Phire Posted November 1, 2017 Author Share Posted November 1, 2017 Just now, Matts4313 said: Well, obvi, I dont. But there have been multiple investigators that have all looked into it and they have all said he didnt do it. They have all came to the conclusion that any bruising she had was from the fist fight she got in + she said she was going to frame him. So... im just connecting dots. But that's not what the investigators said. I tried explaining this in News. Both the prosecutors in Ohio, AND the NFL weighed the same facts and evidence. There's some evidence that backs up her story, but it's incomplete, or at least inconsistent. The government has a very high burden to find someone guilty. They have to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt. The inconsistent evidence likely raises reasonable doubt, and therefore, isn't enough for a criminal conviction. But an employer is bound to no such standard. An employer can fire/suspend people without evidence beyond a reasonable doubt. The NFL acknowledged there was no criminal charges/conviction and even acknowledged that there were credibility issues--but said that they found that at least some of the evidence, even if inconsistent, was enough for them to hand down the suspension. What the NFLPA needs to do is negotiate a CBA that says that the NFL cannot punish a player for an allegation that results in no charges. They have most definitely not ALL come to the conclusion that the bruises were from a fist fight. Plus, domestic violence issues are always muddy. Remember, Ray Rice had his charges DROPPED and he was caught on film perpetrating his crime. The victims in DV cases very often simply do not cooperate. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matts4313 Posted November 1, 2017 Share Posted November 1, 2017 1 minute ago, Phire said: But that's not what the investigators said. I tried explaining this in News. Both the prosecutors in Ohio, AND the NFL weighed the same facts and evidence. There's some evidence that backs up her story, but it's incomplete, or at least inconsistent. The government has a very high burden to find someone guilty. They have to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt. The inconsistent evidence likely raises reasonable doubt, and therefore, isn't enough for a criminal conviction. But an employer is bound to no such standard. An employer can fire/suspend people without evidence beyond a reasonable doubt. The NFL acknowledged there was no criminal charges/conviction and even acknowledged that there were credibility issues--but said that they found that at least some of the evidence, even if inconsistent, was enough for them to hand down the suspension. What the NFLPA needs to do is negotiate a CBA that says that the NFL cannot punish a player for an allegation that results in no charges. They have most definitely not ALL come to the conclusion that the bruises were from a fist fight. Plus, domestic violence issues are always muddy. Remember, Ray Rice had his charges DROPPED and he was caught on film perpetrating his crime. The victims in DV cases very often simply do not cooperate. You are muddying this and you know it. The victim is not only cooperating, she is championing the cause. Not only is she so obsessed with him that she made up the abuse, she has since been served a restraining order for texting him a million times. There is nothing here that screams abuse. There is everything here that screams psycho ex. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Broadway Joe Posted November 1, 2017 Share Posted November 1, 2017 Wow Matts will defend Elliott like his own family Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matts4313 Posted November 1, 2017 Share Posted November 1, 2017 Just now, Broadway Joe said: Wow Matts will defend Elliott like his own family Cowboys are fam. I mean not all of them, but in general. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MKnight82 Posted November 1, 2017 Share Posted November 1, 2017 5 minutes ago, Matts4313 said: Ya, I guess so. I'm sorry but I feel no sympathy. Elliot is a knucklehead who should be punished for a collection of idiotic moves. If he were my employee and he brought the kind of negative press to my company I'd fire him. But I don't have a multi-billion dollar company so I get why he's still around. Still, if I were a Cowboys fan I'd be happy he's being disciplined. He's obviously immature and needs something to get his head on straight. This punishment could possibly help him in the long term. And for you to be continuously grasping at straws to figure out anyway for him to get out of this punishment is frankly annoying. Its annoying we're still talking about this mid-way through the season. Its annoying I have to read about this crap in sports journalism. I posted during the summer that he would be an idiot not to take the 6 game suspension immediately because there was zero percent chance he gets out of it and I stand by it. Its obviously been a distraction for the Cowboys and if he keeps delaying the inevitable it could hit them during their playoff push to end the season, or even worse maybe playoff games. