Pacman suspended for 2007; Henry suspended 8 games

[Hostile]

Lawyers apply for a writ of habeas corpus on behalf of their clients. When a lawyer applies for a writ of habeas corpus, the common parlance is that the prisoner made a habeas claim.

Lawyers can request a claim of habeas corpus. For that matter, so can a prisoner. He can request his day in court before a Judge. It is still a Judge who issues the writ, not a lawyer.

 

[theogt]

Lawyers will bring it up. It may not work, but they will bring up due process. They may even plead temporary insanity. Lawyers will do their job and it may not seem like common sense or that it even applies to Pacman's case, but they will try their best for their client. You say due process does not apply and most will agree with you and in Hos' posts, it looks like he agrees with that, but that doesn't mean a lawyer won't try. It also doesn't mean the NFL and Goodell will or won't accept that arguement. The NFL and Goodell are not beholden to it(due process), but they may use it as a guideline.

Like I said, they can make claims about the law of Kathmandu. They can do whatever they want, though they may face sanctions for doing so (thought that's pretty rare). But the Due Process claim is just as silly as the Habeas claim.

Due Process is a Civil Right. His suspension will be argued is based solely upon a presumption of guilt without Due Process. That is what his lawyers will argue to try and overturn his suspension. I honestly don't see how that can even be a question in anyone's mind. Even if you don't understand the workings of Law in its finite details surely you understand that he does not want to be suspended, will fight it, and needs something upon which to grasp and fight.

The NFL has rules of conduct, but this action is unprecedented (has no prior history) and is retroactive (is new action based upon interpretations not in place when his events happened) in nature. It will be argued that without Due Process he is being unfairly treated.

Guilt is a term that is only applicable to criminal law. The NFL is not applying criminal law. It is not required to give due process of law, because it is not the government.

 

[dbair1967]

sorry Hos, but if you are arguing that a players "rights" are being violated because they (league) arnt allowing him to play, I think you are wrong

I've seen the argument that the league is preventing someone from working (ie, pac Thug) but they are not doing that...he is free to pursue work elsewhere...maybe the CFL, maybe the AFL...maybe as chief grocery bagger someplace...the NFL is free to make any rules they want, if they feel their image is being battered by an obviously dysfunctional piece of garbage, they have the right to suspend him...its a privilege to play in the NFL (or any other major league sport), not a right

all the people (not you specifically Hos, but anyone) crying for "poor Pac Thug the victim, the punishment is too severe" need to get a freaking grip...the guy is a walking crime spree and an embarassment to the league...he is the epitome of trash

David

 

[Doomsday101]

Now, this makes sense to me! I still feel that this debate is between two different things. The Law and the NFL's rules...

No doubt. We are all free to gamble on the games, players are not and I have seen guys banned from the league with no second chance for doing it. It is a conduct that the league can't afford. The league has a right to set standards of what they expect out of their employees. Great thing is Goodell also has a review board made up of current players and it appears the Union itself supports this so I don't see much a player can do to get around this. If you don't like the rules there is always the CFL.

 

[5Stars]

Due Process is a Civil Right. His suspension will be argued is based solely upon a presumption of guilt without Due Process. That is what his lawyers will argue to try and overturn his suspension. I honestly don't see how that can even be a question in anyone's mind. Even if you don't understand the workings of Law in its finite details surely you understand that he does not want to be suspended, will fight it, and needs something upon which to grasp and fight.

The NFL has rules of conduct, but this action is unprecedented (has no prior history) and is retroactive (is new action based upon interpretations not in place when his events happened) in nature. It will be argued that without Due Process he is being unfairly treated.

OK? But, what presumption of guilt? It's a well known fact the he did not adhere to what was goverened by the NFL by not reporting prior incidents, right?

And how does a precedent get instituted? It's has to start somewhere, right?

See, this is where I get confused!

 

[kTXe]

It's this fascination with shiny objects on the tube that's helping put our wonderful country where it is now: with a lot of personal debt and too many people worried about the pursuit of happiness instead of taking care of the important things in life first.

