The NFL has another option to get what they want

[TwoDeep3]

So if a woman says, "I told him to hit me in the face several times", the NFL is just going to let that go?

Ray Rice's fiance (back then) supported Ray Rice completely and it had no impact on their eventual ruling even though she argued for leniency.

Apples and oranges. For all we know he could have said he was going to do it and she said I dare you. And testifies it was with her permission.

 

[Swanny]

You know what, as bat**** crazy and ridiculous as this idea is, I hope it happens, because the NFL would be done. There would be no defense for that. That's collusion and conspiracy and all sorts of huge offenses. The Supeme Court would have a field day.

I truly would love to see this happen. Woukd be fun to watch the circus

 

[dogberry]

The NFL's Ministry of Truth never sleeps.

And neither will you, Despair and Submit.

 

[jobberone]

The NFL has the potential to still get what they want even if they vacate the suspension and write it off as "mistakes were made".

How? Simple ..

They can re-open the investigation into the shirt-pulled-down incident by Elliott. There's no rule that would prevent that as far as I know. They could treat him pulling the shirt down as "sexual assault" and "domestic violence" and say that despite no criminal charges being filed and lack of victim support, the video provides all of the evidence they need to suspend him.

Not only would that give them an opportunity to suspend him where he would less likely be able to win in court, it would also deflect some of the fallout from the judge's harsh words as part of the injunction and present the perception of a pattern of violence against women by Elliott, that most of the media would love to focus on.

The NFL just has to decide if they want to move on from this or let it linger all season while it is discussed over and over, especially every Cowboys game. It comes down to how bad their desire to "win" now is versus what's best for the NFL long term.

Hush up and sit down boy!

 

[Ghost12]

Apples and oranges. For all we know he could have said he was going to do it and she said I dare you. And testifies it was with her permission.

I know (hope?) you're not being serious, but an individually cannot legally consent to being assaulted. So even if a woman gives someone permission to hit her, that guy could still be convicted if he did so.

 

[Joe Realist]

Instead, look for a litany of questionable flags and penalties, starting Sunday night

 

[Diehardblues]

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.

Correct. Which is the most important aspect to the fairness being contested.

"Conduct detrimental to the league " carries a definition the NFL has a wide latitude to interpret and enforce .The NFL certainly believes they're within their rights to enforce the policy without proving beyond a reasonable doubt as a court of law .

They're determined to come down on DV and even if Elliott is proved innocent they'll still be looked on in a favorable light by the critics their agenda on this issue is attempting to satisfy.

It's worth making a mistake on one player to protect the shield. They've made mistakes in the other direction and seem determined not to repeat those same mistakes.

I still believe this grant or stay will only prolong the inevitable suspension . The NFLPA will continue taking every legal action at their disposal to defend their players which they should because you never know how a judge could rule but the process which was agreed on in the collective bargaining agreement will hold up in court much like it did with Brady.

IMO Elliott best chance to have the suspension dismissed is to prove his innocence. Arguing there's a conspiracy or the process wasn't fair will most likely not be enough convincing argument with his guilt still in question.

The NFL felt compelled it had to make this decision unless the plaintiff reversed her accusations ,accused another suspect or the authorities prosecuted another suspect. The fact the DA didn't prosecute case didn't prove his innocence. Many of these DV aren't prosecuted for various reasons.

I salute Elliott for fighting the fight much like I did Brady. It's not over until it's over. But I don't blame the NFL or the commissioners office on this cloud over the Cowboys or the NFL. Elliott and his GF created this situation much like Brady did with the deflated balls.The players poor choices and conduct are creating this cloud over the NFL causing the league the need to react.

The NFL has reacted as we knew they would with the agenda and power this policy provides. They are being pressured by the networks and sponsors who aren't comfortable being associated endorsing their programs and products when this type of conduct is being exploited by the media and can't rely on our justice system to punish behavior they see as detrimental to the shield which I applaud and hence I've taken heat on from fellow Cowboy fans understandably so.

Its unfortunate this has occurred with one of our guys so many have become emotionally attached and one of the young stars in the league but I think it's also important to send a strong message this type of behavior regardless if it's proven or not will not be tolerated.

It's a thankless and extremely tough job taking on this issue when your punishing players who not only are very popular with their fans but vital to the teams success which inflames emotions.
Thanks

 

[links18]

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.

Some form of indecent exposure at the worst.

 

[Silver Surfer]

Another option the NFL could use is to scapegoat Henderson and fire him. They could claim he screwed things up in the hearing and that would give them cover to drop the case or regroup and try a different approach. It deflects the criticism away from them onto someone else who they can claim acted incompetently.

If you look at the ruling, the judge mentions that Henderson did not follow the NFL's wish to preclude Kia Robertson from testifying. He allowed it and she subsequently testified that her findings and conclusions were antithetical to the NFL's position. Her testimony supported Elliot's claim of a conspiracy to deny him a fair hearing.

Secondly, Henderson denied Elliott's request to cross-examine the plaintiff and denied his request to view notes and other documents. The judge used this denial as a additional basis to assert that the NFL had acted unfairly. Those are two major gaffe's they could attribute to him and claim he was the problem.

