Wallach: The NFL filed an appeal with 5th circuit appeals before the other judge ruled

[xwalker]

I don't know... at first glance I would hate to be an attorney at law.
So much detail-work... all the arguing, but then I have always been an information junkie...
I don't really like to argue, but I like to think of debates and hit both sides in my brain upon multiple subjects...

Nope. No can do. I don't have that... gumption to do what you attorneys do. You guys have my respect.

Also I have dispensed with detail work, in my life. That's what my wife does now, lol.

What I dislike is that legal proceedings are not strictly about the law. It's about what you can convince a Judge or Jury to do.

A Juror can do whatever they want. Lawyers will tell them they must follow the law but in reality they can do what they want to do regardless.

The legal system reminds me of the refs in football. It does not matter if a player breaks a rule. It only matters if the refs say he broke the rule.

 

[CCBoy]

What I dislike is that legal proceedings are not strictly about the law. It's about what you can convince a Judge or Jury to do.

A Juror can do whatever they want. Lawyers will tell them they must follow the law but in reality they can do what they want to do regardless.

The legal system reminds me of the refs in football. It does not matter if a player breaks a rule. It only matters if the refs say he broke the rule.

If at real games, fans would flagrantly boo bad calls, even the NFL would get the message, as the media would pick right up on negative aspects.

 

[Hoofbite]

Watching porn is not a crime but many companies have a conduct policy preventing it in the workplace. Do you think companies investigate this breach of conduct based on circumstantial evidence or hard evidence? In most cases, a report (e.g. hard evidence) is produced. If you are going to ruin someone's career you better have some compelling proof.

Thankfully nobody is in jeopardy of having their career ruined.

 

[diefree666]

Thankfully nobody is in jeopardy of having their career ruined.

You mean Zeke is not under threat? You do realize in that suspension they told him that another incident could mean a lifetime ban. I WOULD SAY that is a career ruining situation.

 

[MeTed]

Thankfully nobody is in jeopardy of having their career ruined.

Therefore ... it's okay to railroad someone?

 

[Hoofbite]

You mean Zeke is not under threat? You do realize in that suspension they told him that another incident could mean a lifetime ban. I WOULD SAY that is a career ruining situation.

Well the obvious answer would be to not have another incident. Seems to work for like 99.9% of the NFL.

 

[TheHerd]

Well the obvious answer would be to not have another incident. Seems to work for like 99.9% of the NFL.

Are you even paying attention at all?

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

A few pages back there's a post that quotes the CBA and it says both the NFLPA and the NFL have the right to be present at all hearings and to present any relevant evidence. That wording says to me that both sides get to choose what they consider relevant and present it. Denying Elliot's team the chance the present things they think are relevant seems to me to violate the CBA. If they think questioning Goodell is relevant, it seems to me the CBA says they have that right yet Henderson denied them numerous things they obviously considered relevant. Has anyone else considered this? What am I missing?

That is spot on. Just keep in mind that is not the only argument that the NFLPA is likely to be making. Instead that is the clear and present argument that Wallach used to grant the injunctions.

The NFL is going to lose on merit.

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Well the obvious answer would be to not have another incident. Seems to work for like 99.9% of the NFL.

You're moving the goalposts. He could easily be railroaded again by this process.

Anywho Zeke's career is at risk.

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

100% false.

That is like saying AAA baseball is better than MLB. The talent levels of players and coaches are commensurate.

 

[ghst187]

Good Point, but I think they are more worried about their image. That's all this is about, the NFL's image.

I think it WAS about their image but now it's nothing more than vindication and spite. There are no women's groups protesting Zeke and demanding his suspension. In fact, if anything I think the general consensus is that the accuser is full of it. But yet, Goodell keeps fighting tooth and nail for the suspension even though I don't think even he believes Zeke is truly guilty, it's just about Goodell ruling with an unchallenged iron fist and being god. Justice is far no longer a part of this case and that's why it's so messed up and no chanc Zeke gets a fair trial. Goodell doesn't even want a real trial because the truth will expose his joke of a process.

 

[Hoofbite]

Therefore ... it's okay to railroad someone?

Nobody said that. The post I was responding to was just absurd. Who the hell knows what a workplace would consider if they suspected a person was looking at porn. Whatever they chose to look at would be entirely up to their discretion, just as is the case for NFL. If it was another employee reporting it, maybe that's enough. Maybe browser history is enough. Who the hell knows. Whatever they would look at would be entirely up to them.

