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

[Kevinicus]

The issue is what they're trying to keep from us? this is what we as citizens who are vigilant
need to keep monitored at all times, take 9/11 'government officials' said terrorists hijacked
planes using box cutters crashing them into the twin towers and pentagon, then we heard
some garbage story that the towers fell at the rate of gravity because jet fuel burned right
through the steel. NYC police, firefighters and eyewitnesses to that day said they heard
what sounded like popping noises, Tower 7 which had been untouched then suddenly
went into free fall.

the story doesn't add up now does it? the same way the story about Hardy didn't add up
so let's not kid ourselves here. Hardy's g/f, fiance, wife whatever you want to call her was
in it for the money nothing else! she was unhappy so, She began a monogamous set of
relationships outside of her involvement with Hardy, which probably spiraled out of control
that lead to one of , Her love affair/interests to put the marks on her, But in her mind b/c
she was so angry about her relationship with Hardy pointed the finger of blame at Hardy
protecting the one who really did it and was counting her money before she could even
get it out of the bank, Yet as I said before Truth set's you fee, her story didn't add and the
D.A. like many of us smelled something foul in her story. So he cut Hardy free but the
media can't tell you the truth, so they fabricated that he bought her silence, The NFL
said we're going to suspend you and idiots ate it like candy. - the end

You lost me with the NY stuff which is so far off from reality.

 

[TX Cowboy]

Your strategy is distraction by speculation. I don't know what else he told the judge nor do I care. What we DO know is that he told the judge that a settlement was reached.

Again an actual - the report of a settlement and the information being communicated to the judge based on a legitimate news organization that routinely covers events of a particular community - almost ALWAYS trumps a hypothetical - in this case, speculations that DA Murray was lying and manipulating information.

It really doesn't get any clearer than that.

Then I suggest you provide the actual document that proves there was a settlement
as you've stated it's time to put up or shut up so what's it going to be?

You lost me with the NY stuff which is so far off from reality.

Because you still believe the governments official story of how they say it
happened so I can not help you

 

[tyke1doe]

Then I suggest you provide the actual document that proves there was a settlement
as you've stated it's time to put up or shut up so what's it going to be?

Settlements - particularly in civil proceedings - generally are sealed documents. So the best anyone is going to get is that there's an acknowledgement of the settlement.

With that established, how do we know anything exists without seeing it?

1. Reliable witnesses
2. Understanding how processes and systems work
3. Common sense

So ...

1. The reliable witnesses in this case are the Charlotte Observer and District Attorney Andrew Murray:
A. The Charlotte Observer has a long-standing history of providing information about events to its community. It assigns reporters to cover "beats" and "events" that the average person cannot attend.
B. It has reporters who either:
I. Attend the particular event itself or
II. Interview people who attended the event.

2. The Charlotte Observer and the DA's Office also follow standards of professional ethics. Those ethics include ensuring that its employees truthfully and accurately report events in its community. I'll first speak about the CO.
A. Because the Charlotte Observer takes its responsibility to the community seriously, if a reporter employed by the CO lies, fabricates or makes a mistake in reporting a certain event of community interest, it has a process in place to addresses that fabrication or mistake as well as addresses the reporter himself if the mistake is blatant.
B. If a mistaken is made in a story published by the CO, the newspaper has a standard practice to correct the mistake publicly by running a retraction. This is standard with EVERY daily newspaper.
C. No such correction or retraction was ever published by the CO. If it was, please share that information, and I will gladly concede my initial observation. If none is produced, scientifically and logically, we must conclude that a settlement exists because the reporter of a newspaper of general circulation and long-standing credibility has provided us information that the attorney told the judge one exists.
The DA's office also has standards that govern the legal profession. These standards are to ensure that citizens have confidence in their representative authorities, the ones they've entrusted to administer justice fairly and accurately.
A. If a DA lies to a judge or during a legal process, there is a system in place to administer discipline and punishment.
B. Andrew Murray has YET to be disciplined by a judge or anyone for telling a judge a settlement between Hardy and Holder exists.

3. Because neither the Charlotte Observer issued a correction regarding the statement that a settlement between Hardy and Holder had been reached and because the DA has not been punished for essentially lying to the judge - as some seem to imply - it is Common Sense to conclude that what was reporter was TRUTHFUL and ACCURATE!!!

4. Furthermore, neither Hardy or Hardy's attorney has come forth and refuted Murray's or the newspaper's "lie" that a settlement between Holder and Hardy exists. Usually, when people are lied on, they generally step forward to refute the lie. And yet in the article that HoustonFrog cited, Hardy's lawyer dodged the issue.

See, these are the systems we use to identify truth absent personal observation. Any Internet poster too stubborn to admit he is wrong can offer a challenge of prove it, sort of like one who says "Prove to me an invisible angel isn't dancing on the head of a needle." and then proclaim "See, you CAN'T prove it, so it must exist!" But we have processes and systems we've developed to establish truth and accuracy.

And using these well-established and objective processes and systems and considering all the factors I just outlined, I reach my conclusion.

How's that for "putting up"?

