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

[SultanOfSix]

Second point - I thought the settlement story was completely untrue but if you read the transcript of Hardy's hearing at the NFL HQ in NY, Hardy's attorney keeps ducking the question instead of flatly saying it isn't true. That makes me think something happened, be it a small civil payoff or the idea others have said that they agreed not to sue her for perjury in exchange for something.

I have never seen that so I will take your word for it. I do find it plausible that there was some agreement between both parties. But I find the notion that Hardy "paid her off" as it is being presented in most media elements implausible. I think things got heated between them during the night of the incident and got somewhat physical with neither party free from guilt, but I also don't believe Hardy hit her with the intent to hurt or injure or anything like that. I think neither wanted to really go through with a jury trial and Holder needed some money so they reached an amicable decision between themselves and let it go. Unfortunately for him, Hardy has been tagged with the label of DV abuser since then and it has been a free for all by certain media elements due to PC nonsense to make him an example of it.

 

[4lifecowboy]

I have never seen that so I will take your word for it. I do find it plausible that there was some agreement between both parties. But I find the notion that Hardy "paid her off" as it is being presented in most media elements implausible. I think things got heated between them during the night of the incident and got somewhat physical with neither party free from guilt, but I also don't believe Hardy hit her with the intent to hurt or injure or anything like that. I think neither wanted to really go through with a jury trial and Holder needed some money so they reached an amicable decision between themselves and let it go. Unfortunately for him, Hardy has been tagged with the label of DV abuser since then and it has been a free for all by certain media elements due to PC nonsense to make him an example of it.

I believe that is the sum of it.

 

[Kevinicus]

The words "— whose case was thrown out on appeal after reaching a civil settlement with Holder " are the words of the reporter writing the story and not a direct quote from the attorney.

A ten year old could see that. The fact you can't explains a lot.

It is mind boggling. And now apparently the attorney was supposed to have a response to that line prior to it being printed in the article... It really does explain a lot of what has gone on in this thread. In fact, very, very little of the article was direct quotes from the attorney as someone has repeatedly claimed. Mostly it was just words or phrases such as "consciousness of guilt" - the only direct words in that entire paragraph - that were used. Not even partial sentences.

Guess what "- the only direct words in that entire paragraph -" were not the words of Hardy's attorney. It's shocking I know, but true!

 

[tyke1doe]

Tell him how you umpire child baseball too!!!!

That I can.

 

[tyke1doe]

How hard is it to subpoena bank records if the DA had "reliable" information that a settlement was reached? It should be very easy to prove such considering the situation of the two parties. Why wouldn't they follow through with an investigation since it is illegal to witness-tamper? The explanation given in this article as to why it did not happen is impotent, and seems like a way to just throw an aura of credibility onto specious reasoning. How is there a "fine line" in this case?

Impotent compared to what other explanation?
With respect to subpoenaing bank records, how do we know this wasn't given consideration? However, it is the practice of many athletes to carry large sums of cash.
Let's say Hardy regularly pulls out $100,000 in cash from his weekly check. Even if you subpoenaed bank records, it wouldn't tell you anything other than Hardy had a regular habit of pulling $100,000 in cash from his account (if he has direct deposit) or depositing everything except $100,000.

If he paid Holder $50,000 in cash and Holder goes on a buying spree as has been reported, you could draw a conclusion, but this is hardly evidence.

Second, we really don't know what the "reliable information" is. It could be anything. I don't feel the need to speculate what it is. I just know the DA made a statement to the press and told a judge that a settlement exists.

I think the state knew they didn't have a case because the reliability of Holder was suspect and if they forced the witness to appear in trial they would have eventually looked stupid by the defense team.

I think this is what happened. I think Murray realized he didn't have as strong a case without Holder. And once Holder was uncooperative, I think he just decided it wasn't worth it to prosecute Hardy.

However, I DO NOT believe Murray made up the settlement to save face. I think such an assertion is rather ridiculous. You don't need to fabricate the existence of a settlement to drop a case and, quite frankly, you cause more problems than you solve by doing so.

 

[tyke1doe]

They are both right, BKnight is saying its not a real trial in the sense that Traffic Court isn't a real trial. Mountaineerfan is saying it is a valid process and serves the interest of Justice.

No, they aren't both right. Traffic court, i.e., municipal court, IS a real trial. It's just a different kind of trial that doesn't involve a jury.

Municipal court - n. a lower court which usually tries criminal misdemeanors and civil lawsuits involving lesser amounts of money than superior, district or county courts. The authority, importance and geographical area covered differ from state to state. In California, municipal courts have county-wide jurisdiction, conduct preliminary hearings of felonies, and try cases up to $25,000, while in many states they only handle cases arising out of violations of city ordinances, traffic and/or small claims.

 

[iceberg]

It is mind boggling. And now apparently the attorney was supposed to have a response to that line prior to it being printed in the article... It really does explain a lot of what has gone on in this thread. In fact, very, very little of the article was direct quotes from the attorney as someone has repeatedly claimed. Mostly it was just words or phrases such as "consciousness of guilt" - the only direct words in that entire paragraph - that were used. Not even partial sentences.

