Chris Henry: Assault Accusation...Claims are false *Updated*

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Oh, well that changes the whole story! If Henry ONLY had two arrests and one giving a minor alcohol and one DUI, I don't see anything wrong with that! I'm sure the minor sobered up, and he did not kill anyone while driving drunk...let the guy have fun! I would not punish my son for any juvinile misbehavior unless he was guilty in a court of law!!

And Jones was just having a little fun...you know, out drinking at 4:30 in the morning, inciting a rukus...nothing wrong with that at all. Hey, let kids be kids, huh?

I feel sorry for these poor souls, they just be trying to have fun, ya dig? They just be blowing steam, holmes...!

Poor innocent creatures! "Why is everybody always picking on me"?

And again im not saying that the players should be excused for these actions. I am just saying let the justice system and not Goodell determine who is a criminal and who is not.

That is actually what annoys me. Goodell could have waited a couple of months and all of these cases would have been settled and he could have dropped the hammer righteously.

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

didn't you say that most of are laws are arbitrary?

all laws are aribtrary. do you even know what arbitrary means?

 

[burmafrd]

Fuzzy. Goodell just has to determine that their conduct is detrimental to the league. Hard to argue that getting in trouble multiple times doing extremely stupid things is not detrimental to the league.

 

[Hostile]

Do you roll with R. Kelly?

Not being a smart alec.

Who?

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Fuzzy. Goodell just has to determine that their conduct is detrimental to the league. Hard to argue that getting in trouble multiple times doing extremely stupid things is not detrimental to the league.

and for the fiftieth time now the suspensions specifically list allegations that are awating trial as well as other things as cause for the suspensions. it establishes a precedent.

 

[burmafrd]

I would say that Goodell has been stern ( I like hanging judges, by the way)
but arbitrary?

1 : depending on individual discretion (as of a judge) and not fixed by law <the manner of punishment is arbitrary>
2 a : not restrained or limited in the exercise of power : ruling by absolute authority <an arbitrary government> b : marked by or resulting from the unrestrained and often tyrannical exercise of power <protection from arbitrary arrest and detention>
3 a : based on or determined by individual preference or convenience rather than by necessity or the intrinsic nature of something <an arbitrary standard> <take any arbitrary positive number> <arbitrary division of historical studies into watertight compartments -- A. J. Toynbee> b : existing or coming about seemingly at random or by chance or as a capricious and unreasonable act of will <when a task is not seen in a meaningful context it is experienced as being arbitrary

depends on how you mean it. I would say that it is not 3.
1- well it is fixed by law inside the NFL due to the authorization in the CBA. So that one is out.
2- maybe. BUT Goodell is restrained by the fact that the owners could get together and say enough is enough. the players Union could also probably say something.

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

True no one was ever hanged pre mature during Paine, Adams and Jefferson time. Give me a break!!! :laugh2:

I hope you were joking. The premature hangings via vigilante justice were a result of people determining guilt before due process had taken its course.

 

[burmafrd]

Now Fuzzy, Pacman and Henry had been in trouble numerous times and everyone of them had some legal implications. They had both pleaded guilty or been convicted. It was a clear pattern of behavior on there part. Goodell could say it was legal- he did not have to really site any reasons at all.
He could just say that they were stupid and he was making them pay for it as well. Some things maybe are not openly said but IMPLIED.

 

[burmafrd]

ALso there were cases, Fuzzy, where people believed that the justice system was not working and decided to do it themselves. Jefferson also said that when the system fails the people have the RIGHT to act themselves. No doubt most of the lynchings were probably wrong- but I have read more then a few cases where it was clear that the one lynched had it coming. NOTHING IS EVER 100&#37;. And for those defending our so called JUSTICE system I have two letters for you: OJ.
And while that is the most extreme well known case, there are many others all the time. As regards our system being the best- Being the best of a bad lot is no high praise. I think Jefferson and Adams would be APPALLED at what the system they started has MUTATED too.

 

[5Stars]

And again im not saying that the players should be excused for these actions. I am just saying let the justice system and not Goodell determine who is a criminal and who is not.

That is actually what annoys me. Goodell could have waited a couple of months and all of these cases would have been settled and he could have dropped the hammer righteously.

Listen, I understand your point, to a point, However, you really need to differentiate between the law and the rules of the NFL. That's all.

Do you have children? It's the same principle, Fuzzy! If your child keeps doing things that are wrong, or if neighbors keep complaing to you that your child is over at their house acting up, whether you saw it or not, you have to discipline them!

Think of it this way? There is alot of bad behavior in the world that go unpunished in a court of law. Now, eventually these people that can get away with stuff like this, without discipline, may eventually give them more courage to go farther and farther into criminal activity resulting in the worst crimes that eventually lead to prison time.

So, with that line of thinking, maybe the Commish is actually DOING THEM A FAVOR? Letting them know that they are crossing boundries that should not be crossed, because, BANG...now you went way to far! See ya later...tell the Warden, "I tried..."?

 

[5Stars]

I hope you were joking. The premature hangings via vigilante justice were a result of people determining guilt before due process had taken its course.

Hey! That's me! A member of the DVS!!


