Panthers’ Final Answer: No Greg Hardy in 2015

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Not that I mind Hardy being on the team but this is the first mention I have seen that the prosecutors stated that. In fact the most in depth thing I have read was...

"Holder was part of an earlier trial in front of a judge only that ended with Hardy found guilty, but Joe Person of the Charlotte Observer reports that there are no transcripts from testimony in misdemeanor bench trials. Person also reports that the prosecution has “reliable info” about a settlement between Hardy and Holder that appears to have persuaded Holder not to cooperate with the attempt to convict Hardy, but Hardy had no comment before leaving the courthouse."

Not a single mention about anything you brought up. Forgive me if I am wrong, I have just never heard the anything from the prosecution stating such and they do not have transcripts of what she said in the bench trial anyway. The defense has stated what you said repeatedly, but honestly what else are they going to say?

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2015/02/09/case-dismissed-against-greg-hardy/

But other details also raised unanswered questions about prosecutors’ handling of the case. Hardy’s defense team announced an appeal of his conviction before leaving court in July. But Murray said prosecutors only “recently” had compared what Holder told police the night of the alleged assault with her testimony at Hardy’s first trial.

That’s because prosecutors didn’t have a trial transcript. Hardy’s defense team did – attorney Chris Fialko hired a court reporter at Hardy’s trial in District Court where transcripts are not normally prepared. According to court records, Fialko also fought the prosecution’s request for a copy of the transcript in the weeks leading up to Hardy’s trial this week.

Murray’s office would not elaborate on what prosecutors found when they compared Holder’s statements, but the district attorney said in court that with Holder unavailable, they “did not have sufficient legal basis” to enter her statements to police as evidence.

http://www.charlotteobserver.com/incoming/article10422650.html

As a general rule I avoid the turd. Florio is unreliable and lazy.

 

[Nirvana]

What kind of contract would it take to sign this guy? Would 4 yrs/40 mill/20 guaranteed suffice?

 

[Nightman]

Not that I mind Hardy being on the team but this is the first mention I have seen that the prosecutors stated that. In fact the most in depth thing I have read was...

"Holder was part of an earlier trial in front of a judge only that ended with Hardy found guilty, but Joe Person of the Charlotte Observer reports that there are no transcripts from testimony in misdemeanor bench trials. Person also reports that the prosecution has “reliable info” about a settlement between Hardy and Holder that appears to have persuaded Holder not to cooperate with the attempt to convict Hardy, but Hardy had no comment before leaving the courthouse."

Not a single mention about anything you brought up. Forgive me if I am wrong, I have just never heard the anything from the prosecution stating such and they do not have transcripts of what she said in the bench trial anyway. The defense has stated what you said repeatedly, but honestly what else are they going to say?

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2015/02/09/case-dismissed-against-greg-hardy/

In NC they don't record the proceedings for a bench trial. It is much more informal than a jury trial. It is a way to keep the Superior Court less crowded and more of a preliminary trial. The defense paid for it's own transcripts for the bench trial. The prosecutors were eventually allowed to see copies. When they couldn't deliver a subpoena to Ms Holder they thought of just admitting her previous testimony from the bench trial into the jury trial in lieu of her actual appearance. But after going over her testimony again they were not willing to swear to it as is required. There were several inconsistencies.

As to the settlement, that is pure speculation. Nothing has ever been confirmed and even it was, wouldn't that go towards her motives, more than his guilt. She was willing to walk away from justice for some money. Seems fishy to me. It is also clearly against the law to pay someone off to not testify.

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

This DA looks more and more competent as the days go by.

But the mounting pile of paperwork in the Hardy file no longer contains the exhibits the league’s investigators presumably are most interested in seeing: The dozens of photos introduced in the July trial documenting the injuries sustained by Hardy’s ex-girlfriend, Nicole Holder, during their altercation last May at Hardy’s uptown condo.

The NFL this month asked a judge to unseal the evidence from the bench trial, during which a district judge found Hardy guilty of the misdemeanor charges of assaulting Holder and threatening to kill her.

But the exhibits had been returned to the district attorney’s office and Hardy’s attorney, Chris Fialko, on Feb. 11, two days after the charges were dismissed against Hardy when prosecutors said they couldn’t locate Holder to testify in the jury trial.

http://www.charlotteobserver.com/sports/nfl/carolina-panthers/article11383256.html

 

[Nightman]

What kind of contract would it take to sign this guy? Would 4 yrs/40 mill/20 guaranteed suffice?

It might after all his troubles. That could be a big enough discount to get Dallas to bite.

 

[cheftjpeck]

Well a medical examiners report that indicated no injuries speaks a different story but okay. OJ was exonerated on the basis of police misconduct in the wake of the King debacle after a trial. The prosecutor abandoned the case here. Not remotely the same veracity.

