DMN: Sporting News writer: Greg Hardy has rendered himself 'almost untouchable'

[Philmonroe]

Sorry can I have a Philmonroe translator for this please? Nothing was made up. The small minority is seeing a black and white scenario where black is Hardy isn't guilty, he was hurt by the league and was ramrodded all around. Nothing in any piece out there shows this. Nothing! Not even close.

Aw yes the tired Internet I don't understand card. No need for a translator its plain English. If you don't have the reading capabilities to understand what I'm assuming is your first language just ask for clarification. No need to try to shift the blame to me that your having trouble understanding plain English unless you are an esol.

Before we start I just replied to your points in order of,how they were posted in the quote. My point with the first sentence was don't dap stuff that's basically name calling if you don't want to be "involved". If you didn't dap that silly post calling names just because I don't see it 100% his way it I wouldn't @ you in the first place. Second sentence if you don't understand that you really need to stop posting. I can't simplify that its pretty simple show me where I said Hardy was a good guy. You said I said or implied he was a good guy and I'm asking for proof of this. There is no proof just emotional lumping me in with the other people you going back and forth with cause I'm not 100% on your side. I'm pretty sure none of them are saying he's a good guy either but I could be wrong. The next sentence just says I think you are posting all emotional and making things up cause I never said or implied he was a good guy. The last sentences are making fun of you talking about growing up while you are up here making things up like some kid that doesn't want to get in trouble with their parents. Again I never said or implied that Hardy is a nice guy so its no need for you to say I did such. If you can't understand that I don't know what to tell you.

There was no need for one but since I'm feeling real awesome today there is your breakdown of what I said.

 

[DCBoysfan]

In other news, this thread has caused plenty folks post count to soar.

 

[Miller]

Actually the direct quote from the DA was, "there was a settlement". The financial part is always added by the reporting sources. Sorry your playing the "I'm in the system" card is not working well when you can't get past this simple fact. Stubborn things, these facts that you can't get around.

You have no facts!!!I'm not trying to be rude, but can you read more than one sentence? You are arguing to air. There is nothing you are saying that is correct regarding settlements...that is fact. If they reached any kind of backdoor settlement where the DA was still trying to hunt her down and she disappeared afterward then it was civil in nature

http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/f...-charges-greg-hardy-dropped-article-1.2108351

The charges — assault on a female and communicating threats — were dismissed after Hardy’s accuser — Nicole Holder — reached a civil settlement with Hardy, according to a press release from Mecklenburg County District Attorney Andrew Murray.

Civil settlements...avoiding civil prosecution...are monetary in nature...quid pro quo..."here is your money, you can't talk(write a book, go talk show network, etc)

 

[Miller]

Aw yes the tired Internet I don't understand card. No need for a translator its plain English. If you don't have the reading capabilities to understand what I'm assuming is your first language just ask for clarification. No need to try to shift the blame to me that your having trouble understanding plain English unless you are an esol.

Before we start I just replied to your points in order of,how they were posted in the quote. My point with the first sentence was don't dap stuff that's basically name calling if you don't want to be "involved". If you didn't dap that silly post calling names just because I don't see it 100% his way it I wouldn't @ you in the first place. Second sentence if you don't understand that you really need to stop posting. I can't simplify that its pretty simple show me where I said Hardy was a good guy. You said I said or implied he was a good guy and I'm asking for proof of this. There is no proof just emotional lumping me in with the other people you going back and forth with cause I'm not 100% on your side. I'm pretty sure none of them are saying he's a good guy either but I could be wrong. The next sentence just says I think you are posting all emotional and making things up cause I never said or implied he was a good guy. The last sentences are making fun of you talking about growing up while you are up here making things up like some kid that doesn't want to get in trouble with their parents. Again I never said or implied that Hardy is a nice guy so its no need for you to say I did such. If you can't understand that I don't know what to tell you.

There was no need for one but since I'm feeling real awesome today there is your breakdown of what I said.

Thanks, much better. But most of my ramblings for 10 pages now really never involved your posts so I was never sure where I got involved until you brought my name up.

 

[Miller]

I think that most, if not everybody is aware of my own stance on the Hardy situation from the past by now, so I won't go into that part again.

And my position on his current situation is this. I know he's a screwball, I know he has issues and he's hard to handle, and I know he was late for two confirmed meetings. And that's all I know about that subject. Mike Fisher was the only journalist who bothered to do his job and actually find out what Hardy's issues were while with the Cowboys. Every other one of them either based their articles and reports on rumors, or they parroted something that someone else said or heard.

