The NFL has another option to get what they want

[FuzzyLumpkins]

The closed the case because they felt they had enough with the other case. After the ruling today though, they could present a pattern for future court rulings while also giving them a reason to again suspend him. If nothing else, it would make Elliott look even guiltier in the eyes of the media.

And the NFLPA can come back with them in writing stating that it did not warrant action.

Sure they can make up more nonsense and it wouldn't be the first time but they would lose once again in court.

 

[Reality]

To be clear, I am not saying this would be a smart move by the NFL. It would be purely a spiteful move by them. Even if they lost or even if the second suspension got rolled up into the first one, it would re-introduce the incident to everyone because the media would rehash the story, video, etc. all over again.

 

[Ranching]

That's not actually true. A lot of abused women are afraid to come forward so the law protects them regardless. The video is all of the evidence they need. They do not need the victim to testify or file charges.

You mean the video of her flashing the crowd and laughing as her boobs are flopping around? Oh, yeah.

 

[Reality]

Last I checked that's not a national thing, it's state by state. Texas has it, but I'm not sure Louisiana does.

You are thinking in terms of "laws" .. but remember, the NFL punishes players based on their own definition of "conduct detrimental to the league." It doesn't matter whether a law was broken when it comes to their rules. Otherwise there would have been suspension battle already taking place between the NFL and Elliott.

 

[Pabst]

The "Shirt pulled down" incident was covered in the initial suspension. In the report, they mentioned that they did not find it worthy of additional suspension, although it showed incredibly poor judgement on Zeke's behalf.

None of which I disagree with. Zeke still needs to grow up. But I'm pretty sure the NFL can't retroactively go back and punish him over it, since it was already covered in the prior report.

 

[Ranching]

To be clear, I am not saying this would be a smart move by the NFL. It would be purely a spiteful move by them. Even if they lost or even if the second suspension got rolled up into the first one, it would re-introduce the incident to everyone because the media would rehash the story, video, etc. all over again.

Lol, I brought up a hypothetical last night about Bradyngetting hurt and got crucified. Tough crowd!

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

That's not actually true. A lot of abused women are afraid to come forward so the law protects them regardless. The video is all of the evidence they need. They do not need the victim to testify or file charges.

Taking off a girl's shirt is not a crime unless she does not give consent. That is not analogous to beating someone up which in and of itself is a crime.

You are trying too hard here.

 

[diefree666]

You are thinking in terms of "laws" .. but remember, the NFL punishes players based on their own definition of "conduct detrimental to the league." It doesn't matter whether a law was broken when it comes to their rules. Otherwise there would have been suspension battle already taking place between the NFL and Elliott.

This is pretty sad. Very disappointed in you reality.

 

[Reality]

You mean the video of her flashing the crowd and laughing as her boobs are flopping around? Oh, yeah.

No, I mean the video of Elliott pulling down her shirt and exposing her breasts.

Just because you hit yourself in the head does not mean its okay for other people to do it.

Again, I'm not saying the NFL should do this. I'm saying that everyone needs to realize that the NFL has options that go beyond this one suspension. The NFLPA and Elliott won a battle today, but they are still in a war and the NFL has the ability to attack them on another front should they choose to do so.

It wouldn't be smart and it definitely would make them look bad in the eyes of the courts, but they could vacate the current suspension thereby negating the court order and entire process ahead, while at the same time suspending him for another incident where the courts will be less likely to issue an injunction.

 

[Cowboys22]

Actually, that is sexual assault .. it could conceivably fall under "domestic violence" as well because he was in a relationship of some kind with the woman.

It's not anything if it's consensual behavior and the girl already said she was okay with it. They were dating or hooking up at the time and she was flashing the crowd all day. That's not sexual assault. It's was stupid to get caught on tape doing it but that's about it.

 

[plasticman]

Everybody on the planet would see that as perty, a personal vendetta by the commissioner against a very popular player.

The end ia near for Goodell. The fallout from this will be massive. He deliberately fixed an investigation so the NFL could look good for special interest groups that could never understand the concepts of fairness, they only sought to exert political power.

