News: It is official! Zeke suspended 6 games **merged**

[erod]

Yea, but any reasonably impartial court will side by Zeke when it gets there.
all her 'evidence' has been totally tainted by her attempt to falsify any evidence.

In terms of jail time, you're right. But the court has already ruled in the Brady case that Goodell has every right to make these decisions.

This isn't about criminality.

 

[waldoputty]

They said there was proof her injuries occurred during the days with him. Then they claim there was damning emails and texts though they didn't share them with us. They made it clear that they didn't respect Zeke's argument that maybe it happened somewhere else with no proof. They even claimed they checked on the idea that maybe she was injured bumping into tables while working or in a fem-fem altercation. No evidence of anything at work, and witnesses to the altercation said neither woman ever threw a punch, just hair pulling. I think it sounded like they felt Zeke's argument was insulting BS. Again, reasonable doubt in court, but on the job people are allowed to use their common sense without ironclad proof. I read all of that.

My speculation is that she and he had some moments that probably got a little physical, probably very minor, hopefully no actual hitting with fists, but those who saw the evidence, not any of us, were unanimous and sound confident that he did something wrong. This isn't a conspiracy, but Cowboys fans always seem to think the world is against us.

she has falsified evidence and she has every financial incentive to have those bruises.

 

[speedkilz88]

I wonder about that, too.

There was video of that fight, and it showed no punches, just hair-pulling. So they say no bruises resulted.

The whole thing is just so low rent. Zeke needs to up his standards with women. Strippers with daddy issues isn't the way to go.

A security guard's sworn affidavitt that has already been posted says the two women were punching each other.

 

[MissAnn]

No you're wrong.

His attorneys stated he WAS in Columbus on the week of the 16th.

They are saying that the bruises occurred prior to that according to medical experts and EE was out of town at that time.

If you are going to make things up there's no reason for you to continue to post here.



YR

Thanks for providing some facts.

 

[waldoputty]

In terms of jail time, you're right. But the court has already ruled in the Brady case that Goodell has every right to make these decisions.

This isn't about criminality.

there are comps for this. brady case has no comps in terms of number of games.
there is employment law in terms of consistent treatment of employees.

and @speedkilz88 just said that the 2 women were punching each other. bruises dont show immediately.

 

[mattjames2010]

They said there was proof her injuries occurred during the days with him. Then they claim there was damning emails and texts though they didn't share them with us. They made it clear that they didn't respect Zeke's argument that maybe it happened somewhere else with no proof. They even claimed they checked on the idea that maybe she was injured bumping into tables while working or in a fem-fem altercation. No evidence of anything at work, and witnesses to the altercation said neither woman ever threw a punch, just hair pulling. I think it sounded like they felt Zeke's argument was insulting BS. Again, reasonable doubt in court, but on the job people are allowed to use their common sense without ironclad proof. I read all of that.

My speculation is that she and he had some moments that probably got a little physical, probably very minor, hopefully no actual hitting with fists, but those who saw the evidence, not any of us, were unanimous and sound confident that he did something wrong. This isn't a conspiracy, but Cowboys fans always seem to think the world is against us.

She was also with her friends, and also went to work, also was at her home - this is not enough evidence to pin it on him.

I don't give a **** what they felt - this hinges on sufficient evidence he abused her. Until this evidence is released, there is nothing you can go off of that they have sufficient evidence to keep this suspension.

It's one thing to say he should be suspended for his names being in the headlines and tarnishing the NFL brand - it's another to suspend him because they say he abused her, which is exactly why he got a 6 game suspension. This is far different.

Until they release these emails/texts, it's speculation and you don't have enough to go on. What we DO HAVE is evidence showing she lied to police and a lawyer or at the very least, tried to get her friend to do so.

 

[mattjames2010]

I'm not disagreeing with that. I'm trying to explain why the league is in its rights to do this, and why the CBA is such that Zeke has no chance of winning this case otherwise.

Do you think Zeke hit her? What does your heart tell you?

No one needs that explained - stop wasting people's time.

We know the NFL can suspend, the point people are arguing is that they still need a justifiable reason to do so.

 

[waldoputty]

She was also with her friends, and also went to work, also was at her home - this is not enough evidence to pin it on him.

I don't give a **** what they felt - this hinges on sufficient evidence he abused her. Until this evidence is released, there is nothing you can go off of that they have sufficient evidence to keep this suspension.

It's one thing to say he should be suspended for his names being in the headlines and tarnishing the NFL brand - it's another to suspend him because they say he abused her, which is exactly why he got a 6 game suspension. This is far different.

