point, that is why he warrants a suspension. What is the harm in suspending him for 8 games- a HUGE suspension by NFL standards- and then adding on to that if he's convicted? That seems more fair to me. We have identified there is a problem, a BIG problem, and that he needs to be punished.

 

[Michigan Dave]

Not really.
I find it more offensive to say a guy with the track record of Pacman Jones is equally likely to be honest, or lying, as the legal system of our country much more offensive that to take the short jump to the conclusion that someone who has been involved in so much trouble probably is what he appears to be.

Well, I don't know what to say then. I am just glad that the American legal system is based on the presumption of innocence, and that we don't just imprison him based on "what he appears to be."

Forgive me if I feel the need to give EVERYONE, regardless of their prior wrongdoings, the benefit of a fair defense.

 

[Ring 6]

Henry has several convictions, no? I don't know a lot about Henry's problems, or what they are, but I'm under the impression that he's been convicted multiple times.

Jones has been questioned A LOT and let go A LOT. That leads me to question his decision making, and ability to represent the league positively. At this point, that is why he warrants a suspension. What is the harm in suspending him for 8 games- a HUGE suspension by NFL standards- and then adding on to that if he's convicted? That seems more fair to me. We have identified there is a problem, a BIG problem, and that he needs to be punished.

I'm no expert but I would imagine there would be problems with the union if they handed down one suspension today then changed it if he were convicted. Basing the suspension on whether or not he was convicted would probably also give him cause to dispute the entire suspension if he were not. Besides, they may have actually done that, and the suspension is MORE than a year if he is convicted.

Again, Im no expert on the details, but weren't the problems surrounding Jones much more serious issues than Henry? IIRC, Jones issues had a lot of violence and potential felony issues, while Henry's were not the same type.

 

[jczxohn1]

Absolutely not. But I don't know what happened in Durham, so I waited for the facts to come out. I listened to what the girl said, what the officers and prosecutors said, and what those kids said before making my decision. That's my point. The Jones case is probably not manufactured, and I don't believe that it happens 10% of the time, let alone 50%. But, I see no harm in waiting until charges are brought and the accused has a fair shot at defending himself before passing my judgment.



All I am saying is that I will hear what he has to say. I have not found him guilty of anything yet. Perhaps "equal" was the wrong wording. I concede there.



Duke made a decision based on facts in their case as well, canceled the season, and fired a coach. Again, I'd wait for things to play out. My position here is not that Jones is innocent. He deserves punishment for violating the CoC. I think that is being lost here. I just feel judgment should've been deferred until the case was resolved. Then an appropriate punishment levied.

How long did it take to resolve Jamal Lewis' court case? Should the NFL allow pacman to play for 3-4 yrs before his situation is settled? As a Michigan lawyer,ne apprentice judge, I'm sure you'd have no problem with that. IMO, this jerk won't make his 10 wk review (by the NFL) without being involved in some other "situation for which he isn't responsible". The deplorable thing is that this is such a disrespectful waste of God-given talent by an "over-indulged" (to quote Kraft) individual.

 

[Michigan Dave]

I'm no expert but I would imagine there would be problems with the union if they handed down one suspension today then changed it if he were convicted. Basing the suspension on whether or not he was convicted would probably also give him cause to dispute the entire suspension if he were not. Besides, they may have actually done that, and the suspension is MORE than a year if he is convicted.

Again, Im no expert on the details, but weren't the problems surrounding Jones much more serious issues than Henry? IIRC, Jones issues had a lot of violence and potential felony issues, while Henry's were not the same type.

Right, but I find it hard to punish Jones for the alleged incidents that he was not convicted for under the CoC. Use the CoC to send a harsh message. 8 games is VERY harsh. I also think the union would have no issue with him being suspended now with the stipulation that if he's convicted, he gets 8 more. That's an awful harsh penalty then (as we all agree it is now) and it gives him some due process as well. If he is indeed convicted as everyone feels he should be, he'll get what he deserves.

 

[Michigan Dave]

How long did it take to resolve Jamal Lewis' court case? Should the NFL allow pacman to play for 3-4 yrs before his situation is settled? As a Michigan lawyer,ne apprentice judge, I'm sure you'd have no problem with that. IMO, this jerk won't make his 10 wk review (by the NFL) without being involved in some other "situation for which he isn't responsible". The deplorable thing is that this is such a disrespectful waste of God-given talent by an "over-indulged" (to quote Kraft) individual.

