Should Hardy Appeal, or Nah?

[AsthmaField]

Well guess what? He was proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt in a court of law.

You say that like a jury of his peers found him guilty. I bet a lot of people think that "proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt" envision a jury finding the defendant guilty.

In this case however, it was one person who thought he was guilty... a judge who is known to almost always side with the female in domestic violence cases.

A judge who knew that Hardy could request a jury trial if she did happen to get the decision wrong.

In essence, what the judge was saying was that she felt like the evidence that she looked at was enough to get a jury to deliberate on.

So, yeah, one person found Hardy guilty. I wonder if the judge would have come to the same conclusion had she known that the testimony from Ms. Holder that day completely conflicted with what she told the police on the night of the incident?

Anyway, even had Hardy not asked for the jury trial, what the judge found him guilty of was a misdemeanor that resulted in a suspended sentence. Some would say that missing 15 games (paid or not) in a career where the average time of employment is around three years, is punishment enough for the misdemeanor that the judge found him guilty of.

 

[Jarv]

Well guess what? He was proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt in a court of law. As we all know, charges were dropped on appeal, but those of us in this forum are certainly not beholden to that when making our own determinations.

There is always a reasonable doubt, that is why there is an appeal process. In your mind, anyone who wins an appeal is still guilty, which is very ignorant thought. That is the reason most disagree with you. You really should drop this. I wonder how you would feel if you were taken to court via a grand jury, then had the charges dropped, would you still consider yourself a felon, I think not.

 

[Kaiser]

In this case however, it was one person who thought he was guilty... a judge who is known to almost always side with the female in domestic violence cases.

It was also a Judge in a high profile case who was coming up on reelection. It isn't hard to imagine she didn't want to look "soft on crime" in one of the highest media profile cases she ever had.

 

[Rogah]

I hope it's reduced to zero games, just to prove you wrong again...

Good luck with that!

 

[Rogah]

You say that like a jury of his peers found him guilty.

No, I say that because that is the standard the Judge applied when making her ruling.

Personally, I consider the opinion of a Judge more valid than 12 people selected (mostly) at random, then filtered through a pair of lawyers who get to challenge a few of them.

So, yeah, one person found Hardy guilty. I wonder if the judge would have come to the same conclusion had she known that the testimony from Ms. Holder that day completely conflicted with what she told the police on the night of the incident?

What makes you think Hardy's attorney did not point that out when they presented their defense?

Anyway, even had Hardy not asked for the jury trial, what the judge found him guilty of was a misdemeanor that resulted in a suspended sentence. Some would say that missing 15 games (paid or not) in a career where the average time of employment is around three years, is punishment enough for the misdemeanor that the judge found him guilty of.

And some would say not losing a single dime of income isn't punishment enough for a professional athlete who pummeled a woman.

 

[Rogah]

There is always a reasonable doubt,

Uh, whuh huh?? According to that statement, nobody should ever be convicted of anything ever.

In your mind, anyone who wins an appeal is still guilty, which is very ignorant thought.

Not as ignorant as you thinking he "won an appeal." Charges were dropped. He didn't "win" anything.

I wonder how you would feel if you were taken to court via a grand jury, then had the charges dropped, would you still consider yourself a felon, I think not.

Newsflash: Bench trial =/= Grand jury.

 

[Rogah]

It was also a Judge in a high profile case who was coming up on reelection. It isn't hard to imagine she didn't want to look "soft on crime" in one of the highest media profile cases she ever had.

 

[The Quest for Six]

Hardy should just keep his mouth shut and accept the 4 game suspension and count his lucky stars that he even has the ability to play in the NFL and earn a paycheck and not in prison for at least five year for domestic abuse, where he should be IMO

 

[Nightman]

There have been around 50 DV arrests since Goodell took over in 2006

Three trends emerged:

--A brief suspension: In at least 14 cases, the league or the team suspended or deactivated the players, mostly for just one game. Only one of those was suspended more than two games prior to the league's recent controversy involving then-Baltimore Ravens running back Ray Rice, who was suspended indefinitely after video surfaced that showed he punched his now-wife in the elevator of an Atlantic City casino.

--No suspension: In 16 cases, the league did not suspend the player, often in accordance with how prosecutors viewed those cases. Seven of those cases resulted in legal charges being dropped, plus one acquittal. Six others entered diversion programs to avoid prosecution.

--Grandstand justice: In 15 cases, players were released or not re-signed by their teams soon after their arrest and then never played another NFL game. These players often had marginal talent, but teams could make a show of their release by appearing to have a zero-tolerance policy toward domestic violence

http://www.usatoday.com/story/sport...c-abuse-history-under-roger-goodell/16566615/

Hardy has a good chance to have his suspension reduced to 2,1 or 0 games.

