Did Henderson help Zeke?

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Timing is very relevant here. When the whole Josh Brown thing happened (I'm assuming this is who you are talking about), the NFL had not implemented the mandatory 6 game suspension for Domestic Violence. In fact, that Josh Brown case is why the NFL adopted the mandatory 6 game policy.

I would also point out that I have not heard anybody say Elliott didn't do it. What I have heard is that the DA did not find enough evidence to charge him with. That's a different thing then, he did nothing.
Having said all of this, I am not here to say that the NFL is fair with how they do things or that Zeke is guilty of criminal behavior, with regards to DV issues. He may or he may not be, I don't know. What I am here to say is that the NFL and the Commissioner are not here to hand out legal justice. They are here to protect the Shield and the Owners interests. Two completely different things. This is more of a labor dispute then it is a legal issue, to be honest. This is what people just do not seem to get. This really has nothing, at all, to do with the law. This is about violating a contract and what the employer wants to do to the employee, to change the behavior. When it's all said and done, that's what this is. People trying to attach the law to this situation are simply not getting it, IMO. Has nothing to do with the law or burden of proof IMO.

I posted a link in another thread but there have been 19 DV cases since 2014 and the new DV policy. Of them only 2 were for 6 games and both were for players that were not on any team.

And what the Goodell and his stooges are here for or however you parse it is meaningless. Federal labor and arbitration law requires these types of proceedings be fair. The judge talked about it extensively when discussing the TRO. That is what you don't get. This has everything to do with the law.

What you think is meaningless as well. If you could articulate a basis for your opinion that would be one thing but you do nothing of the sort.

 

[superonyx]

Yep. I absolutely did because it's the truth, like it or not. He didn't have to sign the contract but he did. If you want to play in the NFL, then suck it up and accept that you play under the terms of the rules, according to the CBA.

I don't even know what you are complaining about. You are trying to use the argument that because he was not in the league when the current CBA was signed, that he should not be held responsible. That's like saying because I was not born when this country implemented a tax code, I should not be responsible for paying taxes. I mean, that's how weak that argument is. He has lawyers, agents, NFLPA representatives, NFL personnel, the Commissioner himself, that advise him of what he can and can't do when he joins the league but that's not enough. Really?

I didn't say he doesn't have to go by the rules of the CBA. What I said was you shouldn't use the weak language in the CBA as a stick to beat Zeke over the head with considering he had nothing to do with the CBA and he also didn't have a real choice but to sign the CBA (if players actually sign anything). You have stated that Zeke isn't a victim and you use CBA rules and language as the reason. That's a pretty weak argument.
Maybe you would "suck it up". Zeke, the NFLPA and the legal team obviously feel the commissioner has violated the CBA and they are going to court and letting the law decide. Why does this bother you so bad?

 

[CanadianCowboysFan]

I posted a link in another thread but there have been 19 DV cases since 2014 and the new DV policy. Of them only 2 were for 6 games and both were for players that were not on any team.

And what the Goodell and his stooges are here for or however you parse it is meaningless. Federal labor and arbitration law requires these types of proceedings be fair. The judge talked about it extensively when discussing the TRO. That is what you don't get. This has everything to do with the law.

What you think is meaningless as well. If you could articulate a basis for your opinion that would be one thing but you do nothing of the sort.

well put

I have been trying to make this point but people haven't gotten it. Even if the power was delegated to the NFL to discipline, the league still has to have fair proceedings and follow natural justice. The decisions cannot be arbitrary or patently unreasonable. Goodell is not supposed to act as the Chief Justice of the Supreme Kangaroo Court of the NFL.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

Here is the NFL's reply to Brown's one game suspension....it doesn't back up what you are arguing at all...... it was about Mrs Brown's lack of cooperation as a witness...... that was the mitigating factor

So if a woman lies to protect her husband who admits repeated abuse = one game
If she lies to convict him = 6 games


"In May 2015, the NFL was informed by the New York Giants of Josh Brown's arrest for an incident in his home involving his then wife. We began an investigation into the incident and circumstances surrounding it.