This whole back and forth is based on the idea that NFL somehow needs to meet a prerequisite level of proof that is apparently set by posters of this message board. News flash, thats up to the NFL to decide just as it's up to hypothetical company that employs the porn fiend. The Zeke situation is not currently about the presence, or lack of, compelling evidence. It's about the process by which his punishment was handed down. All the discussion of compelling evidence and the burden of proof is not relevant at this point in time. It may become relevant at a later date but it is not relevant at this time.

And let's just take a moment to ponder over the idea that random people on a message board, who are not even remotely close to being fully informed of all the details that were gathered during the investigation, somehow feel that it is their position to dictate what level of proof is necessary for the NFL (or any other employer) to reprimand a player.

 

[Hoofbite]

100% false.

Yeah but college players try really hard......and stuff.

 

[Hoofbite]

You're moving the goalposts. He could easily be railroaded again by this process.

Anywho Zeke's career is at risk.

If Zeke's career is at risk, the careers of all players are at risk. They could all be railroaded.

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Nobody said that. The post I was responding to was just absurd. Who the hell knows what a workplace would consider if they suspected a person was looking at porn. Whatever they chose to look at would be entirely up to their discretion, just as is the case for NFL. If it was another employee reporting it, maybe that's enough. Maybe browser history is enough. Who the hell knows. Whatever they would look at would be entirely up to them.

This whole back and forth is based on the idea that NFL somehow needs to meet a prerequisite level of proof that is apparently set by posters of this message board. News flash, thats up to the NFL to decide just as it's up to hypothetical company that employs the porn fiend. The Zeke situation is not currently about the presence, or lack of, compelling evidence. It's about the process by which his punishment was handed down. All the discussion of compelling evidence and the burden of proof is not relevant at this point in time. It may become relevant at a later date but it is not relevant at this time.

And let's just take a moment to ponder over the idea that random people on a message board, who are not even remotely close to being fully informed of all the details that were gathered during the investigation, somehow feel that it is their position to dictate what level of proof is necessary for the NFL (or any other employer) to reprimand a player.

Given that the language in PCP specifically mentions "credible evidence" whether or not evidence was credible is very much so at stake.

And lets take a moment that you on a message board who are not remotely close to being fully informed of all the details that were gathered during the investigation, somehow feel that it is your position to dictate what is not the level of proof necessary.

If you are going to go on a sanctimonious rampage like that you should be certain it does not apply to you too. And frankly given that the NFLPAs case is that the NFL is hiding exculpatory evidence with specific examples your rant here comes across as obtuse as well.

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

If Zeke's career is at risk, the careers of all players are at risk. They could all be railroaded.

Very good. That is a far cry from your claim that no one's career is at risk.

 

[TheHerd]

Yeah but college players try really hard......and stuff.

Stadiums are bigger and louder. Cheerleaders are cuter and more real. That's all I got.

 

[CCBoy]

Nobody said that. The post I was responding to was just absurd. Who the hell knows what a workplace would consider if they suspected a person was looking at porn. Whatever they chose to look at would be entirely up to their discretion, just as is the case for NFL. If it was another employee reporting it, maybe that's enough. Maybe browser history is enough. Who the hell knows. Whatever they would look at would be entirely up to them.

This whole back and forth is based on the idea that NFL somehow needs to meet a prerequisite level of proof that is apparently set by posters of this message board. News flash, thats up to the NFL to decide just as it's up to hypothetical company that employs the porn fiend. The Zeke situation is not currently about the presence, or lack of, compelling evidence. It's about the process by which his punishment was handed down. All the discussion of compelling evidence and the burden of proof is not relevant at this point in time. It may become relevant at a later date but it is not relevant at this time.

And let's just take a moment to ponder over the idea that random people on a message board, who are not even remotely close to being fully informed of all the details that were gathered during the investigation, somehow feel that it is their position to dictate what level of proof is necessary for the NFL (or any other employer) to reprimand a player.

We fired a Union Official that was caught watching at work...

 

[TheHerd]

Yeah but college players try really hard......and stuff.

Stadiums are bigger. Cheerleaders are cuter and more real. That's all I got.

 

[Verdict]

How laws are interpreted and thus how they impact people is 100% the legal system- which has become its own culture and has its own language. Legal precedent is just as powerful as any piece of legislation.

Statutory law over rides judicial interpretation, unless a constitutional principle has been violated by that law. But I agree that judicial interpretation is a huge factor as well. Politics also play a huge part in judicial interpretation.