Greg Hardy: "If Cowboys Offer, I'd Love to Stay Here"

[TheMarathonContinues]

For me it really comes down to how much? If he is expecting top 4 to 5 money then he can walk.

I mean he can't be expecting that I would think. The guy was a JAG for the most part when you factor in his year as a whole. He was a distraction on and off the field whether he wanted to be or not. I can't imagine ANYONE paying big for him.

 

[Doomsday101]

I mean he can't be expecting that I would think. The guy was a JAG for the most part when you factor in his year as a whole. He was a distraction on and off the field whether he wanted to be or not. I can't imagine ANYONE paying big for him.

I agree with you. I don't think teams will be knocking down his door just as no one was knocking down his door this past off season. If Dallas choose to sign him then top 10 pay with some personal conduct clause included.

 

[TheMarathonContinues]

I agree with you. I don't think teams will be knocking down his door just as no one was knocking down his door this past off season. If Dallas choose to sign him then top 10 pay with some personal conduct clause included.

I wouldn't be totally against a similar deal that he got this year. Maybe for not nearly as much. A incentive based 1 year deal.

 

[Yakuza Rich]

Part of my face palm was the irony of you, of all people, complaining about people believing the media narrative. Thanks for giving me a great laugh to start the day..!!
Actually no, I don't realize that, because it ain't true and you don't know what the heck you're talking about (as usual).

In an NC bench trial, not only are defense attorneys allowed to present evidence and call witnesses, but in this case they did. Hardy's attorney Chris Fialko was allowed to present evidence, he was allowed to call witnesses (he called 2 witnesses of his own) and he was allowed to cross examine any witnesses the prosecution called, including the victim, whom he did cross examine. He could have called Hardy as well, but chose not to. Furthermore, the prosecution had to give the burden of proof beyond a reasonable doubt (not just probable cause), which the judge found they did.

Thanks for proving how completely ignorant of what went on you are..!! Feel free to lern2facts any day now. Here are more well deserved face palms:

http://www.dallascowboys.com/news/2...w-let’s-take-some-time-dig-deep-hardy-signing

"Secondly, while it’s been widely reported Hardy was “convicted” of domestic assault and communicating threats to his one-time girlfriend in a bench trial conducted by Mecklenburg County District Court Judge Becky Thorne Tin back in July 2014, this a legal process where defense attorneys are not allowed to question evidence, witnesses or the victim. Judge Tin, after an exhaustive 10-hour court session, solely sentenced Hardy to a 60-day suspended jail sentence and 18 months of probation.'

So the way I interpreted that is that Fialko can call his own witnesses and bring forth his evidence, but he was not allowed to question the state's witness, evidence, etc. Otherwise, there would be no reason for Fialko to be there if he couldn't bring forth any witnesses or evidence. But, the Charlotte Observer does show that Fialko did cross-examine Hardy. However, in the end it's a system that is really brought forth to work against the defendant because they are pretty much guaranteed a jury trial after a conviction in the bench trial. It's no skin off the judge's back to convict the person. But, it can be problematic to find the person not guilty because judges are politicians as well.

And Hardy was convicted of a misdemeanor (not a felony as the media would have you believe) and was given 18-months probation to which he appealed on anyway because he didn't want to admit guilt.

As far as not calling Hardy, that's standard operating procedure for defense attorneys. They say having the defendant take the stand is the last thing you ever want to do and you only do it as a last ditch effort.

Let's also remember that the prosecutor expunged this from his conviction from his record as he said, he didn't feel comfortable with Holder's testimony versus what she told the police and the evidence.

"Victims and witnesses routinely stop cooperating in domestic-abuse cases and prosecutors still take the cases to court. (DA Andrew) Murray, though, said the Hardy case was different. He also appeared to raise doubts about Holder’s credibility in a statement to the judge … and only recently had (prosecutors) compared what Holder told police the night of the alleged assault with her testimony at Hardy’s first trial."

So, which is it?

Is he guilty because the prosecution had proof beyond a reasonable doubt in a bench trial that clearly works against the defendant or is he innocent because the prosecution later decided to expunge the conviction from his record because they questioned Holder's credibility?

If you read most of the major media outlets, they believe he's guilty because he was convicted in the bench trial. And they never mention how screwy the NC judicial system is. But when asked why the DA expunged the conviction, they....like yourself...has no answer for it. Why? Because it goes against your preconceived belief system. So they resort to silly face palms because they have not rebuttal. Much easier to do.







YR

 

[Rogah]

http://www.dallascowboys.com/news/2015/03/20/spagnola-now-let’s-take-some-time-dig-deep-hardy-signing

You're taking your legal analysis from Mickey Spagnola of dallascowboys.com. That right there says it all about how you became so woefully ignorant.

FACT: An NC bench trial has the same rules of evidence, procedure and witness examination as any regular jury trial. Fialko can choose to present his own evidence (which he did), call Hardy to the stand (which he did not, as is typical for defense attorneys), call other witnesses (which he did) and cross examine prosecution witnesses, including the victim (which he did).

