A "Rabid Giants Fan" Deals On Greg Hardy

[Rogerthat12]

There is tremendous risk in turning down the settlement offer.

If someone offers you a million dollars (for example) to walk away, and you turn it down because you want to testify in a criminal trial which at most will result in the guy getting probation, and could very well end up in him being found not guilty, then you've just risked a helluva lot of money for no real gain.I doubt the guy has a single shred of regret or humiliation at his own actions.

We simply disagree, I do not go into litigation for any settlement for domestic abuse, you expose the abuser and punish him to the extent the law allows along with the public humiliation with trajectory of a ruined NFL career.

I seek justice and why would he be found not guilty if there is evidence to the contrary?

He was found not guilty because she did not testify.

I do not seek litigation without evidence there is no risk involved in testifying other than not getting the pay out from the abuser.

The gain is justice and exposing the abuser, the point of litigation in such a case.

 

[DFWJC]

Please. We go and sign a woman beater who paid off a witness, and you all want to act like it's a conspiracy against the team. And somehow you're shocked that people in the league office are upset about it.

Where did he beat a woman...ever?
I'm waiting....
Tell me when he ever hit this women.
No excusing him, but there is difference

 

[Rogah]

We simply disagree, I do not go into litigation for any settlement for domestic abuse, you expose the abuser and punish him to the extent the law allows along with the public humiliation with trajectory of a ruined NFL career.

I seek justice and why would he be found not guilty if there is evidence to the contrary?

He was found not guilty because she did not testify.

You are entitled to your own opinion, but not your own facts. He was never found not guilty. Charges were dismissed. There's a huge difference.

The gain is justice and exposing the abuser, the point of litigation in such a case.

Like I said.... That's a very easy thing to say when it's not you risking hundreds of thousands of dollars or more with literally nothing to gain except seeing the guy do a year and a half of probation.

 

[Corso]

No argument from me on Goodell's judgment being poor, especially when it comes to disciplining players in a sensible manner.

The only point I am making is that people are assuming bias from an investigator based on the fact that she is a Giant fan. Since she was not the only investigator working the case, and she is providing information, not the punishment on the player, I don't think that the bias would appear. Especially considering that Hardy and his attorney had an opportunity to sit with the league and present his side of the story.

I would guess that the investigation of this began last year - prior to Hardy no longer being a member of the Panthers. In other words, prior to him becoming a Cowboy.

Goodell made a decision based on PR - not bias. He is trying to make the league look tough on perceived domestic abuse. The discipline was going to be the same regardless of the team that Hardy played for. They evidently believed that based on what they reviewed, including Hardy's input, that he was guilty of domestic abuse. Hardy will appeal this, as he should. The suspension will eventually be reduced.

The people that are claiming bias on the part of the investigation have not seen any of the evidence reviewed. Not a whit. Is the evidence legit? I have no idea. Do I know what really happened that night? No, I do not. Neither does anyone else on this forum.

I disagree with nary a letter of your post. I am simply very much in the corner of if you are the head of a very high profile company and you need to discipline, or find out if you need to discipline someone that is also high profile and everything you are about to do will be scrutinized: You make sure your team that you put together to handle the situation is impeccable. This job requires impeccable credentials, in my mind. People saying "So if they are X fan you wouldn't hire them?" No. Not for this. You just don't hire people that COULD (notice I said could) have a personal conflict of interest. You just don't. It's called maintaining integrity.

I believe you should make this as "antiseptic" as you can. Like surgery, but in a different sense. I am awesomely amused by the lack of professionalism and detail in such an endeavor by the reigning "Figurehead" ruler of the NFL.
And honestly that's on the NFL owners. Jerry included. They hired him, support him and keep him collecting paychecks despite his treating the league like the mafia, making things up as they go.

Edit: Please note the very first sentence in this post. I am not disagreeing with you, but now I'm straight buzzed with a serious intention to not be aware of my specific location when I "come to" within the next 12-18 hours so I'm straight riffing off the top of my head at this moment and that should go towards any posts I make within the next few hours. This was a friendly post, bud.