Hmmm...call me crazy, but the most important thing that I can think of in life IS the pursuit of happiness. But whatever.




Anyways, put me in the camp that thinks this is much too harsh.

 

[Hostile]

sorry Hos, but if you are arguing that a players "rights" are being violated because they (league) arnt allowing him to play, I think you are wrong

I've seen the argument that the league is preventing someone from working (ie, pac Thug) but they are not doing that...he is free to pursue work elsewhere...maybe the CFL, maybe the AFL...maybe as chief grocery bagger someplace...the NFL is free to make any rules they want, if they feel their image is being battered by an obviously dysfunctional piece of garbage, they have the right to suspend him...its a privilege to play in the NFL (or any other major league sport), not a right

all the people (not you specifically Hos, but anyone) crying for "poor Pac Thug the victim, the punishment is too severe" need to get a freaking grip...the guy is a walking crime spree and an embarassment to the league...he is the epitome of trash

David

I wish you guys would learn to friggin' read.

I am NOT making this claim. I am saying his LAWYERS will make that claim.

Get glasses, take a class in advanced English comprehension, do something, but get a clue.

Read my first post in the thread applauding the Commish.

If some of you are foolish enough to think his LAWYERS will not fight this under those claims then you're simply deluded.

Honestly, it's not that friggin' hard guys.

 

[Doomsday101]

I wish you guys would learn to friggin' read.

I am NOT making this claim. I am saying his LAWYERS will make that claim.

Get glasses, take a class in advanced English comprehension, do something, but get a clue.

Read my first post in the thread applauding the Commish.

If some of you are foolish enough to think his LAWYERS will not fight this under those claims then you're simply deluded.

Honestly, it's not that friggin' hard guys.

A lawyer may do it but the judge can also refuse to hear the case. In this instance you have players, the league and the union all in step and I would doubt a judge would step into this.

 

[joseephuss]

Like I said, they can make claims about the law of Kathmandu. They can do whatever they want, though they may face sanctions for doing so (thought that's pretty rare). But the Due Process claim is just as silly as the Habeas claim.

Guilt is a term that is only applicable to criminal law. The NFL is not applying criminal law. It is not required to give due process of law, because it is not the government.

It isn't that silly. As a private entity, the NFL follows its own standards. The previous commisioners followed a standard of giving players their due process before handing out suspensions. Like you and other pointed out, this due process is not part of the NFL. It is the legal government due process of which the NFL really does not have to follow. Prior to Goodell, they mostly did. Michael Irvin was suspended after he had his day in court. Tags did not have to wait to do that, but he did. That sets a precedent. That is a precdent that lawyers will use to fight the suspension and it is affliated with due process. I agree with you that it is most likely not going to stick, but that is what they will do.

 

[Hostile]

OK? But, what presumption of guilt? It's a well known fact the he did not adhere to what was goverened by the NFL by not reporting prior incidents, right?

And how does a precedent get instituted? It's has to start somewhere, right?

See, this is where I get confused!

It isn't confusing at all.

 

[Hostile]

A lawyer may do it but the judge can also refuse to hear the case. In this instance you have players, the league and the union all in step and I would doubt a judge would step into this.

A Judge can refuse to hear it. That won't stop them from trying.

 

[theogt]

There are two sources in federal law that provide "Due Process": the 5th and 14th Amendments.

5th Amendment:

"nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation."

This has been interpreted as saying that no person shall be deprived of life, liberty, or property, by the federal government without due process of law. The NFL is not the federal government.

The 14th Amendment:

"nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws"

This has been interpreted as preventing state governments from depriving a person of life, liberty, or property without due process of law. The NFL is not a state government.

 

[dbair1967]

I wish you guys would learn to friggin' read.

I am NOT making this claim. I am saying his LAWYERS will make that claim.

Get glasses, take a class in advanced English comprehension, do something, but get a clue.

Read my first post in the thread applauding the Commish.

