Should Hardy Appeal, or Nah?

[BoysFan4ever]

Seriously. Let it go.

Why? Because you say so? Need a better reason than that.

I see you still make enemies on every subject you post on. It's the ROGAH way!

And always funny.

 

[Rogah]

Perhaps you would be willing to provide forums, etc. that you frequent, along with links and usernames, so that members here could discern your corrected assertation for themselves?

No, I am not willing to provide such. There are multiple members of this forum who follow me around all over for no reason but to harass me, so I don't want to give them opportunity to continue said harassment everywhere I spend my time on the internet.

 

[Rogah]

ChldsPlay said: ↑
You should make that your new avatar. I would guess that's what most people in the CowboysZone forum but nowhere else think of when they see your posts on this subject.



You should venture to that place - where everyone else agrees with you - and leave this one behind. Since nobody else thinks the way you do.

I may be in the minority, but it is most certainly not true to say "nobody else" in here thinks the way I do.

 

[Stash]

I may be in the minority, but it is most certainly not true to say "nobody else" in here thinks the way I do.

You made the claim. "Nowhere else" but the CowboysZone.

 

[Rogah]

Why? Because you say so? Need a better reason than that.

The reason "why" is because this is a thread about Greg Hardy. If you want to talk about the Patriots, there are (literally) 30+ threads about them in the NFL Zone active within the past 2 months.

I see you still make enemies on every subject you post on. It's the ROGAH way!

Note to DallasEast: The above post, which adds nothing to the discussion but is simply meant for no purpose beyond harassing me, is why I don't want to share details of other websites and I frequent, and usernames under which I post.

 

[Rogah]

So? Billions of people get upset every day over many things. The pamphlet outlines behavior leading up and/or inclusive of domestic abuse. Hardy allegedly got pissed off. Hopefully court documents contain a little more than that one supposed event.

A pamphlet was shared with the group with the question (paraphrasing) "does Hardy exhibit any of the traits contain in this pamphlet?"

I responded by finding one rather large and significant trait we know he exhibited. Nowhere did I say the one fact proved anything, I was simply responding to the question in that post.

 

[Rogah]

So what are we expecting from the Hardy camp? They've been quiet for nearly 2 weeks now. I'm certain there's a strategy to the timing of whatever decision they make.

They are probably either waiting for a dead news zone (i.e. a Friday afternoon) to make an announcement, or they are waiting for the Adrian Peterson contempt findings to play out before deciding how to proceed.

 

[Rogah]

You made the claim. "Nowhere else" but the CowboysZone.

Yes I made the claim and I stand by it.

 

[Stash]

Yes I made the claim and I stand by it.

Good.

Now go stand somewhere else.

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Yes I made the claim and I stand by it.

You're standing by a vacated bench trial verdict, pictures you've never seen, and a throwaway accusation that the DA would not substantiate.

You refuse to consider the arguments of others. In the meantime, you just parrot "CONVICTION!" "THERE'S PICTURES!" and "SHE'S BEEN PAID!"

What is interesting is how persistent you are.

 

[MeTed]

You're standing by a vacated bench trial verdict, pictures you've never seen, and a throwaway accusation that the DA would not substantiate.

You refuse to consider the arguments of others. In the meantime, you just parrot "CONVICTION!" "THERE'S PICTURES!" and "SHE'S BEEN PAID!"

What is interesting is how persistent you are.

predisposed and won't let it go...

 

[Rogah]

You're standing by a vacated bench trial verdict,

Given that's the only actual verdict we have, and the only finding we have issued by an actual court, it remains pretty solid.

pictures you've never seen,

But I've seen a 1st hand description of them

and a throwaway accusation that the DA would not substantiate.

An accusation that no reasonable person could deny the veracity of.

You refuse to consider the arguments of others.

Ah yes, once again we see the same tired old "you disagree with me therefore you are closed minded (but I am not)" idiocy.

In the meantime, you just parrot "CONVICTION!" "THERE'S PICTURES!" and "SHE'S BEEN PAID!"

um, yes..... the fact that he was found guilty beyond a reasonable doubt in the one trial he had to completion and subsequently paid off the accuser to go away, forcing the DA to drop the case, are the main arguments supporting my thesis.

Sorry to see that bothers you so much. By the way, I CAN TYPE IN ALL CAPITAL LETTERS TOO!!!

 

[Nightman]

Exactly right! And posts in this thread talking about 'baseball bats' clearly illustrate the ignorance on the subject. Take a look on any site on the internet where the topic is discussed and it's 'the man should have walked/run away'. Seriously? Is this some Bizarro-land definition of equality?!?!?