 

[CanadianCowboysFan]

The NFL has the potential to still get what they want even if they vacate the suspension and write it off as "mistakes were made".

How? Simple ..

They can re-open the investigation into the shirt-pulled-down incident by Elliott. There's no rule that would prevent that as far as I know. They could treat him pulling the shirt down as "sexual assault" and "domestic violence" and say that despite no criminal charges being filed and lack of victim support, the video provides all of the evidence they need to suspend him.

Not only would that give them an opportunity to suspend him where he would less likely be able to win in court, it would also deflect some of the fallout from the judge's harsh words as part of the injunction and present the perception of a pattern of violence against women by Elliott, that most of the media would love to focus on.

The NFL just has to decide if they want to move on from this or let it linger all season while it is discussed over and over, especially every Cowboys game. It comes down to how bad their desire to "win" now is versus what's best for the NFL long term.

Then it would look like a witchhunt

 

[TwoDeep3]

I know (hope?) you're not being serious, but an individually cannot legally consent to being assaulted. So even if a woman gives someone permission to hit her, that guy could still be convicted if he did so.

And since this is not hitting her, but a playful event that she could agree she egged on, then nothing would come of this. Subjective analysis married with paranoia derives a waste of time.

We can what if all night long. And since the original premise of the OP was the league could treat him in a specific way to attain their goal, evidently if no charges were filed, and a judge in good standing essentially called out the league for manufacturing a situation where the importance of the relationship did not include all aspects which could deny the league's position, then would this not mire them further in a public relations fiasco. Which makes this word play on what is and what will never be pointless.

 

[CanadianCowboysFan]

So if someone tells a player, "You can shoot me" and the player shoots the person, the NFL can't do anything about it? It was consensual.

As I said, "conduct detrimental to the league" is completely subjective and definable by the NFL .. not you .. not me .. and apparently not even common sense after the current case.

Holy bad analogies Batman

 

[Cowboysfan1975]

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.

I've seen the video 1000x for research mind you, but she was obviously pointing to Zeke and motioning for him to pull down her top. That's not assult of any kind. I'll watch it a few more times just to be sure though

 

[tyke1doe]

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.

If the woman consented, it can't be sexual assault.

 

[TrailBlazer]

They 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.

Most of the media is backing Zeke

 

[JoeKing]

I don't think that would fly. Remember, the exposing of the breast was addressed in the letter notifying EE that he was being suspended 6 games. Having admitted knowledge of that incident and having ample time to deliberate a finding, yet failing to include it in the punitive measures would suggest it was dismissed. To now cherry pick that incident would be seen under legal scrutiny as a second bite at the apple... better known as double jeopardy in legal circles.

 

[Ghost12]

And since this is not hitting her, but a playful event that she could agree she egged on, then nothing would come of this. Subjective analysis married with paranoia derives a waste of time.

Twoface, the individual to whom I replied, was replying to a post which said "So if a woman says, "I told him to hit me in the face several times", the NFL is just going to let that go?"

It is *that* level of violence which I am claiming a woman cannot consent to. The shirt pulling incident is a complete non-incident so long as the woman agrees it was a harmless gesture which, AFAIK, she does.

 

[Seven]

Will never happen. They already addressed the top pulling incident and said it didn't warrant and action. They can't now use it to suspend him. They put it to bed and tied their wagon to Tiffany Thompson.

They just imposed a 6 game suspension on a dude that isn't even in the league.......... Next they'll dig up Bozo the Clown and declare he and Mr. Green Jeans are detrimental to the league.


Barney is next.......

 

[Redball Express]

The NFL has the potential to still get what they want even if they vacate the suspension and write it off as "mistakes were made".

How? Simple ..

They can re-open the investigation into the shirt-pulled-down incident by Elliott. There's no rule that would prevent that as far as I know. They could treat him pulling the shirt down as "sexual assault" and "domestic violence" and say that despite no criminal charges being filed and lack of victim support, the video provides all of the evidence they need to suspend him.

Not only would that give them an opportunity to suspend him where he would less likely be able to win in court, it would also deflect some of the fallout from the judge's harsh words as part of the injunction and present the perception of a pattern of violence against women by Elliott, that most of the media would love to focus on.

The NFL just has to decide if they want to move on from this or let it linger all season while it is discussed over and over, especially every Cowboys game. It comes down to how bad their desire to "win" now is versus what's best for the NFL long term.

Maybe..

but bringing another suspension could be disastrous for the league.

at that point it would seem that Zeke's lawyers would have their charges of conspiracy validated.

The court of public opinion would go crazy.

The NFL is dumb but not stupid.

 

[sacase]

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.

Its actually nothing unless the woman in questions complains about it. Otherwise I would be sexually assaulting my wife multiple times a day. LOL People keep trying to pin that on Zeke, but if she was game then there is no foul. If she is good with it then we should be good with it as well instead of looking for the "moral high ground". Just my 2 cents.

For what it is worth, they would get sued again if they tried it. They have already ruled on it, there is no going back.