Transcripts from the NFL hearing released - Bombshells

[Sydla]

Very interesting read. The 911 call stuff where she testifies that she said she wouldn't say anything and wanted to go home but the actual call shows she did not is crazy.

 

[Kaiser]

Funny how people get all pro-defendant rights when its a football player for there favorite team.

BKnight, XWalker, me and a bunch of others did our homework on his and had the same opinion back in January before Hardy ever hit Free Agency, much less joined the Cowboys. The posts are still there, feel free to look them up.

 

[honyock]

I'd say "bombshells" is a pretty fair characterization of that transcript. At the very least, there are gigantic holes and inconsistencies in her story.

At most, and I'm a little surprised that I'm saying this, since I've been pretty ambivalent about Hardy being on the team, I can see the possibility (likelihood) that he is just flat innocent. Maybe guilty of bad judgement, but not the violence allegations.

That transcript, if it's accurate, is really, really damning to the Hardy/domestic violence narrative that has been basically taken as fact. And damning to the DA's office that did the investigation and to the NFL as well. Which of course means that it will probably be totally ignored by the media.

 

[Kaiser]

Question: Does the transcript indicate whether Judge Tin solely evaluated the photographic evidence of the injuries of both parties? Or did the state present expert medical testimony to the severity and probability of attainment concerning the injures incurred?

We don't have a transcript of that hearing but the Charlotte paper posted a Twitter recap from the reporters that attended (if you want to slog through it) -

http://www.charlotteobserver.com/sports/nfl/carolina-panthers/article9140615.html#.U8VF4agoyTw

I don't believe there was anything beyond the photos and the testimony of Hardy, Holder, Hardy's Manager, the officer who took the report, etc. My impression from reading that recap was that the Judge was going to rule for Holder no matter what. She had a long history of ruling for defendants, she had an election coming up where being hard on DV was her big campaign promise and she knew her ruling would be vacated the following day when Hardy asked for a Jury Trial.

In the NFL Hearing Transcript Hardy's attorney said they only did the Bench Trial to see what evidence the State did or did not have. That might be good legal strategy but it was a disaster from a PR perspective.

 

[links18]

BKnight, XWalker, me and a bunch of others did our homework on his and had the same opinion back in January before Hardy ever hit Free Agency, much less joined the Cowboys. The posts are still there, feel free to look them up.

I don't doubt you, but I bet there are many ordinary guys rotting in jail on less.

 

[Kaiser]

I can see the possibility that he is just flat innocent.

Totally agree on the media aspect. I've been saying Hardy was completely innocent for a while, there is literally no credible evidence that he did it. I also thought Hardy had shown bad judgement in giving the girl the money to buy Coke, but in this transcript it says a friend gave it to her rather than it being a steady thing Hardy was paying for. So I'm likely wrong on that.

 

[Kaiser]

I don't doubt you, but I bet there are many ordinary guys rotting in jail on less.

No doubt, if Hardy was a UPS Driver this never would have gone to trial but if it had, there is a chance he loses and does jail time.

BTW, another bombshell in that transcript is that the girl had "previous psychiatric problems", something that hadn't come out before.

 

[65fastback2plus2]

how anyone blames him for this mess with that 911 call transcript is beyond me

 

[khiladi]

I just read the whole thing, thanks again for posting it. A couple of thoughts, there are bombshells like you said. As if it wasn't obvious before, this is further proof the story played out like we thought. This the first time you have a transcript of Holder on the 911 call saying "I don't want to go to jail".

Also its the usual lawyer histrionics to say the DA committed malpractice by withholding exculpatory evidence but its basically true. The DA should have spent more time on this case in the very beginning and dropped it then instead of letting go to the Bench Trial, but that takes effort and a small supply of guts. Hence, it didn't happen.

One thing I changed my mind on, what I read before was that Hardy's attorneys denied there was a settlement. Reading this I think Hardy's attorneys were too clever by half of deflecting the question without answering it, leaving everyone in the room thinking he had. Now I'm thinking he probably did giver a settlement, but Hardy's attorneys would have served him much better by saying "Yes, we gave her 100K to go away because it cheaper than going through a Civil Trial and no one wants to drag Hardy and the NFL through the mud in a case like that". They should have just said that instead of spending so much time deflecting the question.