I hate to keep giving these to you, but you keep on earning them. I mean, using dallascowboys.com as your source for legal analysis? Lololololol

 

[Nightman]

Your naïveté is adorable - don't ever change!!

He is going to free agency. He can't be franchised (not that his performance merits it anyway). He will take the biggest contract he can get. It might be Dallas, it might be elsewhere. And I guarantee you his agent is already fielding offers. De facto free agency began yesterday.

The are too many people like you running around for the DV arrest to be ancient history like it should be.

You just don't want him here and are rooting for a big bidding war. Good luck with that.

 

[Nightman]

Garrett wanted DMurray last year as well and we all know how that worked out.

If JJones wants GHardy back he will sign him.

 

[ConstantReboot]

They were speculating but Garrett did not offer high praise, just that he was good at times stopping the run and good at times at rushing the qb.

It was really soft praise and nothing else offered after being asked multiple times. By contrast, he went into great detail praising Dmac about everything.

Greg knows the decision is with Jerry alone, I personally think Jason does not want the headache and after dealing with his antics this season, never saw the production consistently on the field to warrant the effort to deal with the guy.

Garrett needs to worry about his own production on the field more than his personal feelings towards Hardy. If he doesn't like his antics and his hard to deal with then let Marinelli handle it.

From a guy who's playbook is the bane of this team he is one to talk about players production. He needs to right his ship first before getting personal with players.

 

[Rogerthat12]

Garrett needs to worry about his own production on the field more than his personal feelings towards Hardy. If he doesn't like his antics and his hard to deal with then let Marinelli handle it.

From a guy who's playbook is the bane of this team he is one to talk about players production. He needs to right his ship first before getting personal with players.

I agree and I am only speculating of course.

It seems like Jason will wait on Jerry and company to make the decision and only then he will comment further either way.

Regardless, even the media picked up on his lack of praise at this point, though Hardy was a disappointment on the field overall in my view.

 

[Yakuza Rich]

You're taking your legal analysis from Mickey Spagnola of dallascowboys.com. That right there says it all about how you became so woefully ignorant.

FACT: An NC bench trial has the same rules of evidence, procedure and witness examination as any regular jury trial. Fialko can choose to present his own evidence (which he did), call Hardy to the stand (which he did not, as is typical for defense attorneys), call other witnesses (which he did) and cross examine prosecution witnesses, including the victim (which he did).

I hate to keep giving these to you, but you keep on earning them. I mean, using dallascowboys.com as your source for legal analysis? Lololololol

Who said I was using DallasCowboys.com for legal analysis? I looked at what Mickey had reported. Y'know, he's a member of the media that you doggedly stick up for.

Again, why did the DA expunge this conviction from Hardy's record and state that he questioned Holder's credibility?

Why does the media refuse to acknowledge Holder's admittance of being high on coke and drunk?

Why does Gawker claim that Holder has marks on her neck....when they show pictures of her with...no marks on her neck?

Why does the media almost never mention that Hardy called 911 on her and only talks about the 911 call from Holder's friend (who wasn't in the room and said she couldn't see what was going on)?

Why does the media never mention that Holder RAN AWAY FROM THE POLICE when they came?

I guess it hurts when faced with those questions. Face palms are easier. Of course, if this was Aaron Hernandez you would gleefully stick up for him.







YR

 

[Yakuza Rich]

I mean he can't be expecting that I would think. The guy was a JAG for the most part when you factor in his year as a whole. He was a distraction on and off the field whether he wanted to be or not. I can't imagine ANYONE paying big for him.

He was far from a JAG this year. Stop looking at sacks and look at pressures and TFL's. He was better than Lawrence down the stretch and Lawrence played well. Inconsistent, but well overall. Hardy was banged up ever since the Seattle game and they asked him to play a lot of 4-3 DT on passing downs. Presumably because T. Crawford was playing with one arm and Hayden is no factor rushing the passer. So on passing downs they probably thought it was better to go with Lawrence-Crawford-Hardy-Gregory rather than go with Lawrence-Crawford-Hayden-Hardy.

I don't see anybody paying big money for him because it sets up that controversy to start all over, again. He's also a 4-3 DE and this is still a primarily 3-4 league.

Jerry needs to do with him what we've been doing recently....heavy performance laden contracts. If you play well and presumably stay out of trouble so you can stay on the field...you'll get rewarded. If you don't, we can back out of the contract at any time.

My only concern with him now is just how true those missed meetings rumors were. You never know with the media because they'll either blow something way out of proportion, lie or just be completely mistaken. But, if they are true, then I can see the team cooling on the idea of re-signing him. Otherwise, re-sign the guy and concentrate on fixing the MIKE position and the secondary.







YR

 

[Rogah]

The are too many people like you running around for the DV arrest to be ancient history like it should be.

You just don't want him here and are rooting for a big bidding war. Good luck with that.

No no... let's be clear: I don't want him here but I don't think there's going to be a big bidding war. Any impartial analysis of his performance this year would conclude he is nowhere near his peak performances of 2-3 years ago. He'll get paid, but there won't be any huge bidding war for a woman beater on the downside of his career.

