I actually think Zeke is innocent, why is the NFL so determined in this case?
Law enforcement choose not to charge, now that doesn't mean innocence, but you can get a feel when the believe a person is guilty but you just can't prove it, and you can tell when they believe a accusations have no merit
The lady that interviewed the accuser recommended no suspension... what evidence does the NFL have?
I would sue the hell out of the league if I were Zeke, and I would retire. Bring the NFL to its knees
I read the transcripts from the appeal hearing and so I have to assume ALL the evidence was "out there" in the hearing. I was on the fence on this ordeal with the thought in the back of my head that the NFL had evidence that we don't know about.
Well, according to the appeal transcript the evidence is as follows:
1. Victim testimony
2. Accused testimony
3. Several witnesses in Zeke's defense
4. Very few credible witnesses on the side of the victim
5. Pictures of bruises, related metadata, and processional opinions based on the pictures.
6. Lots of text messages and or emails.
1. So if we start with the victim. It's very clear that the victim is not a credible witness at all. Lies stacked on lies, and many inconsistent testimonies. A bar fight with another women that was witnessed by several people, that resulted in bruises.
2. The accused (Zeke), while certainly guilty of being a bonehead in the whole situation, did not provide any testimony that would imply being guilty of DV and certainly no testimony admitting to physically harming the victim except during consensual "rough sex".
3. Several credible witnesses that corroborate Zekes testimony. None of these witnesses could be considered not credible.
4. Witnesses that in theory were there to help the victim, instead, seemed to hurt the victim. Her own friend admitted to being asked to lie to the police on behalf of the victim. There was also testimony that contradicted some very credible testimony from witnesses for the defense. Again, the witnesses for the victim were few and were not very credible at all.
5. Pictures. There were several pictures that were described by a professional as blurry with poor color. Now this seems to be the meat of the NFL's case. Two professionals were somehow able to determine within some very small timeframes when these bruises happened, and not only when, but how. A professional for the defense, testified that is impossible to pinpoint when these bruises occurred simply based on cell phone pictures. One of the key factors in determining the age of a bruise is color and particularly the color yellow. In his professional opinion, he could not make any determination of age based on these pictures. Some of the pictures he classified as hickies and not injuries. He debunked the main pieces of evidence for the NFL.
6. The texts only hurt the victim in this case as many of them contradicted her testimony and also showed attempts at extortion.
I may have skipped over a few points but I think you get the drift of the whole situation. Now if you couple the "evidence" or lack there of, with the testimony of the lead investigator for the NFL, who testified under oath that she did not think there was evidence to suspend Zeke, it is clearly a case of the NFL having a preconceived outcome that no amount of testimony or evidence, for or against, was going to change.