Goodell hurt football. He hurt the NFL, made them look like fools. If he now attemots to retaliate the owners will pull the plug on him so fast he won't have time for a deep breath before spinning down the drain.

 

[diefree666]

No, I mean the video of Elliott pulling down her shirt and exposing her breasts.

Just because you hit yourself in the head does not mean its okay for other people to do it.

Again, I'm not saying the NFL should do this. I'm saying that everyone needs to realize that the NFL has options that go beyond this one suspension. The NFLPA and Elliott won a battle today, but they are still in a war and the NFL has the ability to attack them on another front should they choose to do so.

It wouldn't be smart and it definitely would make them look bad in the eyes of the courts, but they could vacate the current suspension thereby negating the court order and entire process ahead, while at the same time suspending him for another incident where the courts will be less likely to issue an injunction.

really sad.

 

[texbumthelife]

You are thinking in terms of "laws" .. but remember, the NFL punishes players based on their own definition of "conduct detrimental to the league." It doesn't matter whether a law was broken when it comes to their rules. Otherwise there would have been suspension battle already taking place between the NFL and Elliott.

That may be the case, but I was replying to your comment of

"That's not actually true. A lot of abused women are afraid to come forward so the law protects them regardless. The video is all of the evidence they need. They do not need the victim to testify or file charges."

You brought the law up. That's what I was addressing.

 

[Ranching]

No, I mean the video of Elliott pulling down her shirt and exposing her breasts.

Just because you hit yourself in the head does not mean its okay for other people to do it.

Again, I'm not saying the NFL should do this. I'm saying that everyone needs to realize that the NFL has options that go beyond this one suspension. The NFLPA and Elliott won a battle today, but they are still in a war and the NFL has the ability to attack them on another front should they choose to do so.

It wouldn't be smart and it definitely would make them look bad in the eyes of the courts, but they could vacate the current suspension thereby negating the court order and entire process ahead, while at the same time suspending him for another incident where the courts will be less likely to issue an injunction.

Ok, ok, I give!

 

[Reality]

Taking off a girl's shirt is not a crime unless she does not give consent. That is not analogous to beating someone up which in and of itself is a crime.

You are trying too hard here.

Taking off a girl's shirt is not a crime unless she does not give consent. That is not analogous to beating someone up which in and of itself is a crime.

You are trying too hard here.

Again, you are thinking "CRIME" .. the NFL does not issue player punishment based on crimes. They issue player punishment based on "conduct detrimental to the league."

Marijuana is legal is several states, yet players who get cause using it are suspended. A lot of supplements the NFL has banned are not only legal but available over the counter to everyone of all ages.

 

[CCBoy]

What was the objectionable part? She didn't have a respectable rack? In Germany, many wouldn't have even paid attention.

 

[CCBoy]

Ok, ok, I give!

Easy fella'...that's not what she was saying.

 

[Reality]

That may be the case, but I was replying to your comment of

"That's not actually true. A lot of abused women are afraid to come forward so the law protects them regardless. The video is all of the evidence they need. They do not need the victim to testify or file charges."

You brought the law up. That's what I was addressing.

Right, but because there are some laws out there that support that, the NFL has a justification to consider that "conduct detrimental to the league." The NFL is not bound by which state it happened in.

Marijuana is legal in Colorado for example, but if a Denver Bronco player's drug test shows he used/smoked marijuana, the NFL can suspend him.

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Again, you are thinking "CRIME" .. the NFL does not issue player punishment based on crimes. They issue player punishment based on "conduct detrimental to the league."

Marijuana is legal is several states, yet players who get cause using it are suspended. A lot of supplements the NFL has banned are not only legal but available over the counter to everyone of all ages.

The terms assault has meaning. It is not assault unless she doesn't consent.

Taking your approach they could just suspend him on whim. Sure but that does not mean that what he did on that rooftop can be considered assault unless she did not consent.

 

[Screw The Hall]

That's not actually true. A lot of abused women are afraid to come forward so the law protects them regardless. The video is all of the evidence they need. They do not need the victim to testify or file charges.

But not if the "victim" did the opposite of that and was a witness for the defense instead.