It's the "White Knight Syndrome" where men on the internet want to appear to be the savior to all womankind. They will say and promote ideas they don't believe to make sure the herd approves. Saying there is no reason to ever hit a woman is one of those statements. It is just silly.

It is just sexist as well. Equality means no one should put their hands on anyone else. If a woman puts her hands on me or my family or attacks me with a weapon, she will be dealt with appropriately. If that means striking her than so be it. But men do not have to run away or take a beating to preserve some code that doesn't exist.

That being said, athletes have more to lose than most and may need to show more restraint than most men in other situations. There is now a target on their backs and the League is ready to unload on them if they get the chance, right or wrong.

 

[MeTed]

Exactly. Tedious and exhausting reading your tripe.

 

[Rogah]

predisposed and won't let it go...

Yes, I'm the only one in this thread trying to make points and argue their point of view. <slash sarcasm>

Tell ya what.... Answer us this: Do you want me to "let it go" and leave this thread? Yes or no. If you say you want me to leave this thread, I will leave this thread. If not, I will stay. Just spare us this "you won't let it go" idiocy when there are about 10 people - including you - participating in the ongoing discussion.

 

[Rogah]

It's the "White Knight Syndrome" where men on the internet want to appear to be the savior to all womankind. They will say and promote ideas they don't believe to make sure the herd approves. Saying there is no reason to ever hit a woman is one of those statements. It is just silly.

It is just sexist as well. Equality means no one should put their hands on anyone else. If a woman puts her hands on me or my family or attacks me with a weapon, she will be dealt with appropriately. If that means striking her than so be it. But men do not have to run away or take a beating to preserve some code that doesn't exist.

If saying men who are professional athletes should not beat up women makes me sexist, then so be it.

Now maybe you should go back to worshipping your champions of equal rights and feminism: Ray Rice, Greg Hardy and Ray McDonald. They're so open minded and committed to gender equality, they'll beat the hell out of you whether you're a guy or a girl.!!

 

[Rogah]

Exactly. Tedious and exhausting reading your tripe.

No one is forcing you to read this thread, pal. If you don't like what I have to say, that's what the "ignore" button is for.

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Given that's the only actual verdict we have, and the only finding we have issued by an actual court, it remains pretty solid.
But I've seen a 1st hand description of them
An accusation that no reasonable person could deny the veracity of.
Ah yes, once again we see the same tired old "you disagree with me therefore you are closed minded (but I am not)" idiocy.
um, yes..... the fact that he was found guilty beyond a reasonable doubt in the one trial he had to completion and subsequently paid off the accuser to go away, forcing the DA to drop the case, are the main arguments supporting my thesis.

Sorry to see that bothers you so much. By the way, I CAN TYPE IN ALL CAPITAL LETTERS TOO!!!

A bench trial verdict is not sufficient to pass final judgement through due process unless Hardy acquiesces. I look forward to you ignoring that again. It's pretty obvious you will take what you can get but it is what it is.

I'm really not interested in rehashing the same tripe you stopped actually addressing rebuttals months ago. The things is that things have moved on. Hardy got his suspension reduced which you were sure wouldn't happen. Now you're telling us about how his guilt will drive him not to appeal further.

I'm interested in scoreboard and you have been wrong each and every time. Good job, sir!

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

And I do have to say going to the line by line to repeat yourself 4 times was nice form.

 

[Rogah]

A bench trial verdict is not sufficient to pass final judgement through due process unless Hardy acquiesces.

This forum is not a criminal court of law and we don't have to adhere to standards of criminal courts of law prior to rendering personal opinions.

I look forward to you ignoring that again. I look forward to you ignoring that again.

I'm really not interested in rehashing the same tripe you stopped actually addressing rebuttals months ago.

Oh yay. Another post from someone saying they're not interested in discussing this with me, after responding to my statements over and over. It's been a couple hours since this thread got one of those so I guess we were overdue.

The things is that things have moved on. Hardy got his suspension reduced which you were sure wouldn't happen.

I'll give you the benefit of the doubt that you're making an honest mistake here and not deliberately lying. Suffice to say that I knew that one way or another he would get a reduced suspension.

In fact, I have stated that if he brings the league the federal court, he would most likely win and get the suspension reduced to 2. The only thing I consider an impossibility is 0 games.

Now you're telling us about how his guilt will drive him not to appeal further.

I have no idea what he is going to do next. All I have done is give reasons why he might not want to proceed and why it is not necessarily a situation where he has nothing to lose (as so many in here are claiming).

Yes, those reasons have to do with the fact that he pummeled the daylights out of a woman half his size and threatened to kill her.