 

[Rogerthat12]

You are entitled to your own opinion, but not your own facts. He was never found not guilty. Charges were dismissed. There's a huge difference.
Like I said.... That's a very easy thing to say when it's not you risking hundreds of thousands of dollars or more with literally nothing to gain except seeing the guy do a year and a half of probation.

The charges were dismissed because she did not testify, so in essence he was found not guilty of the alleged charges by having the case dismissed, semantics, not facts.

The reason justice was simply probation is the judge deemed that is all the crime warranted, which begs even more questions for the pay out!

Seeking justice is what is to gain:

Punishing the abuser to the extent the law allows.

Exposing the abuser through national exposure with the trajectory of ruining a lucrative NFL career.

According to you, justice, no matter how small, does not matter, only a cash pay out was the best litigation for justice could do, which is absurd!

What was the purpose of the litigation, money or justice regardless of extent?

 

[KB1122]

The punishment has nothing to do with the Giants rivalry. It has to do with the fact that the league has a perception problem re: domestic violence and wants to send a message.

 

[erod]

Today, it's "THE LEAGUE IS OUT TO GET THE COWBOYS!"

After the sentence is reduced, it'll be "THE LEAGUE IS FAVORING THE COWBOYS YET AGAIN!"

Such is the mindless world of sports fandom.

 

[Plankton]

I disagree with nary a letter of your post. I am simply very much in the corner of if you are the head of a very high profile company and you need to discipline, or find out if you need to discipline someone that is also high profile and everything you are about to do will be scrutinized: You make sure your team that you put together to handle the situation is impeccable. This job requires impeccable credentials, in my mind. People saying "So if they are X fan you wouldn't hire them?" No. Not for this. You just don't hire people that COULD (notice I said could) have a personal conflict of interest. You just don't. It's called maintaining integrity.

I believe you should make this as "antiseptic" as you can. Like surgery, but in a different sense. I am awesomely amused by the lack of professionalism and detail in such an endeavor by the reigning "Figurehead" ruler of the NFL.
And honestly that's on the NFL owners. Jerry included. They hired him, support him and keep him collecting paychecks despite his treating the league like the mafia, making things up as they go.

Edit: Please note the very first sentence in this post. I am not disagreeing with you, but now I'm straight buzzed with a serious intention to not be aware of my specific location when I "come to" within the next 12-18 hours so I'm straight riffing off the top of my head at this moment and that should go towards any posts I make within the next few hours. This was a friendly post, bud.

No worries - I respect the difference of opinion here. You're always one of the more civil posters on the site.

 

[Plankton]

The nfl didn't start asking the NC district attorney for information until after he was with the Cowboys.

Incorrect.

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2015/02/13/nfl-formally-seeks-access-to-greg-hardy-court-file/

 

[speedkilz88]

Incorrect.

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2015/02/13/nfl-formally-seeks-access-to-greg-hardy-court-file/

Well when they filed suit for the information he was. Some coincidence right there.




On the day Greg Hardy became a Dallas Cowboy, the NFL made it clear that the league – and Hardy – have unfinished business in Charlotte.

The NFL filed suit Wednesday, seeking the evidence gathered against the former Carolina Panther defensive end in a domestic-abuse case involving his former girlfriend. Mecklenburg County District Attorney Andrew Murray was named as the defendant.


Read more here: http://www.charlotteobserver.com/sports/nfl/carolina-panthers/article15301409.html#storylink=cpy

 

[Plankton]

Well when they filed suit for the information he was.




On the day Greg Hardy became a Dallas Cowboy, the NFL made it clear that the league – and Hardy – have unfinished business in Charlotte.

The NFL filed suit Wednesday, seeking the evidence gathered against the former Carolina Panther defensive end in a domestic-abuse case involving his former girlfriend. Mecklenburg County District Attorney Andrew Murray was named as the defendant.


Read more here: http://www.charlotteobserver.com/sports/nfl/carolina-panthers/article15301409.html#storylink=cpy

Yeah, so, in other words, the investigation began PRIOR to Hardy signing with the Cowboys. Just as I said.

 

[speedkilz88]

Yeah, so, in other words, the investigation began PRIOR to Hardy signing with the Cowboys. Just as I said.

How did they investigate without that court information that they didn't file a lawsuit until after he signed with the Cowboys?