Let me help you

SARCASM


Just a little tongue in cheek .. Of course there isn't any comparison per say

However just because circumstances made the legal system work right and ruled the case in his favor .. Doesn't mean he is the "right kind of guy "

I'd love to have his skills on the team no doubt .. But not sure

 

[DanTanna]

Her attorney probably told her "You better not testify in another trial, your story has changed so many times they'll NAIL you for perjury and you will go to prison". He also probably told her Greg Hardy would sue her if 1. she didn't "fess-up" or 2. shut up and be glad you're still free. She chose option two.

 

[DoctorChicken]

What kind of contract would it take to sign this guy? Would 4 yrs/40 mill/20 guaranteed suffice?

I would love to sign him to a Melton-like deal. Prove his worth and prove he can stay out of trouble.

 

[gimmesix]

It was invalidated and vacated solely due to the prosecution being unable to get the victim to testify. The reason she wasn't able to be located to testify was due to Hardy and her reaching a financial settlement.

I have trouble with this line of thinking because it presumes that he would have been found guilty. There is always the possibility that something like the inconsistencies in her testimony would have invalidated the verdict.

I'm kind of neutral on signing Hardy, but I like to be careful about assuming guilt. I would hope if Dallas were to consider signing him, it would be very diligent in studying his character before making an offer. No team is full of choirboys, but we also don't need to go back to bringing in players like Pacman Jones.

 

[Verdict]

It was invalidated and vacated solely due to the prosecution being unable to get the victim to testify. The reason she wasn't able to be located to testify was due to Hardy and her reaching a financial settlement.

That is what the prosecutor said. Then again, seldom do prosecutors say hey we screwed the pooch on this one ... we charged an innocent man. Maybe that is what happened, but stating it as if you know what happened is sort of silly unless you had first hand personal knowledge.

 

[adbutcher]

You do understand that the bench trial verdict was invalidated and vacated? He is not convicted of any crime.

Save your breathe, lol.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

I don't think Dallas spent the last four years stripping away bad salary cap debt and building around Right Kinda Guys in order to pay $30 million to a guy who was found guilty for beating the crap out of his girlfriend and then paid her off to win an appeal. Just a hunch.

I would not be so sure about this. Facts around this case leave much room for doubt on what Hardy actually did or did not do. Besides, it's not like we are squeaky clean on players anyway.

 

[burmafrd]

What amazes me is any kind of trial that does not have a formal transcript- how in the world do you really give it any credance?

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Let me help you

SARCASM


Just a little tongue in cheek .. Of course there isn't any comparison per say

However just because circumstances made the legal system work right and ruled the case in his favor .. Doesn't mean he is the "right kind of guy "

I'd love to have his skills on the team no doubt .. But not sure

Let's talk of sarcasm. It's noted by a drawl with American and most western romantic languages. This is to let people know that you are being derisive to the subject at hand. OTOH, when you deadpan the comment, most people do not pick up on it. When your audience has to figure it out on their own it is typically received as hostile as if you are trying to get one over on them.

On the internet, people seem oblivious to this. I have shrink friends that refer to it as internet aspergers. You not inflecting sarcasm is a failure in communication on your part. You are asking me to guess and then being derisive when I guess wrong.

Just because it is sarcasm doesn't meant that it cannot be spoken to sensibly. When you are deriding the OJ not guilty verdict then your implication to the Hardy verdict is obvious. In this case, it makes perfect sense to comment on the circumstances behind the verdicts. That is exactly what I did.

You derided the OJ verdict which implies that not all not-guilty verdicts are valid. I can comment on the circumstances behind the two trials. One being a trial and the other being an oddity of the NC justice system is very germane to your derisive comparison and it speaks directly even if you do not. You act like you can just say 'sarcasm' and that means that what you say has no meaning at all.

 

[gmoney112]

Well, Nation just got a royal beatdown. Quality work, forum.

As a son of the South, I have to admit I laughed a bit when I saw he decided on a bench trial, as a black man in a domestic abuse case, in Charlotte, North Carolina and it wasn't even formally of record. I bet about 10 seconds into it he immediately regretted his decision. I don't think I've heard of a less credible or less favorable circumstance.

I also tend to give a guy a bit of a pass when his GF is admitted drunk and high on cocaine whose story has more holes than Swiss cheese.

A settlement is more of an opportunity to just get it over with anyway, it's not by any means an admission of guilt. The whole legal process, to normal folk, is a huge pain in the butt. How much so I don't have to keep showing up with warnings of bench warrants or contempt? Okay, take my money and good day to you.

How much of the settlement goes to her rehabilitation efforts do you wager?

I'd love to have the guy, as long as there was an incentive clause in his contract, with a base pay dependent on his interaction with ratchet females. "Nice try Greg, you don't get your bonus because we all know that girl you took home was a stripper, no matter how many times she tells you Chastity is her Christian name."

 

[Nightman]

Well, Nation just got a royal beatdown. Quality work, forum.

