That seems to be the only defense of Hardy: that the judge acted improperly or had some sort of axe to grind or simply decided to find someone guilty of a major crime because they were all in a hurry to get to the next case.
While I agree injustices happen in our legal system, I don't just casually *assume* someone found guilty of a crime was only found guilty because the judge had some sort of highly-unethical motives in play.
That's not the only defense at all. This is yet another case where there's not enough publicly available evidence for the public to know for sure, but there are the 911 tapes, on both sides, that paint different pictures. And there's the report that the accuser's testimony in the bench trial reportedly was not consistent with what she told police at the time of the incident. The accuser's alleged involvement with drugs is probably another factor that ought to be weighed in evaluating the possible motivations for her testimony. As should the video evidence that Hardy's team reportedly had available for the jury trial. However you look at it, they were pretty confident all along that this was going to play out in their favor eventually.
It's not much of a stretch for a judge to come to one conclusion based on the accuser's testimony, and for that decision to be vacated later when the key witness declines to testify and the prosecution declines to proceed because of inconsistencies between her early testimony and the police record.
As for a payoff, we don't actually know if that happened or not, but that, too, is something I'd expect to be offered whether he did it or not. If he did it, you pay her to try to settle things (though it's worth noting in Carolina that this sort of quid-pro-quo deal would be illegal if proven). If he didn't do it, I can still see it making sense to settle with no admission of guilt given his timeline heading into NFL free agency. The extra time and publicity a trial would entail could easily cost him his availability at the start of FA this year. And it also opens up the NFL to more second-guessing if he's restated in time, making it more likely his suspension might be upheld a bit longer than it otherwise would.
The reality is, we don't have enough information to know what really went on in the Hardy case.
We do have a pretty good idea that he's got a screw or two loose, though. It'll be interesting to hear--if we ever do--what the team thinks of him as a potential FA target. He's a heck of a football player, for sure.