Federal cocaine distribution cases take a little longer to prosecute. This is probably not going to drag out that long. But if the situation were reversed, and this were you with so much to lose, wouldn't you want the benefit of the doubt from your employer? Heck, this way he would end up with 2 harsh punishments.

Whether or not he makes 10 weeks is irrelevant in punishing him now. If he screws up again, I believe he'll lose his privilege of playing in the NFL. And yes, it's the ultimate waste of talent.

 

[Ring 6]

Well, I don't know what to say then. I am just glad that the American legal system is based on the presumption of innocence, and that we don't just imprison him based on "what he appears to be."

Forgive me if I feel the need to give EVERYONE, regardless of their prior wrongdoings, the benefit of a fair defense.

Come on, your being silly now.
I am not saying convict him.
I am saying this:
Based on what you have posted here 1 of 2 things are true:

1) Adam Jones is lying
2) The police are lying

If I ask someone which is more likely to be true, I find it offensive to call the integrity of the police equal to that or Adam Jones.
Adam Jones has given me great cause to doubt his intergrity. To say I put the integrity of the police on equal footing with Adam Jones' inegrity would be to say that I believe the great majority of policemen in America are corrupt liars.
I think that is the point you are missing here. By championing the cause of someone who has by his own actions put his integrity in severe doubt, and comparing him equally to law enforcement, you aren't elevating Jones to an honest person, you are denegrating the integrity of law enofrcement as a whole.

 

[pats-blue]

Wow. You said I was getting information secondhand from a liar. Jones. You never said anything about my friends being liars. That's fine. I did not say that about your friends, either. All I have ever said here is that I will not make a decision on an open case about someone's guilt without first hearing the facts in the open myself. I don't even believe what I've been told that Jones said from people who know him.

Read closely here: I do not think you are a liar. I do not think your friends are liars. I do not think the Las Vegas PD are liars. I also do not think Jones is a liar.

I do not know. I want to follow as things come out, and the charges are/aren't filed and a case is made so that I can determine these things for myself. I would figure as someone in law enforcement, you would understand and embrace this. Perhaps I've done too much mediation in my day.

Well let me see. You say no one knows more than being reported, well I do. The police don't tell the media everything they have..I say I have inside info and you say you have inside info direct from close friends of "pac". Fine I call you on that. If "pac" gives a version to his friends what version do you think it is? My friends talked to everyone involved..oh except for the unknown shooter who NO ONE knows it seems. Watched video of the original altercation and have ALL the facts available. I'm sorry does that seem equal? I have been in court many times on high profile murder cases, drug cases ect. I defintely will take the percentages that my friends are way more than 50% truthful and that is just common sense. They aren't going on thier opinion they are dealing with the facts of the case. I will tell you the porsecutors office is scared of the money "pac" can throw at this case as they have a budget that this case will blow, plus please they simpley are not of the caliber of 'pac's" lawyers they are pblic servants not high priced Defense attorney's.

Also not sure how I am suppossed to take this comment.."So my friends are liars, but yours aren't because they are conducting an investigation? I have great respect for law enforcement, but to insinuate that those investigating are 100% truthful, or that law enforcement/prosecutors sometimes don't go out of their way to charge high profile cases, well, you may be buying that bridge back. I will take the statement I've heard from Jones through my friends as credibly as the statements from the LVPD. The truth is probably somewhere in between.

Not real sure how I take "but to insinuate that those investigators are 100% truthful"...? How do I take that? Really pretty much called my friends liars I think.

 

[Michigan Dave]

Come on, your being silly now.
I am not saying convict him.
I am saying this:
Based on what you have posted here 1 of 2 things are true:

1) Adam Jones is lying
2) The police are lying

If I ask someone which is more likely to be true, I find it offensive to call the integrity of the police equal to that or Adam Jones.
Adam Jones has given me great cause to doubt his intergrity. To say I put the integrity of the police on equal footing with Adam Jones' inegrity would be to say that I believe the great majority of policemen in America are corrupt liars.
I think that is the point you are missing here. By championing the cause of someone who has by his own actions put his integrity in severe doubt, and comparing him equally to law enforcement, you aren't elevating Jones to an honest person, you are denegrating the integrity of law enofrcement as a whole.