Having said that, it is foolishly naive to think he will go anywhere other than to the highest bidder. He has no loyalty to Dallas.

 

[Rogah]

Who said I was using DallasCowboys.com for legal analysis? I looked at what Mickey had reported. Y'know, he's a member of the media that you doggedly stick up for.

You did, when you have dallascowboys.com as the source of your ignorant information. You read something which was inaccurate and you believed it because you wanted it to be true. Now I have schooled you on your mistakes and ignorance of The NC judicial process.

Just admit you made an honest mistake when you described NC bench trials. It won't kill you, I promise. Once we agree on a basis of that fact, then we can move onto to other parts of the discussion.

 

[TheMarathonContinues]

He was far from a JAG this year. Stop looking at sacks and look at pressures and TFL's. He was better than Lawrence down the stretch and Lawrence played well. Inconsistent, but well overall. Hardy was banged up ever since the Seattle game and they asked him to play a lot of 4-3 DT on passing downs. Presumably because T. Crawford was playing with one arm and Hayden is no factor rushing the passer. So on passing downs they probably thought it was better to go with Lawrence-Crawford-Hardy-Gregory rather than go with Lawrence-Crawford-Hayden-Hardy.

I don't see anybody paying big money for him because it sets up that controversy to start all over, again. He's also a 4-3 DE and this is still a primarily 3-4 league.

Jerry needs to do with him what we've been doing recently....heavy performance laden contracts. If you play well and presumably stay out of trouble so you can stay on the field...you'll get rewarded. If you don't, we can back out of the contract at any time.

My only concern with him now is just how true those missed meetings rumors were. You never know with the media because they'll either blow something way out of proportion, lie or just be completely mistaken. But, if they are true, then I can see the team cooling on the idea of re-signing him. Otherwise, re-sign the guy and concentrate on fixing the MIKE position and the secondary.







YR

Its all subjective to me. When I see Hardy on a backup linemen I expect him to DOMINATE. He did it against the Pats with and without Soldier out there. Hardy wasn't bad enough for me not to want back because I understand this was his rust year and it was about dusting it off. But he was more of a JAG then he was a Pro Bowler. I saw plenty of games of him in Carolina. This was a JAG year for Hardy. He's far superior to what he showed this year.

 

[HappyOnions]

He isn't worth it from a PR or a talent standpoint.

 

[dallasdave]

Do another one year deal !!!!

 

[Yakuza Rich]

You did, when you have dallascowboys.com as the source of your ignorant information. You read something which was inaccurate and you believed it because you wanted it to be true. Now I have schooled you on your mistakes and ignorance of The NC judicial process.

There's a difference between 'going to a site for legal analysis' and reading a site that is reporting something. I believed it because that is what I read recently.

As I have stated many times over...I was against Hardy until I investigated the matter for myself which was when the record was expunged (which is an odd occurrence in *any* judicial system) and Gawker's photos didn't match what the media told us. Those photos were published on November 6th. Mickey's article was published on March 20th. I didn't read Mickey's article until you started doing all of this childish facepalm nonsense.

I believed what Mickey wrote because...he wrote it.

Just like I believed what the media said about Hardy and the incident. I was on this very forum arguing with people *against* Hardy until those photos came out and they didn't make any sense. Not believing Hardy at that time had nothing to do with 'wanting to believe he was guilty'. I didn't believe Hardy at that point because nearly every media member had already convicted him and that's what they were reporting.

And this was long after he had signed with the team and already served his 4-game suspension.

Just admit you made an honest mistake when you described NC bench trials.

I have no problem with admitting an honest mistake here. The issue is that you are not accusing that it was an honest mistake by stating that I 'wanted to believe it was true.' And the fact that you seem to ignore all of the posts I made on this forum arguing with people against Hardy before November 6th. In fact, you have accused me of supporting Hardy solely because he plays for the Cowboys.

That doesn't sound like you're accusing me of an honest mistake by any means.

It won't kill you, I promise

Sincerely,


Aaron Hernandez.







YR

 

[Mr Cowboy]

Spoken from the heart you are right. But i think he'll cost us about 8-10 mills/year.

Let some other team pay him that...........

 

[Rogah]

I believed what Mickey wrote because...he wrote it.

So now that you have been further educated by me, you should reconsider your position. Everything you thought you knew about the bench trial was wrong, and fact remains that in the one trial he had, he was able to present his defense, and he was found guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.

That ain't a media fabrication or narrative, my friend. That's a fact.

 

[Kaiser]

So now that you have been further educated by me, you should reconsider your position. Everything you thought you knew about the bench trial was wrong, and fact remains that in the one trial he had, he was able to present his defense, and he was found guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.

That ain't a media fabrication or narrative, my friend. That's a fact.

He was found guilty in a hearing not much different from Traffic Court, in a high profile case heard by a Judge coming up on reelection who had campaigned on being tough on Domestic Violence. When the District Attorney had to take it to a real trial, he dropped all charges immediately without seeking a plea bargain.

That's a fact.