Why are some so desperately defending...

[zeromaster]

Taking responsibility for your own actions seems to be foreign to some folks nowadays, and they love to try to bend the law to fit their deceitful purposes. But ironically these folks want the Commish to take responsibility for his actions, and he's trying to do what's right. They make the perp into the victim and the punisher into the perp.

That's not an uncommon defense tactic in a courtroom. After all, it's about winning the case, first and foremost.

Cue the lawyers racing to sue me...

 

[bbgun]

Start getting up earlier and eating earlier you old lazy bag of bones.:laugh2:

Sorry, but it's too warm and cozy beneath my LL Bean down comforter. It's either that or find a gf.

 

[Royal Laegotti]

That's not an uncommon defense tactic in a courtroom. After all, it's about winning the case, first and foremost.

Cue the lawyers racing to sue me...

Yep, bottom line is $$$ with that.

 

[deadrody]

Pacman and Vick? I am curious. Some people here are willing to bend logic and common sense out the yang to find ways for these guys to be innocent and not thugs. When clearly they are both NOT innocent (at least of thuggery, anyway) and deserve not only disrepute but more then likely long suspensions. Their whole attitude and actions over a period of YEARS have convicted them. Yet some here badly want it otherwise. Why is that?

It's simple - we believe in the rule of law. And there are laws governing each of these cases. Goodell has to apply the NFL CBA disciplinary process within the bounds of the existing labor laws and the entirety of the Vick - dogfighting saga is all a bunch of hot air until there is a ruling in a court of law.

You seem to think it's ok to pass judgement and ignore the law because they are millionair thugs in your opinion. I don't really HAVE an opinion, per se. But your attitude is the same one that would be at home at a lynching.

Follow the law. That's all. If Vick was running dogfights, then by all means, charge him, prosecute him, convict him and send him to jail. If NOT, though, well that's a whole other story, isn't it.

I, and others, would just like to see the process used, and not see people go off half cocked because they think Vick "has always been trash".

Is that really so hard to understand. I'm sure you don't see the disctinction, but once you start ignoring the rule of law, then those situations will no longer apply to just rich NFL thugs, but just as easily you and I. And since we don't have the luxury of high priced lawyers, it would be that much easier for the system to run us under. You seem to be ok with setting that precedent because you dislike Vick and Jones.

Try to think beyond the end of your own nose.

 

[deadrody]

...we must also distinguish between crimes and punishment in the normal world vs punishment in the NFL.

The problem is, the LAW does not allow that. One is no different than the other. There is a collective bargaining agreement in place and both sides need to adhere to it. If Goodell is truly wrong in this case, not only will the NLRB reduce the suspension, but they will fine the NFL on top of it.

 

[sacase]

Here is my take on it.

Vick - All the evidence is circumstancial. If the authorities had enough information to make the charges stick they would have charged him by now. I am not saying he is innocent but so far, they can't connect him to it. Now things may change and he may be charged, hell he might even be guilty, but thankfully we are innocent until proven guilty. If he does get convicted I would not mind seeing a severe suspenion or even a life time ban. But there are to many people right now smelling themselves over the vick thing. Here is something that strikes me as odd. They did all the interviews with people who say he was there and bet on thing, but why black them out and not identify them? I used to do Personal Security Interviews in my spare time and when we would interview people about an applicants suitability we would ask if they had any derogatory information on them. If the person said yes then we would ask them to make a sworn statement. If they refused chances are they were lying.

With Pac Man, I think he is an idiot, but I don't think he deserves to get a year. The rules did not change until he was suspended, they were annouced the same day. First, I don't think it is right to change the rules then punish someone under the new rules when the offense clearly happend under the old rules.

Second I don't think that you should wait and let things build up and then punish someone for a bunch of things. If you are going to punish them do it right then and there for that offense, don't let them build up and lump them all together. Maybe if Goddell punished him when he did something wrong perhaps the other events would not have followed.

 

[BrAinPaiNt]

It's simple - we believe in the rule of law. And there are laws governing each of these cases. Goodell has to apply the NFL CBA disciplinary process within the bounds of the existing labor laws and the entirety of the Vick - dogfighting saga is all a bunch of hot air until there is a ruling in a court of law.

You seem to think it's ok to pass judgement and ignore the law because they are millionair thugs in your opinion. I don't really HAVE an opinion, per se. But your attitude is the same one that would be at home at a lynching.

Follow the law. That's all. If Vick was running dogfights, then by all means, charge him, prosecute him, convict him and send him to jail. If NOT, though, well that's a whole other story, isn't it.

I, and others, would just like to see the process used, and not see people go off half cocked because they think Vick "has always been trash".

Is that really so hard to understand. I'm sure you don't see the disctinction, but once you start ignoring the rule of law, then those situations will no longer apply to just rich NFL thugs, but just as easily you and I. And since we don't have the luxury of high priced lawyers, it would be that much easier for the system to run us under. You seem to be ok with setting that precedent because you dislike Vick and Jones.

Try to think beyond the end of your own nose.

The thing is that the league has it's own investigators looking into the matter and can come to their own conclusion on the issue.

There are different avenues to look at and one criminal case is not the only one.

How many times have we seen someone found not guilty in a criminal case so they do not face any jail time. However later go to court in a civil suit and have to pay a person for the same thing they were not found guilty of in a criminal trial?

This is just another situation where the NFL has the right to investigate a matter and come to their own conclusions. They do not have to tie their decision into the criminal law. Just as they have suspended players for spitting on other players, taking cheap shots to players, violating the drug policy yet none of those players are officially found guilty or even charged with a criminal act.