Most legal analysts said, when the case was thrown out, the agreement wasn't a settlement. This article comes from February this year:

http://www.wcnc.com/story/news/loca...ial-that-ended-before-even-starting/23137621/

If there was a settlement, I'm not sure anything would have been filed. It would just be an agreement between the parties," he said.

 

[khiladi]

The more I read this nonsense, the more I like and sympathize with Hardy.
I think he's totally innocent and the fact he has to apologize again, makes me feel sport for him.

And the more I am disgusted by all these self-righteous mediots and their hypocrisy, only trying to make a name for themselves and really don't care about what the truth is. They are worse than him as far as I am concerned.

 

[EPL0c0]

And even then, they had to chase her to catch her and it was 30 minutes before she would talk to them.

Someone should send this to the DFW reporters like Evan Grant, who constantly makes Twitter references supporting the ESPN dramatics on this. Its amazing that none of the Cowboys beat reporters have read more than a few paragraphs about the case.

I'm sure they have, but with all the stuff hurled at Hardy, admitting that they may have been wrong is not what they're likely to do.

Tangent: argued with a person about how Lawrence Taylor is welcome at Giants games and HOF events despite being a registered sex offender.

The excuse is that LT thought she was older. Regardless of age, she still claimed he raped her. So having a history of drug use and other issues, on this, they take LT's word. Oh she was a hooker so she'd lie.

But what I hear is that giving Hardy the benefit of the doubt, believing his side, well no, he's 100% wrong and can't be trusted.

 

[Philmonroe]

I don't doubt you, but I bet there are many ordinary guys rotting in jail on less.

And your point is? Of course people will want to know more about Hardy than some random working a 9to5. That's how it works even for you so I don't see the purpose of your comments when even you probably know more about players on the team than you know about most people on here that you've at least interacted with by text with. Truth is we care about what we care about and that's mainly things that are close to us in some way whether they be family, friends, sports, causes, etc. There is no shame in that IMO its just life

 

[Plumfool]

We don't have a transcript of that hearing but the Charlotte paper posted a Twitter recap from the reporters that attended (if you want to slog through it) -

http://www.charlotteobserver.com/sports/nfl/carolina-panthers/article9140615.html#.U8VF4agoyTw

I don't believe there was anything beyond the photos and the testimony of Hardy, Holder, Hardy's Manager, the officer who took the report, etc. My impression from reading that recap was that the Judge was going to rule for Holder no matter what. She had a long history of ruling for defendants, she had an election coming up where being hard on DV was her big campaign promise and she knew her ruling would be vacated the following day when Hardy asked for a Jury Trial.

In the NFL Hearing Transcript Hardy's attorney said they only did the Bench Trial to see what evidence the State did or did not have. That might be good legal strategy but it was a disaster from a PR perspective.

I got a similar impression. Having a clearer understanding of the NC judicial system and having dealt with judges and DAs offices as a LEO and reading Jason Whitlocks piece the other day really leads me to believe that the judge would have dismissed this case if it was s regular case

We often forget that politics can overrule justice. It would have been political suicide fot the judge just dismiss this case. So she might have trusted that Hardys lawyers would appeal. Thus allowing her to not look bad in the eyes of her voters.

 

[Nightman]

What happened in North Carolina was unfortunate but I hope no one believes the judicial system is only flawed there. There are zero states with perfect court systems. Some prosecutors and judges are thorough and follow both the letter and the spirit of the law but all do not. Justice is sometimes victimized for the sake of convictions.

Domestic abuse, like all allegations and crimes, should be investigated thoroughly. Time constraints, etc. are poor and unjust excuses for levying punishment. The photographs should have sparked more intense scrutiny of what actually happened in this particular case. All of the documented bruising, with the exception of the chin and foot, were borderline 1st degree in severity. Even I, a novice, have seen enough bruise-related trauma on patients' bodies from accidental and intentional violent encounters over the years to be somewhat suspicious of that particular evidence.