Until they release these emails/texts, it's speculation and you don't have enough to go on. What we DO HAVE is evidence showing she lied to police and a lawyer or at the very least, tried to get her friend to do so.

he is just giving the benefit of doubt to the NFL

 

[waldoputty]

I'm not disagreeing with that. I'm trying to explain why the league is in its rights to do this, and why the CBA is such that Zeke has no chance of winning this case otherwise.

Do you think Zeke hit her? What does your heart tell you?

none of us have a ******* idea.
the only definite evidence is SHE FALSIFIED EVIDENCE

 

[Yakuza Rich]

And they failed woefully to prove those bruises occurred any other time. The metadata corroborated the time frame of those injuries. It doesn't prove he did it, but they were intimately involved in some sort of relationship.

That's what the league made its decision on.

And if you don't know the difference between the requirements of criminal court and this, then I can't help you.

You said that the DA could now go after EE because of the metadata evidence. My post had nothing to do with the NFL's requirements. Don't change the subject



YR

 

[waldoputty]

A security guard's sworn affidavitt that has already been posted says the two women were punching each other.

EXCELLENT POST

 

[Yakuza Rich]

Thanks for providing some facts.

Somebody has to because erod isn't going to




YR

 

[MissAnn]

She was also with her friends, and also went to work, also was at her home - this is not enough evidence to pin it on him.

I don't give a **** what they felt - this hinges on sufficient evidence he abused her. Until this evidence is released, there is nothing you can go off of that they have sufficient evidence to keep this suspension.

It's one thing to say he should be suspended for his names being in the headlines and tarnishing the NFL brand - it's another to suspend him because they say he abused her, which is exactly why he got a 6 game suspension. This is far different.

Until they release these emails/texts, it's speculation and you don't have enough to go on. What we DO HAVE is evidence showing she lied to police and a lawyer or at the very least, tried to get her friend to do so.

This alone would indicate an unethical agenda by the NFL.

 

[waldoputty]

Bruises can take how long before showing up?
The formation of a bruise has everything to do with the person receiving the bruise, the mechanism behind the bruise and the location of the bruise on the body. Someone taking blood thinners will present with a bruise much faster than, say, a 10 year old with no medical conditions. 30 minutes to a few days is an accurate assessment. Also, bruises may not always be visible. A muscle may be bruised but the blood may not be apparent under the skin.

https://www.quora.com/How-long-does-it-take-for-a-bruise-to-form

 

[Sydla]

They said there was proof her injuries occurred during the days with him. Then they claim there was damning emails and texts though they didn't share them with us. They made it clear that they didn't respect Zeke's argument that maybe it happened somewhere else with no proof. They even claimed they checked on the idea that maybe she was injured bumping into tables while working or in a fem-fem altercation. No evidence of anything at work, and witnesses to the altercation said neither woman ever threw a punch, just hair pulling. I think it sounded like they felt Zeke's argument was insulting BS. Again, reasonable doubt in court, but on the job people are allowed to use their common sense without ironclad proof. I read all of that.

My speculation is that she and he had some moments that probably got a little physical, probably very minor, hopefully no actual hitting with fists, but those who saw the evidence, not any of us, were unanimous and sound confident that he did something wrong. This isn't a conspiracy, but Cowboys fans always seem to think the world is against us.

It really shouldn't be up to Elliott to prove how she got the bruises. It's absurd that is the standard here used by the NFL. Further, I think the medical experts interpretation of the photos is under some scrutiny because according to Elliott's attorney's statement, at least one of the medical experts agreed that the injuries could have happened prior to the week in question.

I am not so sure it's a conspiracy against the Cowboys as it is the NFL is trying for a PR win here. They've been bludgeoned over the handling of past DV incidents so this time, they throw the book at a guy without having substantial evidence (and ignoring evidence that undercuts their claim). And it worked in some cases.......... there are editorials all over the country from people lauding the NFL for a job well done here.

If anyone thinks they went into this with an open mind, I have some land under a bridge to sell you. They went into this knowing they wanted to nail Elliott and they backfilled their decision knowing that Goodell has wide latitude to suspend.