I think that virtually all of the reporting done on Greg Hardy has been sensationalist ****, thrown out there for ratings and clicks. That has nothing to do with whether or not the guy did or didn't do something, and everything to do with reporters and media failing to do their homework and failing to provide the truth to their audience. It's been garbage reporting and virtually every turn. And for that, they should all be ashamed of themselves rather than Greg Hardy.

I also believe that both sides need this relationship to be repaired and to give it antihero chance to work. I think they have needs that only the other side can fill and it makes too much sense to me not to. If what this team was preaching about redemption and second chances when they signed him last year is remotely true, they would do it again. Otherwise, it looks to me like exactly what everyone believed, a desperate team and a desperate player pairing up because the player needed money and the team needed pass rush, and nothing else. And all talk of helping him was a load of bull****.

I think Fish, if I'm reading your post right, may be wrong on this. The Drew Pearson stuff I've quoted was straight from Pearson during an interview and he specifically stated that many players approached him and told him how bad it was in the locker room. Not sure what motive he would have to lie. Of course I blocked Fish on Twitter because I find he always has an axe to grind...my opinion. I may be wrong but I believe Woodson had a very similar story. I also think this is why JG has been so quiet and to the point regarding Hardy. I will say, from my own personal knowledge from a brother that worked with the team and still has contacts, the joke was they called him Tardy Hardy...the execs...and that it was not a 2 time deal. More of a weekly deal.

 

[JoeKing]

You have no facts!!!I'm not trying to be rude, but can you read more than one sentence? You are arguing to air. There is nothing you are saying that is correct regarding settlements...that is fact. If they reached any kind of backdoor settlement where the DA was still trying to hunt her down and she disappeared afterward then it was civil in nature

http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/f...-charges-greg-hardy-dropped-article-1.2108351


Civil settlements...avoiding civil prosecution...are monetary in nature...quid pro quo..."here is your money, you can't talk(write a book, go talk show network, etc)

Of course you are not trying to be rude... it comes natural for you. Stating what happens in some cases, is not what happens in all cases and more specify, this case. You have your belief of what the settlement was and I have mine. Since the people that really are in the know aren't talking, it would be wise to consider either opinion as a possibility and for us to go our separate ways. Can you at least be mature enough to concede this possibility?

 

[KJJ]

This is proof his accusations of her false statements scared her into agreeing to go away in exchange for her not being prosecuted for her lies. Thanks for helping my position.

Post a link that supports that's why she went away. I haven't heard any talk of that but there's plenty of talk of a financial settlement. Hardy was the one who was in deep **** he had his NFL career to protect.

 

[Stash]

I agree with that, except for the coming back part. We might need him (we definitely need a player of his ability, and he's the only option out there), but we're obviously moving in another direction. Signing Mayowa and Crawford and flirting with Jones, and then the way Jason and Stephen answer Hardy-related questions, the diligence we're doing on players like Bosa and Spence. I think he's a goner. Even if we go QB at #4, I think we're taking DL in the draft someplace and moving on, regardless. The media definitely did a horrible job with this story, but there's a reason there why the club isn't considering him an option.

We'd be hearing something about the sides talking right now, otherwise. As you say, it makes too much sense unless there's a dealbreaker there somewhere.

I can't fault anyone for thinking that way, but for my own opinion, I'd like to see more information before I decided if anything the guy actually did was worthy of banishment, and more importantly further weakening this team at an already-weak spot.

 

[JoeKing]

Post a link that supports that's why she went away. I haven't heard any talk of that but there's plenty of talk of a financial settlement. Hardy was the one who was in deep **** he had his NFL career to protect.

The people in the know about the details of the settlement are not talking and never have. The things you read about a "financial" settlement can be nothing but speculation for the very reason that no ones is allowed to speak about specifics. My speculation is as good as anyone's and of course you won't read about it because it is counter to what the media wants it's readers to believe.

 

[Miller]

Of course you are not trying to be rude... it comes natural for you. Stating what happens in some cases, is not what happens in all cases and more specify, this case. You have your belief of what the settlement was and I have mine. Since the people that really are in the know aren't talking, it would be wise to consider either opinion as a possibility and for us to go our separate ways. Can you at least be mature enough to concede this possibility?

It's not some cases and that is what you are not getting. It's not rudeness, its exasperation due to the fact that what I'm explaining isn't made up opinion. It's the system and how the criminal and civil system work. Also, almost every article quoted has mentioned a civil settlement and many have mentioned financial. No one...the DA, the people involved, etc...has corrected this. Civil cases are settled out with monetary value for something else. It's how it works. So you can keep saying be mature or whatever but the reality is I'm being mature explaining it to you and you just want to be on an island where your theory doesn't jive with the court system and reality.

Also, if anything is made up here its your theory on false statements. With the pictures, etc there would be no reason or any proof at all for her to be charged with anything like that, especially after a judge already found him guilty in the bench trial. She had the upper hand at that point.