I am not championing Jones. I am also not saying the police are lying.

I am saying: I WANT TO HEAR WHAT BOTH HAVE TO SAY.

That's it. I want to hear the case. The case is not public yet, and I'm not using speculation from hearsay on a message board that I have heard nowhere else to make my mind up. When the case is presented, then I can determine my opinion. No charges have yet to be filed, so as of yet, the prosecutors in Vegas have yet to discredit Jones' story! It's still a work in progress, and they are trying to piece everything together. When the case is presented, and it is inevitably shown on ESPN, the LVPD will probably be the ones that I believe. But until then, I wasn't there to decide for myself.

At this point all I know is that he was where he shouldn't have been, doing what he shouldn't have been, and should be punished accordingly.

 

[Ring 6]

Right, but I find it hard to punish Jones for the alleged incidents that he was not convicted for under the CoC. Use the CoC to send a harsh message. 8 games is VERY harsh. I also think the union would have no issue with him being suspended now with the stipulation that if he's convicted, he gets 8 more. That's an awful harsh penalty then (as we all agree it is now) and it gives him some due process as well. If he is indeed convicted as everyone feels he should be, he'll get what he deserves.

I think there is also a big part of this that you are overlooking.
Leading up to his suspension, the commissioner met with Jones and asked him to explain these incidents. I dont think its a huge leap, given the result, that Jones explanations were not real strong. In fact, if he were questioned on these incidents and lied, then the truth came out, he risked a lifetime ban, I would imagine.

Just as you would not judge Jones without all of the facts, isnt it also hard to judge Goddells decision without knowing all the facts that surrounded it? Whiel you refuse to jump to any conclusion about Jones, you are quick to jump to a conclusion about Goddells motivation, and assume what facts his decision was based on. Damn, I shouldhave been a lawyer.

 

[pats-blue]

Come on, your being silly now.
I am not saying convict him.
I am saying this:
Based on what you have posted here 1 of 2 things are true:

1) Adam Jones is lying
2) The police are lying

If I ask someone which is more likely to be true, I find it offensive to call the integrity of the police equal to that or Adam Jones.
Adam Jones has given me great cause to doubt his intergrity. To say I put the integrity of the police on equal footing with Adam Jones' inegrity would be to say that I believe the great majority of policemen in America are corrupt liars.
I think that is the point you are missing here. By championing the cause of someone who has by his own actions put his integrity in severe doubt, and comparing him equally to law enforcement, you aren't elevating Jones to an honest person, you are denegrating the integrity of law enofrcement as a whole.

Amen. Careful of your spelling or typos Andy.

 

[Ring 6]

I am not championing Jones. I am also not saying the police are lying.

I am saying: I WANT TO HEAR WHAT BOTH HAVE TO SAY.

That's it. I want to hear the case. The case is not public yet, and I'm not using speculation from hearsay on a message board that I have heard nowhere else to make my mind up. When the case is presented, then I can determine my opinion. No charges have yet to be filed, so as of yet, the prosecutors in Vegas have yet to discredit Jones' story! It's still a work in progress, and they are trying to piece everything together. When the case is presented, and it is inevitably shown on ESPN, the LVPD will probably be the ones that I believe. But until then, I wasn't there to decide for myself.

At this point all I know is that he was where he shouldn't have been, doing what he shouldn't have been, and should be punished accordingly.

Again, you missed my point.
By giving Jones and law enforcement a equal footing on who may or may not be telling the truth (I am not talking about waiting for facts, but saying they are equally likely to be right) you are taking a guy who is generally perceived as entirely lacking integrity and claiming you feel the integrity of law enforcement is equal to his.


Let me give you an example.

If a known rapist commits a rape of a 90 year old lady, and claims it was consensual, and you say I refuse to take a side on who is telling the truth and I refuse to say either is lying or say which is more likely to be lying, that is lowering the integrity of the 90 year old lady to that of the rapist. It is not going to be perceived as I have no reason to not believe her, but I'd like proof he is not lying. It is saying flip a coin, either one may be telling the truth. I think that would be offensive to 90 year old ladies everywhere.