 

[deadrody]

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2007/football/nfl/05/31/vick.investigation.ap/index.html

This one might work better

And here's more that will blow your mind. Anonymous informants that essentially mean nothing. And a prosecutor apparently trying to prosecute the case through the media. Something you don't do if you actually have a case. String him up.

 

[Royal Laegotti]

The thing is that the league has it's own investigators looking into the matter and can come to their own conclusion on the issue.

There are different avenues to look at and one criminal case is not the only one.

How many times have we seen someone found not guilty in a criminal case so they do not face any jail time. However later go to court in a civil suit and have to pay a person for the same thing they were not found guilty of in a criminal trial?

This is just another situation where the NFL has the right to investigate a matter and come to their own conclusions. They do not have to tie their decision into the criminal law. Just as they have suspended players for spitting on other players, taking cheap shots to players, violating the drug policy yet none of those players are officially found guilty or even charged with a criminal act.

Thankyou!

 

[BrAinPaiNt]

The problem is, the LAW does not allow that. One is no different than the other. There is a collective bargaining agreement in place and both sides need to adhere to it. If Goodell is truly wrong in this case, not only will the NLRB reduce the suspension, but they will fine the NFL on top of it.

The law does allow it in many cases.

Because it has happened many times through out not only the NFL but also the regular business world.

Goodell does not have to suspend Vick by saying that he committed a crime. The crime does not have to be the reason for a suspension.

That is the part people are not getting IMO.

Oh heck never mind.

This is a never ending argument and I doubt I will change someone elses view and I doubt they change mine.

 

[deadrody]

This is just another situation where the NFL has the right to investigate a matter and come to their own conclusions. They do not have to tie their decision into the criminal law. Just as they have suspended players for spitting on other players, taking cheap shots to players, violating the drug policy yet none of those players are officially found guilty or even charged with a criminal act.

All subject to the collective bargaining agreement. There is, apparently, clear guidance related to convictions and the NFL disciplinary policy, and the CBA. And as I've stated in other threads, the NFL can investigate all they like, but they still have to have facts and evidence to support any conclusion they reach. And there is no way they could ever hand out a punishment equal or greater to that applicable to a conviction for something that he is either exonerated for or even not charged for.

These are all very simple principles.

 

[Chocolate Lab]

Why do some defend Vick? Simple. Besides the rare Vick fan who would defend him no matter what in this particular case -- probably very young fans -- the others are the self-styled gadflies of the group who think it's cool to go contrary to the group no matter what the subject is. It's pretty obvious who those few are.

 

[burmafrd]

actually, deadrody, you re the one that does not get it. Its all up to the commissioner. He can do pretty much what he wants- and it is clear that most of the players SUPPORT him. So pacman, vick and all their lawyers have no chance.

 

[deadrody]

The law does allow it in many cases.

Because it has happened many times through out not only the NFL but also the regular business world.

Goodell does not have to suspend Vick by saying that he committed a crime. The crime does not have to be the reason for a suspension.

First of all, the law does NOT allow it, and it does NOT happen all the time. Maybe it does with the average employee, but NOT within a union-management relationship.

The simple principle is union employees have done X many times before and the general punishment has been Y. That requires, by law, that the next time a union employee does X, you cannot punish them beyond Y. Unless and until the policy is officially changed through collective bargaining, i.e. a new contract.

 

[Hoofbite]

And here's more that will blow your mind. Anonymous informants that essentially mean nothing. And a prosecutor apparently trying to prosecute the case through the media. Something you don't do if you actually have a case. String him up.

Two weeks ago that prosecutor would have been your messiah. He played the basic "not gonna believe a thing, won't say a thing, ask me all the questions as I laugh" role.

Now that hes doing his job and has collected some info, hes trying to do all this through the media.

 

[deadrody]

actually, deadrody, you re the one that does not get it. Its all up to the commissioner. He can do pretty much what he wants- and it is clear that most of the players SUPPORT him. So pacman, vick and all their lawyers have no chance.

Oh, right. Because you say so. Gotcha. The commissioner is STILL bound by the CBA. Period. End of story. You think otherwise, just wait and see.

 

[burmafrd]

You obviously have not read the CBA. The ULTIMATE authority is the commissioner. The players union signed off on it. By signing their contracts, the players submit to it. end of story.

 

[BrAinPaiNt]

You obviously have not read the CBA. The ULTIMATE authority is the commissioner. The players union signed off on it. By signing their contracts, the players submit to it. end of story.

Quit wasting your time. We are not going to change their views, they are not going to change ours. Anything else is just going to result in tired hands from typing something that will not have an impact on changing their views.:laugh2:

Remember just last year someone stomped on a Dallas Cowboys players head and received the largest suspension ever for a player. It was unprecedented...but according to some using a current argument that was against the law and the commish can not do it and will be punished for it.

 

[Royal Laegotti]

Hmmm.....Who to believe.....deadrodent, sorry deadrody < Roger Goodell.

Bud, this plan that the NFL is carrying out is probably more well thought out than what you give it credit for.

I guess you would like the NFL to consult the U.S. judicial system before they take any disiplinary action against their employees in their own private business. Sounds like a form of socialism/communism to me.

 

[Chocolate Lab]

I guess deadrody missed at the Pro Bowl this year when the players went to Washington and asked for stricter punishment because they felt a few bad apples were giving them all a bad image.

This isn't the major league baseball union where they blindly defend the players no matter what.