Guess what "- the only direct words in that entire paragraph -" were not the words of Hardy's attorney. It's shocking I know, but true!

all you need these days is a few choice words of "bad person" and be the first to declare you're a victim and social media takes over from there.

 

[erod]

I don't get why folks are so defensive about Hardy. He's not in prison. The girl bailed, paid off or not. He's free. Case closed.

However, that doesn't mean teams are required to hire him. Freedom of speech does not mean freedom from consequences. And innocence in a court of law doesn't mean you didn't do anything wrong. Or in Hardy's case, hundreds of things of wrong over a long stretch of time.

There's a reason this first-round talent didn't get drafted until the 6th round. And there's a reason 32 teams - which employ some awfully shady characters by the way - don't want anything to do with this psychotic imbecile.

This Neanderthal, after everything that happened with that woman, actually was stupid enough to make comments about Tom Brady's wife, and tweet that he was "guns-a-blazin'" to get back to playing. Plus, the blowup with Dez and the coaches on the sideline. Plus, the repetitive tardiness. And lastly, the lack of production after a half against New England.

The dude is cancer wrapped in leprosy in an Ebola bottle.

 

[Kaiser]

It is mind boggling. And now apparently the attorney was supposed to have a response to that line prior to it being printed in the article... It really does explain a lot of what has gone on in this thread. In fact, very, very little of the article was direct quotes from the attorney as someone has repeatedly claimed.

It is mind boggling. You have two guys that honestly think someone with a JD said "En dash, whose case was thrown out" and "with Holder, En dash".

 

[Kaiser]

And as a former court reporter who has made a mistake in misinterpreting what happened in a case, I can tell you that when that happens, there is a quick correction and apology.

So you know everything about the Legal System because you were a reporter and know everything about grammar because you were a bad court reporter?

Looking forward to page 85 of this thread, where you tell us you know Polymer Chemistry because of the bottles you recycled while homeless.

Then again, this thread is orders of magnitude beyond stupid. I'm putting you and the Toad on Ignore.

 

[tyke1doe]

So you know everything about the Legal System because you were a reporter and know everything about grammar because you were a bad court reporter?

Looking forward to page 85 of this thread, where you tell us you know Polymer Chemistry because of the bottles you recycled while homeless.

Then again, this thread is orders of magnitude beyond stupid. I'm putting you and the Toad on Ignore.

I have experience. You have ad hominem attacks.

Experience trumps ad hominems every day.

 

[tyke1doe]

Then again, this thread is orders of magnitude beyond stupid. I'm putting you and the Toad on Ignore.

Oh pllleeasssee, plllleeeassse don't put me on ignore.

 

[tyke1doe]

It is mind boggling. You have two guys that honestly think someone with a JD said "En dash, whose case was thrown out" and "with Holder, En dash".

And you have someone with no clue of how the world works claiming that a court reporter whose job it is to accurately convey information and whose newspaper would have printed a correction if he were wrong - not to mention the DA and attorney would have demanded it - thinks the reporter fabricated information about a settlement.

Simply clueless.

 

[GimmeTheBall!]

QFT....guy is a dirt bag.

Please be careful when comparing people to dirt bags, mate. Not all dirt bags are as bad as some people, such as Hardy.

 

[GimmeTheBall!]

Oh pllleeasssee, plllleeeassse don't put me on ignore.

Well, bloke, if he is going to ignore you, then i will too, but I will do it with a heavy heart.

 

[GimmeTheBall!]

Greg Hardy will be on an opening day roster.

I tend to agree. As one football analyst said recently, when camp opens or when the season opens, one team -- because of injuries, etc. -- will be desperate for such a player.

It does not speak well for professional athletes, mate, but there it is.

 

[Kevinicus]

And you have someone with no clue of how the world works claiming that a court reporter whose job it is to accurately convey information and whose newspaper would have printed a correction if he were wrong - not to mention the DA and attorney would have demanded it - thinks the reporter fabricated information about a settlement.

Simply clueless.

Where is the court reporter stuff coming from? Who says the journalist reporter "fabricated" anything? What information would that be?

There is so much piss poor communication going on in this thread. People not reading things right. People trying to infer things that aren't there. People making things up. It's a mess.

 

[iceberg]

Where is the court reporter stuff coming from? Who says the journalist reporter "fabricated" anything? What information would that be?

There is so much piss poor communication going on in this thread. People not reading things write. People trying to infer things that aren't there. People making things up. It's a mess.

people are making **** up and at this point, believing their own ******** cause they've said it long enough.

need to be in the dead horse zone.

 

[tyke1doe]

Well, bloke, if he is going to ignore you, then i will too, but I will do it with a heavy heart.

 

[JoeKing]

So basically you're saying that the DA "settled" the case with Holder. And if that's the case, why would the DA then tell the judge she settled the case with Holder?

Sorry, but that doesn't make any sense.

Even so, you can't place your theory of that which is unknown with one that is known. As I've said on this forum repeatedly actual information trumps theoretical/hypothetical information all the time.

You think you live in a world where DAs never lie to judges? Under table deals don't happen? Wise up man, corruption runs amuck much more than you want to believe.