As a son of the South, I have to admit I laughed a bit when I saw he decided on a bench trial, as a black man in a domestic abuse case, in Charlotte, North Carolina and it wasn't even formally of record. I bet about 10 seconds into it he immediately regretted his decision. I don't think I've heard of a less credible or less favorable circumstance.

I also tend to give a guy a bit of a pass when his GF is admitted drunk and high on cocaine whose story has more holes than Swiss cheese.

A settlement is more of an opportunity to just get it over with anyway, it's not by any means an admission of guilt. The whole legal process, to normal folk, is a huge pain in the butt. How much so I don't have to keep showing up with warnings of bench warrants or contempt? Okay, take my money and good day to you.

How much of the settlement goes to her rehabilitation efforts do you wager?

I'd love to have the guy, as long as there was an incentive clause in his contract, with a base pay dependent on his interaction with ratchet females. "Nice try Greg, you don't get your bonus because we all know that girl you took home was a stripper, no matter how many times she tells you Chastity is her Christian name."

2m extra to remain ratchet free in 2015.....

 

[xwalker]

Well, Nation just got a royal beatdown. Quality work, forum.

As a son of the South, I have to admit I laughed a bit when I saw he decided on a bench trial, as a black man in a domestic abuse case, in Charlotte, North Carolina and it wasn't even formally of record. I bet about 10 seconds into it he immediately regretted his decision. I don't think I've heard of a less credible or less favorable circumstance.

I also tend to give a guy a bit of a pass when his GF is admitted drunk and high on cocaine whose story has more holes than Swiss cheese.

A settlement is more of an opportunity to just get it over with anyway, it's not by any means an admission of guilt. The whole legal process, to normal folk, is a huge pain in the butt. How much so I don't have to keep showing up with warnings of bench warrants or contempt? Okay, take my money and good day to you.

How much of the settlement goes to her rehabilitation efforts do you wager?

I'd love to have the guy, as long as there was an incentive clause in his contract, with a base pay dependent on his interaction with ratchet females. "Nice try Greg, you don't get your bonus because we all know that girl you took home was a stripper, no matter how many times she tells you Chastity is her Christian name."

He did not decide on a bench trail. All of the trials in that state start with a bench trail and the appeal to a jury trail is basically automatic.

The bench trial serves as a filter similar to the function of a Grand Jury. With a Grand Jury, one jury reviews multiple cases to determine if they are worth sending to trail. With the bench trial in Carolina, the judge makes that determination.

 

[Kaiser]

As a son of the South, I have to admit I laughed a bit when I saw he decided on a bench trial, as a black man in a domestic abuse case, in Charlotte, North Carolina and it wasn't even formally of record. I bet about 10 seconds into it he immediately regretted his decision. I don't think I've heard of a less credible or less favorable circumstance.

I also tend to give a guy a bit of a pass when his GF is admitted drunk and high on cocaine whose story has more holes than Swiss cheese.

Two points, at one point I read everything I could on the situation because I think Hardy would be the perfect FA addition from a personnel standpoint (15 sacks out of that position rather than the 3 we got from Selvie and we make the Super Bowl IMO).

#1 - from everything I read there was absolutely nothing beyond the girl's testimony pointing to Hardy being guilty. Then after the "Traffic Court" hearing she had contradicted herself and admitted to doing coke that night, so she had no credibility going into the real trial. In the 911 call Hardy said he was taping everything and his attorneys said they had evidence that would completely exonerate him. I think that is a big reason the DA dropped the case so quickly and why (in the article above) Hardy's attorneys are trying to control how the information is given to the NFL. They don't want the NFL to pick and chose things to hand down a harsh punishment. They want the entire story going to the NFL and the media at the same time.

#2 - on the Judge's motives in the first hearing, I live in LA but the same thing occurred to me when I was reading all the news articles. So I googled the girl (white) and then the Judge (white and looks like a ... rhymes with ditch). I don't know what was in the Judges mind at the time, but her deciding a black defendant was guilty from the start wouldn't exactly surprise me.

 

[AzorAhai]

I really hope some of you who know with certainty Greg Hardy is guilty never end up being a juror. This mentality of disregarding the judicial system because it doesn't fit your perception is ridiculous. Im sure if a woman/man accused you of something you would be fine waving your right to a jury trial and accepting a verdict handed down by a single entity, who is easier to convince/deceive than multiple jurors. Your knowledge of half truths and a low percent of the evidence along with a lack of knowledge of what a North Carolina bench trial is and is used for is irrelevant because you already know exactly what happened right?

 

[Stash]

This guy is the name in my opinion. Warts and all, he is far and away the best pass rusher to hit the market and will cost accordingly. But if we're serious about improving the defense and taking that next step this year, I see him as a must have. The one big splurge to load up and kick the door in. Like the Peterson news, I see this as good news for the Cowboys.