Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 18 of 18

Thread: Seen the pictures?

  1. #11
       
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Detroit
    Posts
    5,770
    Blog Entries
    11
    First, as best as I can guess your take on what happened is the most probable.

    BUT

    Mr. Hardy is a highly-paid person who has been given the privilege to entertain the country at the highest level due to his skill and the willingness of us to pay money into the system. We may not like how that privilege is tied to consequences that the "normal" person may not endure, but he also is able to circumvent some of those consequences because of his money and standing.
    I don't believe he has been "given" anything. It may be just POV, but employment at any level is an EXCHANGE, a "deal" between two parties. If one of the parties didn't want to make the deal, it wouldn't happen.


    I simply cannot ignore the idea that a "normal" person would be in jail right now while Hardy is able to continue on the way he is.
    OK. We are switching backfrom the NFL to examining the US Legal system now. Yes Hardy's judicial outcome in not typical, but that is because he has MONEY, not athletic ability. Any person with lots of money can game the US Legal system to some significant degree. That is a reasonable discussion, however if you change MONEY to MONEY/FAMILY CONNECTIONS then you could say the same for most countries to varying extent.






    The part about it where it is clear that he doesn't "get it" (the rap song and stupid comments in the media) is frustrating, but shouldn't be the reason he loses his job. The big problem is that the system failed here in that he has not had to really suffer any punishment for what he did.
    The employer is not a surrogate hangman for a defanged judicial system. Should he not be allowed to shop in better stores also? How about eat at better restaurants? What commercial transactions shall we ban him from?

    Remember, he was paid while suspended. He got paid,
    Yep. And that was because Goodell couldn't deal with making a decision, so he just paid to punt the ball.


    [he]remained free and didn't even have to succomb to beatings his body takes on Sundays.

    He remained free because the US[North Carolina] judicial system could not [fully] convict and punish him, per their own rules.


    Throwing a girlfriend across the room a few times ended up being a pretty good deal for him.
    Yep and that sucks. But I am not going to ask Jerry to become judge, jury and executioner. Although if Hardy is just too loathsome to be around, then can him. Jerry takes his choice and lives with his deal. As consumers we can decide to watch the Cowboys or not, but to STILL watch and decry Jerry for not taking a stand, is just non-sensical. Coaches always tell players work on what YOU control. Fans control remotes and Visa Cards and Stub Hub.

    If the fans DECIDE not to show Jerry that Hardy's POR is tiny if not negative, then don't blame Jerry.
    Last edited by darvon; 11-07-2015 at 07:51 PM.

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    West Hills, California
    Posts
    2,988
    Quote Originally Posted by darvon View Post

    Yep. And that was because Goodell couldn't deal with making a decision, so he just paid to punt the ball.
    Goodell punted until all the evidence came out. Then he suspended Hardy for 10 games. Then Hardy appealed with the assistance of the NFLPA and an arbitrator reduced it to 4 games. For those of you who want further blood and punishment for Hardy, you aren't going to get it. The NFL has already proven it can't hand out punishments.

    And you are right, Darvon, Jerry has made his choice with Hardy and the benefits outweigh the costs right now. And Jerry knows that having Hardy on his team isn't going to hurt his brand. What hurts his brand is losing and as long as Hardy can sack the QB, he'll deal with the PR associated with Hardy.

  3. #13
       
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Detroit
    Posts
    5,770
    Blog Entries
    11
    Goodell punted until all the evidence came out. Then he suspended Hardy for 10 games.
    I respectfully disagree. Goodell initiated a practice of becoming extra-legal, and investigating/sentencing ahead of the courts. Big Ben et al. He waited until the police proceedings were done with Rice, and then punished and then the video came out, he repunished because of PR. He faced Hardy, whose Part 1 case was over July, 2014, and then Peterson got nailed, and he flopped around as the PR pressure spiraled, with TV covering every game that these two played in. Some minor clerk (who now has a big promotion and raise) at the NFL found the Commissioner's Double Secret Probation loophole, Goodell used it to get those two AWAY from microphone and cameras. He used it after Phase 1 with Hardy and before court with Peterson. And he developed the "rule" that he will use this to allow the courts to finish (and get the perps away from cameras) in cases where the players are too valuable to cut.



