Zeke's accuser admitted to talk of leveraging sex videos of RB for money

[Yakuza Rich]

It won't be zero games, if that's what you're asking. The NFL beat Brady last year because the courts decided the CBA gives Goodell to do whatever he wants. There is no burden of proof. He can do it by feel, by his gut. The players agreed to this.

In the next CBA, I have no doubt this will be gone. The owners don't like it any more than the players do.

That's not quite true.

The court ruled that Goodell was within the CBA with Brady because he gave Brady an equal chance that he gave others and that because they cited Brady with actual conduct issues (destroying his phone on purpose), Goodell had the right to issue a 4-game suspension.

Goodell has a lot of issues at hand with this case, including procedural issues. Procedural issues are one way to get the court to deem that Goodell violated the CBA.

The CBA gives Goodell a lot of power, but he still has to work within the confines of the CBA otherwise the court will rule in favor of EE.

And hopefully by that time enough evidence will be compiled by EE's team against Thompson that the court of public opinion will sway so strongly in EE's favor that Goodell realizes his only way out is to get rid of the suspension.





YR

 

[waldoputty]

Just want to remind everyone.
We should be calling her a criminal and a felon.
It is about PR after all.

 

[Ranched]

Just want to remind everyone.
We should be calling her a criminal and a felon.
It is about PR after all.

I also wish to remind everyone that @waldoputty opened his thread about Zeke where it's suppose to be. Reality specifically indicated to post ALL Zeke threads here: http://cowboyszone.com/forums/drama-zone.57/ Let's not disrespect.

 

[CooterBrown]

Elliot shouldn't have to "clear" himself of DV charges. That is how the NFL has flipped the script, so to speak. The burden of proof is on the one making the claim, in this case, the accuser, and should likewise be on the NFL.

The jury, in this case, the NFL, is free to believe or disbelieve anything they want to believe. If they believe her, she met her burden of proof. To my knowledge, there is nothing in the collective bargaining agreement that requires the league to prove their decision was based upon proof beyond a reasonable doubt, or even clear and convincing proof. Only that the league believes it happened. It's all about PR for the league.

And as far as her being a liar goes, even liars sometimes tell the truth.

With all that said, I think the NFL really screwed this one up. They were so concerned with showing they are serious about domestic violence that they chose the wrong case to be their standard-setter. Ray Rice, and then Josh Brown, caused a lot of bad PR so the NFL was running scared.

When the prosecutor chose not to proceed, the NFL should have said, "we aren't sure the prosecutor made the right decision, but it was his decision to make, and we are not in a position to second-guess the legal system." That way, the prosecutor's office catches all the bad PR and the NFL is business as usual.

Of course, that presumes that Goodell and company did not consider the fact that Zeke plays for the Dallas Cowboys and Jerry Jones. That is a whole conspiracy theory I choose to ignore.

My bottom line opinion: Zeke (and all of us Cowboy fans) can hope the appeal is a success and it gets reduced to a couple games. At this point in time, whatever happens, I don't think there is anyway he can "clear his name." And, as far as "not accepting" any suspension, I don't think he will have any choice in the end.

 

[CooterBrown]

So if nobody trusts either side in a dispute, it is usually just dropped. I wonder if this ever got to court, would those photos even be allowed? There is no one who can vouch that they are real and their chain of custody lies solely on the accuser's phone. No way a judge could allow them as evidence.

The pictures would be admissible in court just on her say-so. "chain of custody" is a phrase that allows the evidence to be called into question, but rarely can cause the evidence to be inadmissible. She would have to face cross-examination, (that would be a fun one to do), but cell phone pictures are admitted in court every day just on the phone owner's testimony.

 

[Established1971]

Again though, it doesn't mean it didn't happen.That's the point that so many people are missing. Is she the scum of the earth? It appears that she is. But, that doesn't mean that he's incapable of harming her, and this isn't about her, this is about him.

I think you are missing how using information from an extortionist should not be grounds to believe the accuser over the accused. It's about the situation not just him.

 

[Yakuza Rich]

Again though, it doesn't mean it didn't happen.That's the point that so many people are missing. Is she the scum of the earth? It appears that she is. But, that doesn't mean that he's incapable of harming her, and this isn't about her, this is about him.

It's about credibility. Ask yourself if it was EE that was caught lying, discussing extortion, etc...would you state 'that doesn't mean he actually hit her.'

Let's take the OJ Simpson case. OJ was caught lying numerous times he also had a history of Nicole calling the police on him and he could be heard in the background ranting against her and then when the police showed up...she would have bruises consistent with her being beaten by OJ.

OJ also stalked Nicole and her boyfriend at the time and threatened her boyfriend with physical harm on different occasions.

That's a pattern of behavior that is consistent with somebody that would kill their ex-wife and is not credible as a person.

But that doesn't mean he did it, right? And we should believe him in spite of these instances, right?