Because you still believe the governments official story of how they say it
happened so I can not help you

All I read from your side is conspiracy theories. But conspiracies have to be evaluated by a system and a process that allows us to verify them. This is how the world works and how we objectively evaluate concepts like "good" and "bad," "right" and "wrong," "truth" and "falsehood." So please delineate for me the objective processes and systems you use to determine Murray lied, other than your suspicions and speculations.

Thank you.

 

[TX Cowboy]

That's right they are generally sealed documents so the media would have no access
to them now would they? now explain how mysteriously they got into the hands of a
reporter for the Charlotte Observer, keeping in mind that once again the media isn't
telling you the entire truth here

 

[tyke1doe]

That's right they are generally sealed documents so the media would have no access
to them now would they? now explain how mysteriously they got into the hands of a
reporter for the Charlotte Observer, keeping in mind that once again the media isn't
telling you the entire truth here

Who said anything about the settlement getting into the hands of the Charlotte Observer?

1. Just because a district attorney says that a settlement exists doesn't mean that he reveals the entire content of the settlement nor does it mean the reporter actually sees/saw the settlement.

Let me ask you a question, and I hope you answer it.

Do you believe that the Cowboys have developed a draft board - a board used to rank players they plan to select in the draft? This is a confidential document that neither you nor I have seen. So does it exist if we haven't seen it?
If you say, "Yes, you believe they have such a document, tell me why."
If you say, "No, no such document exists because I haven't seen it", tell me why your belief in such a document is predicated upon you seeing it.

Thank you for your response in advance.

2. The district attorney tells A JUDGE that a settlement has been reached. He doesn't merely tell a reporter.

3. The district attorney knows that a reporter is going to report what he says. If the district attorney lies to a reporter, the reporter can use the power of the pen to "out" the district attorney for lying. I don't recall any such article or editorial, do you?

4. If the district attorney were lying, someone would call this to his attention, either the judge or Hardy's attorney.

5. If the reporter were lying, someone would call this to his attention, either the judge, the DA or Hardy's attorney or all of them. As I've said previously, I've covered criminal and civil court cases as a newspaper reporter. During my experience, I had a conversation with a judge and misinterpreted what he said. I reported it in the newspaper, and both my editors and I got a call from the judge. I was summoned to his office (not officially, but he wanted to talk to me). We discussed my misinterpretation of his statement, clarified how I misinterpreted his statement and my newspaper ran a correction.
That's how the process works. No attorney or judge worth his salt wants erroneous information to be circulated about his case or proceedings in his case nor does he want statements he did not make to be published. So no judge or attorney is going to let an egregious mistake like this remain unattended. Yet, I haven't heard one word in the form of a correction or retraction of the settlement information by a reputable source. This is only being questioned by posters who seem to embrace this universal view that members of the media routinely fabricate stories and DAs routinely lie to judges. But if this were the case our whole system of justice would collapse.

6. The media not telling the whole "truth" doesn't necessarily mean the media are lying. The opposite of whole truth isn't necessarily lying. The opposite of whole truth can be the lack of full knowledge. Just because a newspaper or media outlet doesn't deliver the whole truth - whatever that means in this context, and I still don't understand how that term is being used here, but I'll play along - doesn't mean it is deliberately keeping something from the public or fabricating information. Your thinking is too binary and too parochial.

 

[Kevinicus]

Then I suggest you provide the actual document that proves there was a settlement
as you've stated it's time to put up or shut up so what's it going to be?



Because you still believe the governments official story of how they say it
happened so I can not help you

Because I believe in truth, math, and physics.

 

[Sarge]

Whether he did what he was being accused of is one thing, being disruptive, late for meetings and in general just being a pain in the *** to coaches and other players tells you all you need to know about the guy. He is DONE as a Cowboy and should thank his lucky stars another team is dumb enough to sign him on,

 

[CyberB0b]

Whether he did what he was being accused of is one thing, being disruptive, late for meetings and in general just being a pain in the *** to coaches and other players tells you all you need to know about the guy. He is DONE as a Cowboy and should thank his lucky stars another team is dumb enough to sign him on,

Not necessarily. The Cowboys could still come a calling.

 

[Miller]

Ed Werder Verified account ‏@Edwerderespn
Solicited #NFL GMs on Greg Hardy. Most praised @RosenhausSports for his efforts. But prevailing opinion: "Greg Hardy? Nobody wants him.''

 

[zrinkill]

Are all the guys who were defending him last year still thinking he was framed?

 

[LocimusPrime]

I was framed once. I beat the charges but just barely. Terrible. Not discussing his guilt/ innocence but just saying it happens. That's inmates are getting released once Dna testing started to come around. The innocence program.

 

[Nightman]

Are all the guys who were defending him last year still thinking he was framed?

Framed isn't the word.....innocent is what I argued.....he didn't put his hands on that woman.....she lied about it

 

[zrinkill]

Framed isn't the word.....innocent is what I argued.....he didn't put his hands on that woman.....she lied about it

http://www.foxsports.com/nfl/story/...dam-schefter-espn-nfl-goodell-contract-040516