The people in the know about the details of the settlement are not talking and never have. The things you read about a "financial" settlement can be nothing but speculation for the very reason that no ones is allowed to speak about specifics. My speculation is as good as anyone's and of course you won't read about it because it is counter to what the media wants it's readers to believe.

But the bold is not true because its not how the system works and is premised on a majorly faulty premise that has never been talked about and goes against what the criminal trial was about.

 

[Stash]

I think Fish, if I'm reading your post right, may be wrong on this. The Drew Pearson stuff I've quoted was straight from Pearson during an interview and he specifically stated that many players approached him and told him how bad it was in the locker room. Not sure what motive he would have to lie. Of course I blocked Fish on Twitter because I find he always has an axe to grind...my opinion. I may be wrong but I believe Woodson had a very similar story. I also think this is why JG has been so quiet and to the point regarding Hardy. I will say, from my own personal knowledge from a brother that worked with the team and still has contacts, the joke was they called him Tardy Hardy...the execs...and that it was not a 2 time deal. More of a weekly deal.

I just wish we officially got the info on the record. If he's that bad, bury him and throw dirt on the grave rather than having people wondering. My own stance is that given the huge need, I need to know specifics before I'm OK with sending my best pass rusher out the door.

 

[Miller]

I just wish we officially got the info on the record. If he's that bad, bury him and throw dirt on the grave rather than having people wondering. My own stance is that given the huge need, I need to know specifics before I'm OK with sending my best pass rusher out the door.

Agree! Too much speculation. I'm just going on those interviews and what my brother was told..so hearsay. Guess from my perspective if I add the tweets and all the things since last year I heavily lean on the guy could be that cancer in the locker room. You and I are both not JG fans at all but I found his response to Hardy telling since he usually pulls some statements out that may toe Jerry's lines. But who knows! That's been my mantra all along.

 

[Nightman]

You have no facts!!!I'm not trying to be rude, but can you read more than one sentence? You are arguing to air. There is nothing you are saying that is correct regarding settlements...that is fact. If they reached any kind of backdoor settlement where the DA was still trying to hunt her down and she disappeared afterward then it was civil in nature

http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/f...-charges-greg-hardy-dropped-article-1.2108351


Civil settlements...avoiding civil prosecution...are monetary in nature...quid pro quo..."here is your money, you can't talk(write a book, go talk show network, etc)

A settlement like the one being speculated about would be illegal......quid pro quo in a criminal case is a crime.......she never filed a civil suit so there would be no civil settlement.......if he was going to pay her off he would have done it before the bogus bench trial, not after a guilty verdict that was immediately vacated but still has been used as weapon against him ever since.....

The DA dropped charges because the Defense was finally allowed access to Holder's initial report to the Police. This "new" evidence showed that Holder lied during the bench trial and the DA knew about it and condoned it. As soon as the Defense contacted the DA with a threat of filing misconduct charges, all the charges were instantly dropped. The DA then made up the story about Holder not being found and the lie about a settlement to cover his butt.

Hardy is eccentric and guilty of going back for a few booty calls with a crazy person but he is not a woman beater and he shouldn't have to pretend to be one and pretend to be sorry for it to make the public feel better.

That is the sad part. Most people would forgive him if he lied and squirted out a few tears and claimed he needed rehab. But since he maintains his innocence he is labeled a monster and a POS. The hypocrisy in this world no knows bounds.

 

[JoeKing]

It's not some cases and that is what you are not getting. It's not rudeness, its exasperation due to the fact that what I'm explaining isn't made up opinion. It's the system and how the criminal and civil system work. Also, almost every article quoted has mentioned a civil settlement and many have mentioned financial. No one...the DA, the people involved, etc...has corrected this. Civil cases are settled out with monetary value for something else. It's how it works. So you can keep saying be mature or whatever but the reality is I'm being mature explaining it to you and you just want to be on an island where your theory doesn't jive with the court system and reality.

Also, if anything is made up here its your theory on false statements. With the pictures, etc there would be no reason or any proof at all for her to be charged with anything like that, especially after a judge already found him guilty in the bench trial. She had the upper hand at that point.




But the bold is not true because its not how the system works and is premised on a majorly faulty premise that has never been talked about and goes against what the criminal trial was about.

So the people that know the details of the settlement aren't talking but your speculation is more valid than mine? Gotcha... you are indeed the mature one. I offered you an olive branch to stop arguing and you slap it away. Your "this is how the system works" card playing is not a catch all for all cases.

 

[Miller]

A settlement like the one being speculated about would be illegal......quid pro quo in a criminal case is a crime.......she never filed a civil suit so there would be no civil settlement.......if he was going to pay her off he would have done it before the bogus bench trial, not after a guilty verdict that was immediately vacated but still has been used as weapon against him ever since.....