 

[AsthmaField]

Uh, whuh huh?? According to that statement, nobody should ever be convicted of anything ever.
Not as ignorant as you thinking he "won an appeal." Charges were dropped. He didn't "win" anything.
Newsflash: Bench trial =/= Grand jury.

Bro, I'm not sure how you did it... but I didn't say any of that. How you quoted me, I'm not sure.

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Uh, whuh huh?? According to that statement, nobody should ever be convicted of anything ever.
Not as ignorant as you thinking he "won an appeal." Charges were dropped. He didn't "win" anything.
Newsflash: Bench trial =/= Grand jury.

No, but bench trials were created to speed dockets and grand jury proceedings for the benefit of saving cost. They are used in municipalities in lieu of GJ proceedings. In this case Hardy was never indicted by GJ.

Due process requires a jury trial for conviction or that the right be waived. Neither happened.

 

[AsthmaField]

What makes you think Hardy's attorney did not point that out when they presented their defense?

Well, the DA was at the bench trial and he was unaware of the conflicting testimony. I assume that if it was brought out in the bench trial, the DA would have been well aware of it.

And some would say not losing a single dime of income isn't punishment enough for a professional athlete who pummeled a woman.

And it is way too much of a punishment for a guy that is completely innocent of any wrongdoing and was just a victim of circumstance.

 

[Nightman]

No, but bench trials were created to speed dockets and grand jury proceedings for the benefit of saving cost. They are used in municipalities in lieu of GJ proceedings. In this case Hardy was never indicted by GJ.

Due process requires a jury trial for conviction or that the right be waived. Neither happened.

He knows this all too well

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

No, I say that because that is the standard the Judge applied when making her ruling.

Personally, I consider the opinion of a Judge more valid than 12 people selected (mostly) at random, then filtered through a pair of lawyers who get to challenge a few of them.

What makes you think Hardy's attorney did not point that out when they presented their defense?
And some would say not losing a single dime of income isn't punishment enough for a professional athlete who pummeled a woman.

Holder alleged being thrown twice, grabbed, choked and had a toilet lid slammed on her arm. She never alleges pummelled. Do you not know what the word means?

 

[Toruk_Makto]

Yes.

 

[coult44]

The photos. Folks keep bringing them up thinking they are so condemning without actually having seen them. So they use their imaginations and conjure up horrible images and then it's easy to think Hardy is a cruel man... except it's not based on anything factual. It's a he said she said... and I believe he is innocent until proven guilty. Who's says he laid a hand on her? He is what he is... an innocent man. What ever you think he did only exist in your imagination that you conjured up in those photos that have never seen the light of day in public. And even when they do, what will they prove... the he said or the she said? Neither. She got blooded and bruised but there is no provable accounting to who's hands caused those injuries. Crazy(or drugged)(or desperate) people do desperate/crazy things so it is in the realm of possibility she injured herself. That is his story. I believe him.

Can't argue with folks like you.....Comical, and type of person that give folks more of a reason to hate on us....

 

[jwitten82]

So , with the photos that the court and the NFL seen, do you think she just fell down the stairs? Regardless of any reason, even if she hit him with a bat, he should have never paid a hand on her. For that, he is what he is. Can he move forward? Yes. Does he deserve another chance? Yes. But for what he did, he's guilty.

Wow, you really think a man shouldnt hit a woman even if she comes at him with a bat?

 

[Hoofbite]

If he's not guilty of beating this woman, he MUST appeal.
In this climate, you simply can't risk not appealing.
If you accept a two-game suspension, people will assume you are admitting some capability in the case.
If she was indeed crazy and set you up, then you have to appeal it.

Is there actually anyone left who:

A) Hasn't arrived at a conclusion as to whether or not he beat her

B) Plan on doing so but only after his disciplinary situation is worked out with the NFL.

Can't imagine there's many.

 

[coult44]

Wow, you really think a man shouldnt hit a woman even if she comes at him with a bat?

Yes i do. If a grown man can't get out of that situation, then he probably deserves to be hit with a bat. Probably deserves it anyways. But there's no reason at all an elite athlete, especially one of his size, should ever hit a woman.

Ok. Perhaps if a woman was beating a kid to death, or gonna kill someone, and you had to lay the smack down, then I'd do it....but that's in an extreme condition...

 

[jobberone]

Luca Brasi sleeps with the Fishes............

This is before he went to bed.