Question: Does the transcript indicate whether Judge Tin solely evaluated the photographic evidence of the injuries of both parties? Or did the state present expert medical testimony to the severity and probability of attainment concerning the injures incurred?

Hardy's team asked the Mecklenburg County ME to look over the evidence before they called in a paid expert and here is some of his report.

 

[Nightman]

Most legal analysts said, when the case was thrown out, the agreement wasn't a settlement. This article comes from February this year:

http://www.wcnc.com/story/news/loca...ial-that-ended-before-even-starting/23137621/

Any talk of a settlement or agreement is a red herring. It has no bearing on the case. All the evidence and testimony shows nothing but inconsistencies, changed stories and hidden exculpatory evidence. People against Hardy want to use a settlement as proof of his guilt. Even the NFL lawyers were more interested in talking about a possible settlement instead of the fact the DA hid a audio tape from Holder that proved Sammy Curtis caused most of the bruising while restraining her.

 

[Plumfool]

Any talk of a settlement or agreement is a red herring. It has no bearing on the case. All the evidence and testimony shows nothing but inconsistencies, changed stories and hidden exculpatory evidence. People against Hardy want to use a settlement as proof of his guilt. Even the NFL lawyers were more interested in talking about a possible settlement instead of the fact the DA hid a audio tape from Holder that proved Sammy Curtis caused most of the bruising while restraining her.

The reason? Hardy was going to suffer the sins of past DV cases. Come hell or high water.

 

[Nightman]

The reason? Hardy was going to suffer the sins of past DV cases. Come hell or high water.

I think that is basically IT in a nutshell.

The funny thing is that it may have served as a deterrent. It may be anecdotal but it seems that there have been a lot less arrests and hardly any DV cases in the last year. Of course the most recent is Joe Randle but that hasn't received any attention. I guess everyone just expected Ray McDonald to have another incident and let him be once released.

 

[links18]

And your point is? Of course people will want to know more about Hardy than some random working a 9to5. That's how it works even for you so I don't see the purpose of your comments when even you probably know more about players on the team than you know about most people on here that you've at least interacted with by text with. Truth is we care about what we care about and that's mainly things that are close to us in some way whether they be family, friends, sports, causes, etc. There is no shame in that IMO its just life

Um, no. The shame is in having one standard for "defendant's rights" for famous people or athletes and another much more restrictive one for ordinary Joes. Innocent until proven guilty? For most defendants its usually the opposite.

 

[Kaiser]

I got a similar impression. Having a clearer understanding of the NC judicial system and having dealt with judges and DAs offices as a LEO and reading Jason Whitlocks piece the other day really leads me to believe that the judge would have dismissed this case if it was s regular case

We often forget that politics can overrule justice. It would have been political suicide fot the judge just dismiss this case. So she might have trusted that Hardys lawyers would appeal. Thus allowing her to not look bad in the eyes of her voters.

I think you are exactly right. Also I'd love to hear your thoughts as Law Enforcement, aren't domestic violence calls usually the most potential for an officer to get hurt? Have you had a case where a completely innocent victim saw the officers and began running?

 

[Plumfool]

I've been apart of three standoff situations, all were the result of DV calls. I've seen where a rush to judgment by a beat officer resulted in Death. DV calls are very scary because of the possible volatility of the situation.

I've never experienced a case where an innocent person just started running or walking away from police Especially when they are the alleged victim. Normally in DV cases when I've had to make an arrest it's the partner of the accused who becomes angry with me for making the arrest.

In my experience people walk away or run away from police because they are either have something they are fearful of being arrested for, or especially lately, they simply are scared of or are distrustful of police.

I've always sensed that this was just a fight between Nicole and Hardy. However the more evidence comes out and the more testimony I've been able to review I'm not convinced that it was. It sounds more to me like Hardy was in defense mode. Fortunately it didnt go as far as Steve McNabb's situation.