The DA dropped charges because the Defense was finally allowed access to Holder's initial report to the Police. This "new" evidence showed that Holder lied during the bench trial and the DA knew about it and condoned it. As soon as the Defense contacted the DA with a threat of filing misconduct charges, all the charges were instantly dropped. The DA then made up the story about Holder not being found and the lie about a settlement to cover his butt.

Hardy is eccentric and guilty of going back for a few booty calls with a crazy person but he is not a woman beater and he shouldn't have to pretend to be one and pretend to be sorry for it to make the public feel better.

That is the sad part. Most people would forgive him if he lied and squirted out a few tears and claimed he needed rehab. But since he maintains his innocence he is labeled a monster and a POS. The hypocrisy in this world no knows bounds.

This is false...well what you are implying happened is false. They didn't criminally reach a settlement. You are right in they can't go behind a judge and a DA and reach a settlement in a criminal trial. For one, it's not their choice...the court takes everyone through the process. But in this case, while the DA was trying to reach her, she reached a civil settlement with Hardy..which would be monetary in nature and allow him to not have this case dragged out in civil court too. Once that was done, she made herself unavailable and didn't want to testify. It's why "being paid off" makes sense when being talked about because its the only way it can go down like this.

 

[Nightman]

I guess no one has seen Fatal Attraction or Gone Girl...........like the poet from so many years ago said ....."nor Hell a fury like a woman scorned"

 

[Miller]

So the people that know the details of the settlement aren't talking but your speculation is more valid than mine? Gotcha... you are indeed the mature one. I offered you an olive branch to stop arguing and you slap it away. Your "this is how the system works" card playing is not a catch all for all cases.

Please read above in response to bk! Your scenario would not happen ok. It's plain and simple. Your scenario about false accusations makes zero sense because one judge already said he did it and there were pictures, etc. There would never be a false statement case in this matter with how it went down...pics, etc. Even at its best this case is still he said/she said.

I'd take the olive branch but I'm honestly trying to tell you proper facts on how these things work in most courts and your ignoring it because you can't find a transcipt that says "financial."

 

[Nightman]

This is false...well what you are implying happened is false. They didn't criminally reach a settlement. You are right in they can't go behind a judge and a DA and reach a settlement in a criminal trial. For one, it's not their choice...the court takes everyone through the process. But in this case, while the DA was trying to reach her, she reached a civil settlement with Hardy..which would be monetary in nature and allow him to not have this case dragged out in civil court too. Once that was done, she made herself unavailable and didn't want to testify. It's why "being paid off" makes sense when being talked about because its the only way it can go down like this.

That is the story they sold to cover up their own incompetence and her complete unreliability as a witness.

You bought it hook, line and sinker, and it would be illegal. If she refused to testify because she was given money that is a crime. She didn't disappear. She went to her parents home for a few weeks over the holidays.

 

[JoeKing]

Please read above in response to bk! Your scenario would not happen ok. It's plain and simple. Your scenario about false accusations makes zero sense because one judge already said he did it and there were pictures, etc. There would never be a false statement case in this matter with how it went down...pics, etc. Even at its best this case is still he said/she said.

I'd take the olive branch but I'm honestly trying to tell you proper facts on how these things work in most courts and your ignoring it because you can't find a transcipt that says "financial."

Again, no one in the know about the details of the settlement are talking. Your speculation of it's details are no better than anyone else's. Your speculation doesn't imply guilt either... it just the way the system works, right? It could be right but we will never know. See how I'm not so arrogant (as you) to insist it's my way or the highway. I still believe what I believe.

 

[Miller]

That is the story they sold to cover up their own incompetence and her complete unreliability as a witness.

You bought it hook, line and sinker, and it would be illegal. If she refused to testify because she was given money that is a crime. She didn't disappear. She went to her parents home for a few weeks over the holidays.

What?

For one she has Facebook photos when she was "missing" snowboarding in Vail, shopping in NY, etc. She went home for a few days.

It's not illegal and why would the DA make themselves look dumber by saying they couldn't find her.

You do know that Ben Roethlisberger's rape victim didn't press charges criminally because she thought Harrah's would cover for him. So she sued civilly and included Harrah's and they settled and there was no indication of what she got. This happens a lot.

There is a criminal case and a civil case. They are separate. Just like with OJ, Big Ben, etc. The civil case is for cash. She settled with Hardy for cash while the criminal one was ongoing and took the money and ran and made herself unavailable criminally. You can call her gold digger or whatever you want but the facts support a civil settlement that made the DAs case much harder when they couldn't get her on the stand a second time.