In the course of the League’s investigation, our investigators became aware that his wife had filed a statement with the county court alleging previous altercations between the spouses. However, despite multiple attempts to speak with her about this incident and her previous statements, she declined to speak with us. We understand that there are many reasons that might have affected her decision not to speak with us, but we were limited in our ability to investigate these allegations.


Over the course of the 10-month investigation, we also made numerous requests—as late as this spring—to local law enforcement officers for information on the case and previous allegations. They declined those requests for information.


As a result of these factors, our investigators had insufficient information to corroborate prior allegations. In addition, no criminal charges were brought forward regarding the incident in question or prior allegations. The NFL therefore made a decision based on the evidentiary findings around this one incident as provided to us by the District Attorney.


The NFL made a finding that Mr. Brown had violated the Personal Conduct Policy. We did so based on the evidence of this one incident as presented in the police report, Mr. Brown and his wife’s statements to police that evening, and his statements in interviews with the NFL.


The NFL Personal Conduct policy allows for discipline to be imposed even when criminal charges are not presented. It further allows for us to consider both aggravating and mitigating factors regarding discipline for domestic violence.


After reviewing the evidence in this one incident, we imposed a one-game suspension for violation of the personal conduct policy.


Mr. Brown and the NFLPA appealed this discipline, but the decision was upheld by a hearing officer."

What is it you think I'm saying?

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

I posted a link in another thread but there have been 19 DV cases since 2014 and the new DV policy. Of them only 2 were for 6 games and both were for players that were not on any team.

And what the Goodell and his stooges are here for or however you parse it is meaningless. Federal labor and arbitration law requires these types of proceedings be fair. The judge talked about it extensively when discussing the TRO. That is what you don't get. This has everything to do with the law.

What you think is meaningless as well. If you could articulate a basis for your opinion that would be one thing but you do nothing of the sort.

Sounds like an opinion to me.

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Sounds like an opinion to me.

The National Arbitration Act requiring fairness is not an opinion. Labor law states you cannot have unequal punishments. It is explicit in the law.

And not all opinions are created equal. An informed opinion is superior.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

The National Arbitration Act requiring fairness is not an opinion. Labor law states you cannot have unequal punishments. It is explicit in the law.

And not all opinions are created equal. An informed opinion is superior.

You are talking about the FAA here yes? I don't claim to be a lawyer, but I do know this. In order for Pub.L. 68–401, 43 Stat. 883 to be enacted, it must first be agreed upon by council. I believe the NFLPA filed on Tuesday that the FAA does not have jurisdiction in this matter, but rather, the LMRA does. As I am sure you know, the LMRA is more of a commercial body. In order for any of this process to even be granted, this must first be ruled upon. I wonder how many times this has been granted by the courts, when dealing with the NFL?

As you said, not all opinions are created equal but maybe, a more informed opinion can way in for us? What say you, do you think you kind find that person?

 

[Philmonroe]

Timing is very relevant here. When the whole Josh Brown thing happened (I'm assuming this is who you are talking about), the NFL had not implemented the mandatory 6 game suspension for Domestic Violence. In fact, that Josh Brown case is why the NFL adopted the mandatory 6 game policy.

I would also point out that I have not heard anybody say Elliott didn't do it. What I have heard is that the DA did not find enough evidence to charge him with. That's a different thing then, he did nothing.
Having said all of this, I am not here to say that the NFL is fair with how they do things or that Zeke is guilty of criminal behavior, with regards to DV issues. He may or he may not be, I don't know. What I am here to say is that the NFL and the Commissioner are not here to hand out legal justice. They are here to protect the Shield and the Owners interests. Two completely different things. This is more of a labor dispute then it is a legal issue, to be honest. This is what people just do not seem to get. This really has nothing, at all, to do with the law. This is about violating a contract and what the employer wants to do to the employee, to change the behavior. When it's all said and done, that's what this is. People trying to attach the law to this situation are simply not getting it, IMO. Has nothing to do with the law or burden of proof IMO.