YR

 

[PA Cowboy Fan]

It's about credibility. Ask yourself if it was EE that was caught lying, discussing extortion, etc...would you state 'that doesn't mean he actually hit her.'

Let's take the OJ Simpson case. OJ was caught lying numerous times he also had a history of Nicole calling the police on him and he could be heard in the background ranting against her and then when the police showed up...she would have bruises consistent with her being beaten by OJ.

OJ also stalked Nicole and her boyfriend at the time and threatened her boyfriend with physical harm on different occasions.

That's a pattern of behavior that is consistent with somebody that would kill their ex-wife and is not credible as a person.

But that doesn't mean he did it, right? And we should believe him in spite of these instances, right?




YR

Well he was found not guilty. lol

 

[mattjames2010]

This woman is screwed up.

 

[Section446]

It's about credibility. Ask yourself if it was EE that was caught lying, discussing extortion, etc...would you state 'that doesn't mean he actually hit her.'

Let's take the OJ Simpson case. OJ was caught lying numerous times he also had a history of Nicole calling the police on him and he could be heard in the background ranting against her and then when the police showed up...she would have bruises consistent with her being beaten by OJ.

OJ also stalked Nicole and her boyfriend at the time and threatened her boyfriend with physical harm on different occasions.

That's a pattern of behavior that is consistent with somebody that would kill their ex-wife and is not credible as a person.

But that doesn't mean he did it, right? And we should believe him in spite of these instances, right?




YR

I get where you're coming from, but the NFL doesn't seem to see it the way we see it.

 

[Section446]

I think you are missing how using information from an extortionist should not be grounds to believe the accuser over the accused. It's about the situation not just him.

I'm not missing anything, I get that she doesn't appear to be a trustworthy person. At the end of the day, that still doesn't mean that he didn't do it (allegedly).

 

[diefree666]

I'm not missing anything, I get that she doesn't appear to be a trustworthy person. At the end of the day, that still doesn't mean that he didn't do it (allegedly).

yeah sure. And the world will end tomorrow when an asteroid hits. There is about as much evidence of that as supports your claim.

 

[Fla Cowpoke]

I'm not missing anything, I get that she doesn't appear to be a trustworthy person. At the end of the day, that still doesn't mean that he didn't do it (allegedly).

It is scary that it doesn't have to be proven beyond a reasonable doubt in order to screw him up like this potentially is doing. With tons of contradictory and inflammatory evidence there is no way Zeke should be suffering financially but this is going to cost him not just millions, but 10's of millions.

 

[Yakuza Rich]

I get where you're coming from, but the NFL doesn't seem to see it the way we see it.

Everybody knows that. But when people like yourself espouse giving Thompson the benefit of the doubt after repeatedly being caught lying and now trying to extort EE therein lies the problem...the court of public opinion is willing to overlook her lack of credibility and continue to give her the benefit of the doubt.

And it's looking like the NFL does not genuinely 'look at it that way.' This looks like a PR ploy and they are trying to cater to the court of public opinion and make up for the mistakes in the Rice case and thus making the evidence fit their vendetta.





YR

 

[waldoputty]

I also wish to remind everyone that @waldoputty opened his thread about Zeke where it's suppose to be. Reality specifically indicated to post ALL Zeke threads here: http://cowboyszone.com/forums/drama-zone.57/ Let's not disrespect.

?
what about the other zeke threads in the fan zone?

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

No offense, but this is old news. TMZ made the text messages from his ex public b4 Zeke was even suspended. One text stated her telling a friend she lied to the cops to get even with Zeke. Problem was, dummy Goodell AGAIN, is late getting the truth.

No worries fans. Zeke won't be going down, but his ex will.

This actually is new. Before she was trying to conspire to railroad him for DV. This one is her trying to do it over sex tapes.

The NFL still finds her credible.

Then again they are the people who had video of Rice laying that girl out in an elevator and dragging her like a caveman and only gave him two games. They tried to hide that too when it was going to other way.

 

[Ranched]

?
what about the other zeke threads in the fan zone?

Putty Putty....you misinterpreted my dear. I meant that your the ONLY one who started a Zeke thread where it belongs. Hey, you like my tats?

 

[Ranched]

Watching goodell eating crow will almost as good as winning a SB....almost

He's still finishing the Crow from the Pats dinner.

 

[PA Cowboy Fan]

She is a liar. Once you have proven that you are untrustworthy anything goes. Now maybe Zeke isn't that trustworthy either according to the NFL. In that case it's a wash. You need evidence. It can't just be her word against his. It's ridiculous that you are guilty until proven innocent in the NFL. This isn't just about Zeke either. With this ruling every single player in the league is in danger of getting accused of things for a whole lot of different reasons. This is turning into a soap opera.

 

[darthseinfeld]

Because in real life girls are not going to be any part of a sex tape...not that I've tried or anything, just saying

You'd be surprised