If some of you are foolish enough to think his LAWYERS will not fight this under those claims then you're simply deluded.

Honestly, it's not that friggin' hard guys.

I can read fine, just didnt see the need to go back and read 150+ posts when I saw 5 or 10 all saying about the same thing...it wasnt just you I was responding to

lawyers can argue whatever they want Hos, but they'll be losing this one bigtime...the league did the right thing...time to take out the trash...guys like Pac Trash, Henry, Tank Johnson, Leonard Little and Ray Lewis have no business being out on the street, let alone making the kind of money they do

David

 

[Doomsday101]

A Judge can refuse to hear it. That won't stop them from trying.

Of course not, anyone can try and sue anyone for any reason and people do it all the time but I think any judge who reviews this will not touch it. I remember when the USFL sued the NFL they won and were awarded 1.00 dollar.

 

[theogt]

It isn't that silly. As a private entity, the NFL follows its own standards. The previous commisioners followed a standard of giving players their due process before handing out suspensions. Like you and other pointed out, this due process is not part of the NFL. It is the legal government due process of which the NFL really does not have to follow. Prior to Goodell, they mostly did. Michael Irvin was suspended after he had his day in court. Tags did not have to wait to do that, but he did. That sets a precedent. That is a precdent that lawyers will use to fight the suspension and it is affliated with due process. I agree with you that it is most likely not going to stick, but that is what they will do.

That's not a Due Process claim. It's nothing like a due process claim.

A Due Process claim isn't an iffy claim. It isn't a close claim. It is completely and totally inapplicable in this instance. No sane judge in the United States would apply it in this case. It would be dismissed on the pleadings, just as a habeas corpus claim would be. They're both silly claims. Neither has a snowball's chance in hell.

 

[joseephuss]

Of course not, anyone can try and sue anyone for any reason and people do it all the time but I think any judge who reviews this will not touch it. I remember when the USFL sued the NFL they won and were awarded 1.00 dollar.

There is that judge who is a Commander season ticket holder and has mediated NFL cases before. He will probably end up with this one and rule that both players should not be suspended and then award them both to Washington.

 

[dbair1967]

What I dont like is the standards Goodell tried to use in the contracts. I mean he justifies doing this on the basis of ridicule?

i also think hes a bit premature on the basis that Jones hasnt even been convicted of a crime yet. if he is exonerated then the NFL is going to get the hammer big time. habeas corpus being violated is a pretty compelling argument.

he isnt going to be exonerated of anything, he might buy his way out of something or cop some plea deals, but he isnt going to be cleared...the guys been caught cold on all sorts of garbage

he's a piece of trash...time to be taken to the dump with the rest of it

David

 

[5Stars]

A Judge can refuse to hear it. That won't stop them from trying.

OK...from you last post to me and this one...now I understand where you are coming from...



I hate these kinds of threads! But, you sure can learn alot of things on this board!!

 

[joseephuss]

That's not a Due Process claim. It's nothing like a due process claim.

A Due Process claim isn't an iffy claim. It isn't a close claim. It is completely and totally inapplicable in this instance. No sane judge in the United States would apply it in this case. It would be dismissed on the pleadings, just as a habeas corpus claim would be. They're both silly claims. Neither has a snowball's chance in hell.

What do you call it then? I really don't care what the name, but a lawyer is going to draw on the precedents of previous commisioners and previous player suspensions. Still may and probably will lose, that is what they will do.

 

[theogt]

Lawyers can request a claim of habeas corpus. For that matter, so can a prisoner. He can request his day in court before a Judge. It is still a Judge who issues the writ, not a lawyer.

And it's still called a habeas claim. For some strange reason you laughed at that.

What do you call it then? I really don't care what the name, but a lawyer is going to draw on the precedents of previous commisioners and previous player suspensions. Still may and probably will lose, that is what they will do.

They can make a claim that Goodell took actions exceeding his rights under the contract. That's simply a state law claim of contract law. Has nothing to do with Due Process.