What are you talking about with bold? You must be on some drugs or a hidden Giants fan. You think people were complaining about why he didn't get six games at the time of the original decision because there was no rule for six games in place by last year? Lol you looking silly on this one my man.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

What are you talking about with bold? You must be on some drugs or a hidden Giants fan. You think people were complaining about why he didn't get six games at the time of the original decision because there was no rule for six games in place by last year? Lol you looking silly on this one my man.

I agree. In fact, I've already addressed this earlier. Might help if you actually read the thread.

 

[Philmonroe]

I agree. In fact, I've already addressed this earlier. Might help if you actually read the thread.

I did but when I see a post I disagree with or have something to say I quote it then and there period. Might help if you know what your talkng about from the start

 

[HanD]

I agree. In fact, I've already addressed this earlier. Might help if you actually read the thread.

brown was suspended while the new DV policy had already been instated. he was suspended for personal conduct policy per this link:

https://www.sbnation.com/nfl/2016/8...nds-1-game-suspension-for-giants-k-josh-brown

The NFL made a finding that Mr. Brown had violated the Personal Conduct Policy. We did so based on the evidence of this one incident as presented in the police report, Mr. Brown and his wife’s statements to police that evening, and his statements in interviews with the NFL.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

I did but when I see a post I disagree with or have something to say I quote it then and there period. Might help if you know what your talkng about from the start

Noted. I will be sure to keep that very sage advice in mind.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

brown was suspended while the new DV policy had already been instated. he was suspended for personal conduct policy per this link:

https://www.sbnation.com/nfl/2016/8...nds-1-game-suspension-for-giants-k-josh-brown

The NFL made a finding that Mr. Brown had violated the Personal Conduct Policy. We did so based on the evidence of this one incident as presented in the police report, Mr. Brown and his wife’s statements to police that evening, and his statements in interviews with the NFL.

I understand. I have commented on this already in this thread. I thought that the DV policy had been adopted in 2016. I was in error and stated that earlier in the thread.

 

[Philmonroe]

Noted. I will be sure to keep that very sage advice in mind.

Great you do that

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

Great you do that

Absolutely. I will also keep in mind what you have said in your post and apply it to you. No worries, I got this.

 

[HanD]

I understand. I have commented on this already in this thread. I thought that the DV policy had been adopted in 2016. I was in error and stated that earlier in the thread.

sorry. there are so many threads and they are growing so fast. wanted to clarify if it hadn't been.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

sorry. there are so many threads and they are growing so fast. wanted to clarify if it hadn't been.

I understand. It's no problem, I was wrong there so it's cool.

 

[Silver N Blue]

You are talking about the FAA here yes? I don't claim to be a lawyer, but I do know this. In order for Pub.L. 68–401, 43 Stat. 883 to be enacted, it must first be agreed upon by council. I believe the NFLPA filed on Tuesday that the FAA does not have jurisdiction in this matter, but rather, the LMRA does. As I am sure you know, the LMRA is more of a commercial body. In order for any of this process to even be granted, this must first be ruled upon. I wonder how many times this has been granted by the courts, when dealing with the NFL?

As you said, not all opinions are created equal but maybe, a more informed opinion can way in for us? What say you, do you think you kind find that person?

What does federal aviation administration have to do with this?

 

[Philmonroe]

Absolutely. I will also keep in mind what you have said in your post and apply it to you. No worries, I got this.

I'm not worried. You seem to be worried though. Apply everything I've ever said in a post. It doesn't matter to me because I'm pretty consistent. When I'm not I don't mind being called out unlike some

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

What does federal aviation administration have to do with this?

It stands for Federal Arbitration Act, in this case Silver. But yeah, I thought the same thing when I read it.