 

[Plankton]

How did they investigate without that court information that they didn't file a lawsuit until after he signed with the Cowboys?

The fact that they made the request in February shows that they began the investigation. It's as clear as a bell.

At least to someone who doesn't presume bias against my team from the league office.

 

[speedkilz88]

The fact that they made the request in February shows that they began the investigation. It's as clear as a bell.

At least to someone who doesn't presume bias against my team from the league office.

They had nothing to investigate without that court information. They didn't file to see it until he signed. They admit they didn't even interview Holder at any time.

 

[JoeKing]

The punishment has nothing to do with the Giants rivalry. It has to do with the fact that the league has a perception problem re: domestic violence and wants to send a message.

And there in lies the problem. The commish is more concerned about perception than reality. Tangible evidence that directly condemns Hardy of a single act of violence doesn't exist but if they appoint a sympathetic ear and present their side of the story in a biased manner, they can engineer their own desired outcome. The narrative, "big scary man with military style assault weapons beating defenseless woman" is an obvious attempt to bias the story. The photos of a bruise woman and no proof how it happened automatically get attributed to the scary man and not the crazy lady. It would be different if a video existed of Hardy hitting the alleged victim... that's the kind of real evidence that made the Ray Rice case a slam dunk. All we have is the words of Hardy and his alleged victim and opinions of numerous secondary persons. The alleged victim has now mysteriously stopped talking and Hardy's voice is ignored so the secondary opinions rule the day with impunity. This politically correct society has claimed another victim and call it social justice.

 

[Plankton]

They had nothing to investigate without that court information. They didn't file to see it until he signed. They admit they didn't even interview Holder at any time.

They asked first, and gave the DA one month to provide the information. When he didn't comply, they sued.

You don't think with the league's law enforcement connections that they couldn't have spoken with the police department? They couldn't have spoken with the Panthers to see what information they had? You said that the league didn't ask for information until he signed with Dallas. That is factually incorrect.

 

[Corso]

The fact that they made the request in February shows that they began the investigation. It's as clear as a bell.

At least to someone who doesn't presume bias against my team from the league office.

Mmmm... I honestly didn't read the entire thread (actually I barely read a few posts) so I did not figure the conspiracy agenda was being argued.
I don't believe there is a conspiracy against this team, personally. I think fans of every team will believe that and that's pretty normal. We all have a little bit of victim's mentality towards certain things. It's human.
I do believe the Cowboys are the most high profile team in the league and they have the most fans and that magnifies things, to be sure, and I simply cannot believe the NFL wants to wantonly bite the hand that figurative and literally feeds it more than any other by far. And the Commanders! They are #2 as far as revenue, last I check (which was a while ago).

I do believe that this was handled in a less than expected professional manner, in my point of view and that is no bueno, mi amigo.
That was and is my point, in continuation from my previous post on the subject.

Not that you asked, but I felt compelled to type this and shouldn't be judged for doing so.
I'M A MAN DA**IT!

 

[DogFace]

The rooting interests of an investigator aren't relevant. I guess only people without rooting interests can work in the league office, huh? Are you saying that there's no way that the investigator, who didn't mete the justice in this decision, could put that aside and do her job? Especially considering that she is paid by the Cowboys as well as the other 31 teams in the league? Seriously?

I'm saying a reasonable person could see she has a CONFLICT OF INTEREST which should be avoided to avoid doubt among critically thinking people.

This is a general rule in our society that attempts to insure fairness in a judgement or ruling.
When discipline is involved it becomes more important. We don't normally let the families of the victim of a crime sentence the accused. There is a reason for that.

This will all eventually be knocked down to far fewer games by a judge who has no conflict of interest.

 

[renny]

Did they remove that article? Link doesn't work.

Did they remove that article? Link doesn't work.

By Shira Springer Globe Staff October 26, 2014




Lisa Friel has built a career on fact finding under difficult circumstances.

As a prosecutor with the Manhattan district attorney’s office for nearly three decades, she directed sexual assault investigations, rising to chief of the sex crimes unit. She joined T&M Protection Resources, a security and investigations firm, as a vice president in October 2011 and deals with allegations of sexual misconduct in schools and public and private workplaces.

Continue reading below