    I heard something today that is getting close to stepping on one of my hot buttons. ESPN stated that the NFL saw the photos before handing out the suspension, but the Cowboys did not.

    Anybody know HOW the NFL saw the photos on a sealed court case? Did Hardy give them up? If not, how does a business get sealed government documents without the backalley/deadspin route?

  4. #14
       
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Detroit
    Posts
    5,770
    Blog Entries
    11
    I also heard an ESPN reporter on Mike and Mike talk about all this/DV in the NFL and state that the league and the NFLPA should/would get together on the next CBA and put in language for dv/rape/etc crimes being a special case and having an automatic punishment (I can't remember if she said ban) for a player who did this.


    What went unchallenged was that as far as the Legal System goes, they retracted their claim that they can prove Hardy did it to the satisfaction of a jury.

    So who gets to decide "did it"? And what is "it" Rape sure, but a lot of these get pled down to misdemeanor assault/ battery or even lower. Remember that the courts didnt reach a finding in Rice, they dropped the case in exchange for counseling. Does that constitute "did it"? And does that constitute "it"?

    I know DV is more insidious that simple assualt, for the reason that the victim in many cases is economically dependent, to some degree, on the perp. But for professional athletes, the mismatch in strength et al means that the man vs women is not much more significant as NFLplayer vs human. The really huge issues of DV is the dependence of the victim, economically/romantically, as well as the cultural impact of sexual assault vs simple assault on the victim.

    Again, all of these complexities are why our legal system is not 7 rules written on a bar napkin. Trying to build that system as a rider to the CBA sounds like an impossible task or one performed for show.

  5. #15
       
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Detroit
    Posts
    5,770
    Blog Entries
    11
    One more item. Violence between sexes come in degrees in our legal system. Most of the talking heads never deal with that facet. It's only "did it" or "didn't do it". I would love to hear THAT discussion in the context of the NFL or sports.

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    West Hills, California
    Posts
    2,988
    Quote Originally Posted by darvon View Post
    Anybody know HOW the NFL saw the photos on a sealed court case? Did Hardy give them up? If not, how does a business get sealed government documents without the backalley/deadspin route?
    According to the league office, NFL investigators obtained photos from the Charlotte Mecklenburg Police Department along with seven photographs that had been provided to the District Attorney by a non-law enforcement source. (The NFL filed a lawsuit to obtain those seven photos.)

    The photos were obtained subject to a protective order, which expressly limited their dissemination to the league, the NFL Players Association, Hardy, and any attorneys, investigators, and expert witnesses working on Hardy’s case. The protective order generated in connection with the seven photos from a non-law enforcement source does not authorize the league to share the photos with any team(s) considering the possibility of signing Hardy to a contract.



    http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com...a-court-order/

  7. #17
       
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Detroit
    Posts
    5,770
    Blog Entries
    11
    Thanks for that info.

    This is a hot button for me. Unless Hardy authorized it, why would our court system allow release of closely held police photos to a 3rd party, and only a single third party.

    I really get steamed when government cavelierly grants MLB/NFL/XYZ to stuff from police/DOJ files. Just like with PEDs in baseball. ARRGH!!

    The Government is NOT the investigator for the NFL Didn't we cover this with the NCAA?
    Last edited by darvon; 11-09-2015 at 11:40 PM.

  8. #18
       
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Charlotte, NC
    Posts
    1,038
    [QUOTE=darvon;261208]Thanks for that info.

    This is a hot button for me. Unless Hardy authorized it, why would our court system allow release of closely held police photos to a 3rd party, and only a single third party.

    I really get steamed when government cavelierly grants MLB/NFL/XYZ to stuff from police/DOJ files. Just like with PEDs in baseball. ARRGH!!

    The Government is NOT the investigator for the NFL Didn't we cover this with the NCAA?[/QUOT

    The investigation is closed; most photographs become part of the public record when they are no longer part of a criminal investigation, right? The case was investigated, he was found guilty, appealed and was released. Documents are no longer sealed. Hardy's 2nd "trial" was last....January?

    And no, you can't deny a person employment forever based on a criminal record; but the NFL and all other employers have the option to hire someone like Hardy or to not hire him. The Dallas Cowboys made a decision with which I disagree, but I don't think that makes them appreciably worse than any other team. Hell, he'd probably still be here in Carolina if the Panthers could have afforded him.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •