Twitter: NFLPA files Greg Hardy appeal; asks for neutral arbitrator

[AzorAhai]

 

[Beast_from_East]

No way 10 games stands up...................5 at max.

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

This from the guy who said Ray Rice pleaded guilty. You were about as accurate as we expected.
Yes, we all know it was a bench trial. What part of he was "found guilty beyond a reasonable doubt but then had charges dropped on appeal when the victim refused to cooperate further" do you not understand?

Rogah doesn't respect due process nor rule of law.

We all know the defense attorney had a better case so the prosecution dropped and lost the appeal. Higher court ruling stands regardless of your ignorance and handwaving.

Not true. Ray Rice pleaded Not Guilty and had charges dropped contingent on attending a pretrial diversionary program.

That's cleaner than Hardy, who was actually found guilty beyond a reasonable doubt but then had charges dropped on appeal when the victim refused to cooperate further.

That is not 'not guilty' and is about as ignorant to the process as possible.

If he is determined to be not guilty the state cannot punish him. What he did was plead nolo contendere and got put on probation. IOW, he did not dispute the charges. Nevermind the videotape.

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

I believe he physically abused that woman. I don't think his career should be over, but I think he needs to be suspended for the year in order to go thru counseling properly and to hopefully break this pattern of behavior for him in the future.





YR

What pattern?

 

[SultanOfSix]

This is just another example of NFL shenanigans that has become commonplace under Goodell.

Hardy and the NFLPA should stick to their guns (the CBA) and settle for nothing more than two games.

Handing out an unjustifiable punishment according to agreed upon rules post facto in order to make oneself look like the good guy in the court of some media generated "public opinion" to compensate for the incompetency of one's own previous management of such issues is specious and transparently self-serving.

 

[CATCH17]

That just won't fly. According to that logic, they couldn't do anything to Ray Rice and this whole crapstorm started when people got upset that they gave Rice only 2 games.

They shouldn't have punished Ray Rice until they had evidence.


Heck, they could've just said that the legal system found him not guilty and just let him play.

That would've been better then what they decided with the initial 2 game suspension.



What if video services of Hardy actually beating her with a toilet seat and hitting her with guns? You think 10 games won't look worse then 2?


The NFL just needs to stay out of it and ACT on the INFORMATION they get from the courts.

 

[Rogah]

Rogah doesn't respect due process nor rule of law.

We all know the defense attorney had a better case so the prosecution dropped and lost the appeal. Higher court ruling stands regardless of your ignorance and handwaving.



That is not 'not guilty' and is about as ignorant to the process as possible.

If he is determined to be not guilty the state cannot punish him. What he did was plead nolo contendere and got put on probation. IOW, he did not dispute the charges. Nevermind the videotape.

You people are entitled to your own opinions, but not your own facts.

Ray Rice pleaded "Not Guilty"
He did not plead "guilty" as Burmafred inaccurately claims (before trying to lecture me on accuracy)
He did not plead "no contest" as FuzzyLumpkin claims (perhaps confusing Ray Rice with Adrian Peterson)

He pleaded not guilty and charges were dropped on the condition that he accepted a pretrial diversionary program. So now returning to my original point, CATCH17 said "If the court finds them guilty then have at it but the NFL has no business handing down punishments to players with no charges" to which I responded that that will not fly because according to that logic, Ray Rice would not be punished.

I stand by my statement despite all the people who do not know the facts of the case trying to disagree. Here are 6 articles all proving I am right:

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.co...ty-applies-for-pretrial-intervention-program/

http://www.baltimoreravens.com/news...-Charges/c136564d-7562-4764-95e8-eff898344ef4

http://articles.baltimoresun.com/20...40520_1_rice-and-palmer-ray-rice-janay-palmer

http://www.usatoday.com/story/sport...ccepted-rice-rare-in-domestic-cases/15704943/

http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/eye-on...-rice-pleads-not-guilty-to-aggravated-assault

http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/1...avens-pleads-not-guilty-eyes-pretrial-program

 

[Rogah]

They shouldn't have punished Ray Rice until they had evidence.

Heck, they could've just said that the legal system found him not guilty and just let him play.

That would've been better then what they decided with the initial 2 game suspension.


What if video services of Hardy actually beating her with a toilet seat and hitting her with guns? You think 10 games won't look worse then 2?


The NFL just needs to stay out of it and ACT on the INFORMATION they get from the courts.

You're contradicting yourself. Should the NFL based their decisions on evidence that they have in hand, or should they simply go by what the courts say?

In your previous post, you said "If the court finds them guilty then have at it but the NFL has no business handing down punishments to players with no charges. Well, Ray Rice had his charges dropped. So according to your own words, the NFL has no business handing down a punishment to him.

 

[Nightman]

You people are entitled to your own opinions, but not your own facts.

Ray Rice pleaded "Not Guilty"
He did not plead "guilty" as Burmafred inaccurately claims (before trying to lecture me on accuracy)
He did not plead "no contest" as FuzzyLumpkin claims (perhaps confusing Ray Rice with Adrian Peterson)

He pleaded not guilty and charges were dropped on the condition that he accepted a pretrial diversionary program. So now returning to my original point, CATCH17 said "If the court finds them guilty then have at it but the NFL has no business handing down punishments to players with no charges" to which I responded that that will not fly because according to that logic, Ray Rice would not be punished.

I stand by my statement despite all the people who do not know the facts of the case trying to disagree. Here are 6 articles all proving I am right:

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.co...ty-applies-for-pretrial-intervention-program/

http://www.baltimoreravens.com/news...-Charges/c136564d-7562-4764-95e8-eff898344ef4

http://articles.baltimoresun.com/20...40520_1_rice-and-palmer-ray-rice-janay-palmer

http://www.usatoday.com/story/sport...ccepted-rice-rare-in-domestic-cases/15704943/

http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/eye-on...-rice-pleads-not-guilty-to-aggravated-assault

http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/1...avens-pleads-not-guilty-eyes-pretrial-program

Ray Rice took a deal that was contingent on him doing several things before being cleared. That is not the same thing as pleading guilty or no contest, but it is not getting off completetly. Peterson plead guilty to a misdemeanor.

Hardy was not even tried and the charges were dropped. Anything that happened prior to the jury trial is irrelevant and you keep bringing it up to try and strengthen your argumaent. You know it is not the same.

 

[burmafrd]

You people are entitled to your own opinions, but not your own facts.

Ray Rice pleaded "Not Guilty"
He did not plead "guilty" as Burmafred inaccurately claims (before trying to lecture me on accuracy)
He did not plead "no contest" as FuzzyLumpkin claims (perhaps confusing Ray Rice with Adrian Peterson)

He pleaded not guilty and charges were dropped on the condition that he accepted a pretrial diversionary program. So now returning to my original point, CATCH17 said "If the court finds them guilty then have at it but the NFL has no business handing down punishments to players with no charges" to which I responded that that will not fly because according to that logic, Ray Rice would not be punished.

I stand by my statement despite all the people who do not know the facts of the case trying to disagree. Here are 6 articles all proving I am right:

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.co...ty-applies-for-pretrial-intervention-program/

http://www.baltimoreravens.com/news...-Charges/c136564d-7562-4764-95e8-eff898344ef4

http://articles.baltimoresun.com/20...40520_1_rice-and-palmer-ray-rice-janay-palmer

http://www.usatoday.com/story/sport...ccepted-rice-rare-in-domestic-cases/15704943/

http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/eye-on...-rice-pleads-not-guilty-to-aggravated-assault

http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/1...avens-pleads-not-guilty-eyes-pretrial-program

any time a troll claims only he has the facts- well they have lost and don't know it. Nolo contendre is a typical legal loophole that people like you love so much. to people who live in the real world he admitted guilt.

 

[Plumfool]

You people are entitled to your own opinions, but not your own facts.

Ray Rice pleaded "Not Guilty"
He did not plead "guilty" as Burmafred inaccurately claims (before trying to lecture me on accuracy)
He did not plead "no contest" as FuzzyLumpkin claims (perhaps confusing Ray Rice with Adrian Peterson)

He pleaded not guilty and charges were dropped on the condition that he accepted a pretrial diversionary program. So now returning to my original point, CATCH17 said "If the court finds them guilty then have at it but the NFL has no business handing down punishments to players with no charges" to which I responded that that will not fly because according to that logic, Ray Rice would not be punished.

I stand by my statement despite all the people who do not know the facts of the case trying to disagree. Here are 6 articles all proving I am right:

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.co...ty-applies-for-pretrial-intervention-program/

http://www.baltimoreravens.com/news...-Charges/c136564d-7562-4764-95e8-eff898344ef4

http://articles.baltimoresun.com/20...40520_1_rice-and-palmer-ray-rice-janay-palmer

http://www.usatoday.com/story/sport...ccepted-rice-rare-in-domestic-cases/15704943/

http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/eye-on...-rice-pleads-not-guilty-to-aggravated-assault

http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/1...avens-pleads-not-guilty-eyes-pretrial-program

In the Ray Rice case both are true. The commish by "letter of the law" shouldn't have suspended Rice. But according to his letter to Rice and in which Rice accepted that the conduct was "incompatible with NFL policies and warranted disciplinary action." Roger should not have succumbed to pressure of the situation.

 

[Risen Star]

There is no question the league gave Hardy a 10 game suspension knowing full well it will get reduced. But by going the route they did now instead of looking soft on domestic violence it's someone else who is lowering the number of games he gets suspended.

There's pretty much nothing else that needs to be said.

 

[dallasfan4lizife]

There's no possible way a drunk female strung out on coke could have minor scratches and bruises without being assaulted...LOL

There's no possible way Nicole Holder is a leech that seeks those with money........Nelly

In my opinion, from all the detailed reports I've read about the Greg Hardy/Nicole Holder dispute, it seems like Hardy has been completely railroaded because of the whole Rice video.

 

[Rogah]

any time a troll claims only he has the facts- well they have lost and don't know it. Nolo contendre is a typical legal loophole that people like you love so much. to people who live in the real world he admitted guilt.

You said he pleaded guilty (and then you attacked me for making inaccurate statements).

You would look a lot less foolish if you simply admitted you were wrong than you do by trying to twist and turn things around. Just man up and admit you made an honest mistake.

 

[jrumann59]

Rice's Case was plea deal plain and simple, he did what the DA asked, for a favorable disposition. Call it PBJ he had to agree they had him dead to rights.

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

You people are entitled to your own opinions, but not your own facts.

Ray Rice pleaded "Not Guilty"
He did not plead "guilty" as Burmafred inaccurately claims (before trying to lecture me on accuracy)
He did not plead "no contest" as FuzzyLumpkin claims (perhaps confusing Ray Rice with Adrian Peterson)

He pleaded not guilty and charges were dropped on the condition that he accepted a pretrial diversionary program. So now returning to my original point, CATCH17 said "If the court finds them guilty then have at it but the NFL has no business handing down punishments to players with no charges" to which I responded that that will not fly because according to that logic, Ray Rice would not be punished.

I stand by my statement despite all the people who do not know the facts of the case trying to disagree. Here are 6 articles all proving I am right:

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.co...ty-applies-for-pretrial-intervention-program/

http://www.baltimoreravens.com/news...-Charges/c136564d-7562-4764-95e8-eff898344ef4

http://articles.baltimoresun.com/20...40520_1_rice-and-palmer-ray-rice-janay-palmer

http://www.usatoday.com/story/sport...ccepted-rice-rare-in-domestic-cases/15704943/

http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/eye-on...-rice-pleads-not-guilty-to-aggravated-assault

http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/1...avens-pleads-not-guilty-eyes-pretrial-program

Maryland law is different than Texas law then my bad.

Point still stands. Him entering a pretrial diversion program still speaks to admission of culpability. Nevermind the video.

I know you desperately want it to be simple. You still have no respect for due process.

 

[Rogah]

Maryland law is different than Texas law then my bad.

Point still stands. Him entering a pretrial diversion program still speaks to admission of culpability. Nevermind the video.

I know you desperately want it to be simple. You still have no respect for due process.

I never said the guy was innocent; for Pete's sake, we all saw the video.

All I am saying is this: Some people believe the NFL should only be able to discipline a player if they are found guilty in a court of law. If the NFL implements that guideline, then that means Ray Rice would not have been disciplined.

Let the record show that I do not support such a guideline. I do not believe the NFL should only be allowed to discipline players found guilty in a court of law - and I hold that opinion no matter what laundry a guy wears on Sunday afternoons.

 

[Oh_Canada]

I hope the NFL gets blasted here. They took one general incident, said he did 4 seperate violations, and gave him the max punishment for each. They have never done that before and it's a blatent attempt to circumvent Judge Doty's ruling. That's like two guys get into a fight and each guy getting a seperate assault charge for each punch thrown and sentenced the max years for each punch. Does it ever work like that?

Yes. I wonder if they will fine the Patriots for each time they deflated a ball?

 

[Nightman]

I never said the guy was innocent; for Pete's sake, we all saw the video.

All I am saying is this: Some people believe the NFL should only be able to discipline a player if they are found guilty in a court of law. If the NFL implements that guideline, then that means Ray Rice would not have been disciplined.

Let the record show that I do not support such a guideline. I do not believe the NFL should only be allowed to discipline players found guilty in a court of law - and I hold that opinion no matter what laundry a guy wears on Sunday afternoons.

People aren't saying that exactly. Rice entered into a Pre-trial intervetion program with 12 months probation. That is an acknowledgement of some wrong doing.

Hardy wasn't even tried ultimately. Big difference. AND don't even try to bring up the bench trial. That is nothing more than a glorified arraignment or preliminary hearing.

 

[Corso]

I never said the guy was innocent; for Pete's sake, we all saw the video.

All I am saying is this: Some people believe the NFL should only be able to discipline a player if they are found guilty in a court of law. If the NFL implements that guideline, then that means Ray Rice would not have been disciplined.

Let the record show that I do not support such a guideline. I do not believe the NFL should only be allowed to discipline players found guilty in a court of law - and I hold that opinion no matter what laundry a guy wears on Sunday afternoons.

I did not read the entire tet-a-tet between you and Fuzz (although I'm sure I will in the very near future, you both are good and thoughtful posters and I'm certain I will enjoy it) on this matter, but I will say that your point about the NFL and punishment is neither lost, or misaligned with my attitude with the subject, although I would like the subject in all cases and counts to be investigated and judged both fairly and antiseptically- free from bias and agenda and that cannot be said in this matter.

To me that is an injustice. Now I may be coming from left field here on this, on you two, but... crud- I'm 2 sheets to the wind and I just felt like typing something.
Cut me a break... I got one more sheet to go.