 

[cowboyblue22]

boy jerry sure was wrong on this one makes him look really bad and Stephen to

 

[Chuck 54]

Just for perspective:

My wife and I spend a few days in a hotel. There are pictures and witnesses supporting that she looked normal the day before. A few days later, she has bruises on her wrists, arms, and a black eye. She says I roughed her up; I say that's all bull, that I only restrained her to allow me to leave the room. He said-she said. There are conflicting stories, maybe she even tried to get someone to say they saw something they weren't around to see. Now she's a bad witness, so the case is dropped. But a medical examiner can look at the injuries and say that based on coloring, the injuries definitely occurred over those same days we were in the hotel. Someone questions me, and I say "hey, maybe it happened at work or in a fight." They look into both of those, and there are witnesses that say nothing happened at work, and there was a tussle where the two ladies pulled hair, but no punches or wrestling. Now I say "maybe she fell down stairs."

This isn't going to court when there's no witness and my wife is not a credible witness because she tried to get a friend to say she saw what happened. Still, I can guarantee you everyone is going to believe I did something and that the odds are that I caused those bruises.

There's no proof other than my wife's bruises that were incurred while we were on vacation. It's her word against mine, but no witness. Only my very closest friends are likely to believe me. Maybe I'm wrong, but I think this is what led to the decision that was shared with Roger Goddell.

 

[erod]

No one needs that explained - stop wasting people's time.

We know the NFL can suspend, the point people are arguing is that they still need a justifiable reason to do so.

Which they have absolutely.

The question is consistency in ruling, which is a hot mess.

 

[Chuck 54]

It really shouldn't be up to Elliott to prove how she got the bruises. It's absurd that is the standard here used by the NFL. Further, I think the medical experts interpretation of the photos is under some scrutiny because according to Elliott's attorney's statement, at least one of the medical experts agreed that the injuries could have happened prior to the week in question.

I am not so sure it's a conspiracy against the Cowboys as it is the NFL is trying for a PR win here. They've been bludgeoned over the handling of past DV incidents so this time, they throw the book at a guy without having substantial evidence (and ignoring evidence that undercuts their claim). And it worked in some cases.......... there are editorials all over the country from people lauding the NFL for a job well done here.

If anyone thinks they went into this with an open mind, I have some land under a bridge to sell you. They went into this knowing they wanted to nail Elliott and they backfilled their decision knowing that Goodell has wide latitude to suspend.

I don't disagree with you, but the independent panel couldn't find any reasonable explanation other than Zeke caused the bruises. They reported their findings, and Goddell acted.

 

[Nerm222]

I don’t post here often, but I thought I would add my thoughts on this one. I was really surprised when the suspension was six games instead of two or four. I was aware of the allegations she made about the assault on July 21st, and the evidence that she was lying about the assault. When the suspension was announced, I thought it was odd how vague the wording was regarding evidence against Elliot. I have seen it interpreted that Elliot basically had to prove how those bruises occurred on her, or he would be assumed to have caused them. Obviously, his ex-girlfriend has demonstrated that she will make up an incident that did not occur. So, regardless of her taking photos at the time and place she said they were taken, I do not see any statement from her that Elliot caused the injuries to be evidence against him. I’m not arguing against the NFL’s authority to give Elliot a suspension, even if the evidence is weak. But I am concerned if they just assume he caused those bruises on the basis of her accusations that he did it.


Having said that, I am not ready to say that the NFL came to an incorrect conclusion, or did not have a basis for the suspension they gave him. I don’t know the investigators, but I assume they did their jobs with a goal of obtaining and evaluating evidence in a manner that would help to let the NFL make an informed decision about any potential punishment. I can’t see them ignoring the fact she clearly lied about Elliot assaulting her on the 21st, when evaluating her other claims about him being violent towards her. I would hope that they had additional information indicating that Elliot had likely caused the photographed injuries, beyond her just saying he did. I am guessing that they have some additional information that leads them to the conclusions they made, but I have not seen a clear indication of what that information might be.


In the end, I think they could have suspended him just for the shirt lifting incident, just because they have a lot of power when deciding what conduct they chose to punish. I can’t say the NFL and their investigators are wrong. They know everything about the investigation and have a lot more context about the evidence considered. I do think that there needs to clearer explanation from the league about why they think Elliot caused those injuries, besides the fact that the accuser took pictures of the injuries and stated that he caused them. I really think it is short sighted to say that since she lied about the incident on the 21st, then there can be no question about whether Elliot was ever abusive to her. It’s certainly possible that he was abusive to her, AND she lied and made up an incident of abuse. I just want to know what the investigators saw that made them think Elliot caused the injuries, outside of her saying that he did. My guess is that there is additional information. If it turns out there isn’t, I think this is pretty unfair to Elliot.