:laugh2:

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Now Fuzzy, Pacman and Henry had been in trouble numerous times and everyone of them had some legal implications. They had both pleaded guilty or been convicted. It was a clear pattern of behavior on there part. Goodell could say it was legal- he did not have to really site any reasons at all.
He could just say that they were stupid and he was making them pay for it as well. Some things maybe are not openly said but IMPLIED.

couldve wouldve shouldve

for the fifty first time goodell specifically listed allegations agianst both guys that were awaiting trial.

 

[burmafrd]

SO what? You do not get it. There were many reasons to slam Pacman and Henry. Not just the legal messes. I did point out that there certainly was IMPLIED reasons as well, didn't I?

 

[Bob Sacamano]

Goodell specifically lists criminal acts that Jones and Henry are still awaiting trial on in the suspensions. Your little fantasy scenario of them being suspended only because of media coverage is just crap you are making up.

From the old policy there is a specific definition of what is conduct detrimental.



Notice that negative media reports are not listed. The players contract gives Goodell the authority to determine these violations 'reasonably.' So even if those suspensions didnt list the aforementioned pending cases you would still have no point.

As i have stated repeatedly i dont care how harsh his punishments are as long as they are consistent so you blathering about that has no point.

i used to tutor high schoolers and they sure seemed to pick up things faster than you do.

Fuzzy, from the old CBA, Appendix C-NFL Player Contract, point 15

Integrity of Game. Player recognizes the detriment to the League and professional football that would result from impairment of public confidence in the honest and orderly conduct of NFL games or the integrity and good character of NFL players. Player therefore acknowledges his awareness...or is guilty of any form or conduct reasonably judged by the League Commisioner to be detrimental to the League or professionaly football, the Commisioner will have the right, but only after giving Player the opportunity for a hearing at which he may be represented by cousel of his choice, to fine Player in a reasonable amount; to suspend Player for a period certain or indefinitely; and/or to terminate this contract

so again, the NFL has a right to protect it's image and PacMan and Henry agreed to it

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

ALso there were cases, Fuzzy, where people believed that the justice system was not working and decided to do it themselves. Jefferson also said that when the system fails the people have the RIGHT to act themselves. No doubt most of the lynchings were probably wrong- but I have read more then a few cases where it was clear that the one lynched had it coming. NOTHING IS EVER 100%. And for those defending our so called JUSTICE system I have two letters for you: OJ.
And while that is the most extreme well known case, there are many others all the time. As regards our system being the best- Being the best of a bad lot is no high praise. I think Jefferson and Adams would be APPALLED at what the system they started has MUTATED too.

actually locke said that and i never claimed that the american justice system was 100%, I am just saying that it is much much better than Goodell/Upshaw. Goodell cannot obtain a search warrant or issue subpoenas for example nor compell a witness to testify even if he has 10000 exFBI field officers.

 

[DallasEast]

Here we go again :bang2:

Goodell would probably have a good laugh after reading these threads. It's highly logical to assume that the NFL's legal department poured over every possible scenario; and advised the commissioner how he could then enforce his authority in these matters before his very first suspension. Most assuredly, they still are and will continue to do so throughout his tenure.

It's no longer a simple matter of what observers think is right or wrong. It's what it shall be under Goodell. Arguments which have or will insure in favor or against Goodell's enforcement of the NFL conduct policy were made moot long before they were ever brought forth. That's a good thing, imo.

 

[Bob Sacamano]

all laws are aribtrary. do you even know what arbitrary means?

so all laws were done on a whim w/ no logical reasoning?

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Fuzzy, from the old CBA, Appendix C-NFL Player Contract, point 15

Integrity of Game. Player recognizes the detriment to the League and professional football that would result from impairment of public confidence in the honest and orderly conduct of NFL games or the integrity and good character of NFL players. Player therefore acknowledges his awareness...or is guilty of any form or conduct reasonably judged by the League Commisioner to be detrimental to the League or professionaly football, the Commisioner will have the right, but only after giving Player the opportunity for a hearing at which he may be represented by cousel of his choice, to fine Player in a reasonable amount; to suspend Player for a period certain or indefinitely; and/or to terminate this contract

so again, the NFL has a right to protect it's image and PacMan and Henry agreed to it

For the fifty second time the suspensions Goodell handed down specifically mention allegations still pending trial against Henry and Jones.

 

[Bob Sacamano]

For the fifty second time the suspensions Goodell handed down specifically mention allegations still pending trial against Henry and Jones.

and conduct detrimental to the league's image

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Goodell would probably have a good laugh after reading these threads. It's highly logical to assume that the NFL's legal department poured over every possible scenario; and advised the commissioner how he could then enforce his authority in these matters before his very first suspension. Most assuredly, they still are and will continue to do so throughout his tenure.

It's no longer a simple matter of what observers think is right or wrong. It's what it shall be under Goodell. Arguments which have or will insure in favor or against Goodell's enforcement of the NFL conduct policy were made moot long before they were ever brought forth. That's a good thing, imo.

i conceded that he was completely within his contractual rights to act. if there was a contract out there that said Hos could kick you in the nads i would still think Hos wasnt nice if he kicked you in the nads.