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phire Posted November 1, 2017 Author Share Posted November 1, 2017 Just now, Matts4313 said: You are muddying this and you know it. The victim is not only cooperating, she is championing the cause. Not only is she so obsessed with him that she made up the abuse, she has since been served a restraining order for texting him a million times. There is nothing here that screams abuse. There is everything here that screams psycho ex. I'm not muddying anything. Just analyzing the facts. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blahstoise Posted November 1, 2017 Share Posted November 1, 2017 There's always next year Matts.. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AZ_Eaglesfan Posted November 1, 2017 Share Posted November 1, 2017 Unless you know all the evidence and the facts of the case you are just drawing conclusions to fit your own bias. The NFL ruled he did something wrong, like it or not that is what happened. What is the truth? I don't know better than anyone else, but if the NFL ruled that he acted inappropriately I believe that there is likely at least a semi truth there. Debating what actually happened is pointless and stupid because none of us have a clue. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matts4313 Posted November 1, 2017 Share Posted November 1, 2017 2 minutes ago, AZ_Eaglesfan said: Unless you know all the evidence and the facts of the case you are just drawing conclusions to fit your own bias. The NFL ruled he did something wrong, like it or not that is what happened. What is the truth? I don't know better than anyone else, but if the NFL ruled that he acted inappropriately I believe that there is likely at least a semi truth there. Debating what actually happened is pointless and stupid because none of us have a clue. But thats not what happened. The lead investigator from the NFL said he didnt do it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phire Posted November 1, 2017 Author Share Posted November 1, 2017 10 minutes ago, Matts4313 said: But thats not what happened. The lead investigator from the NFL said he didnt do it. OK let's stop right here. Give me the source for this. If you cannot, you must concede that you are either wrong or too misinformed to proceed with any further debate on this. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MKnight82 Posted November 1, 2017 Share Posted November 1, 2017 15 minutes ago, Phire said: OK let's stop right here. Give me the source for this. If you cannot, you must concede that you are either wrong or too misinformed to proceed with any further debate on this. He's probably talking about this: http://www.star-telegram.com/sports/nfl/dallas-cowboys/article170603722.html "Roberts recommended no suspension for Elliott following her interviews with Thompson during the investigation — a fact Roberts testified to during the appeals hearing with Henderson, according to a source. Roberts’ recommendation of no discipline is the main reason Cowboys owner Jerry Jones expressed so much confidence in the case until the NFL announced the suspension on Aug. 11. Jones was told by a top NFL executive that there would be no suspension, according to a source. But Roberts’ recommendation never made it into the NFL’s final report or the official suspension letter on Aug. 11, which cited the league’s findings of three instances of domestic violence by Elliott against Thompson based on the victim’s testimony and photographic evidence. When NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell conducted a meeting to discuss discipline for Elliott, it included Lisa Friel, the senior vice president for investigations; Jeff Pash, executive vice president and general counsel; and Adolpho Birch, senior vice president of labor policy and government affairs, among others. But Roberts was not at the meeting as Friel recommended a six-game suspension to Goodell. During the appeal hearing there was testimony that Friel barred Roberts from the meeting, a source said. Elliott and the NFLPA attacked Roberts’ absence as a process failure during the appeal hearing and plan to exploit it if they go to federal court to seek a temporary injunction against a suspension. That Roberts’ recommendation didn’t make it into the report and that she wasn’t involved in the decision could be used against the NFL if a federal court case is pursued." A couple of points here. - Recommending Elliot shouldn't be suspended doesn't mean he didn't do anything, it means the investigator couldn't find enough evidence to think he deserved one. - Elliot has pursued the argue in court stated in the article and has apparently lost. - Roger Goodell under the current CBA doesn't have to abide by the investigator's findings whatsoever. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phire Posted November 1, 2017 Author Share Posted November 1, 2017 man dont help him out Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MKnight82 Posted November 1, 2017 Share Posted November 1, 2017 Just now, Phire said: man dont help him out How does that help him? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phire Posted November 1, 2017 Author Share Posted November 1, 2017 Just now, MKnight82 said: How does that help him? I need him to answer so I can methodically take him down Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phire Posted November 1, 2017 Author Share Posted November 1, 2017 37 minutes ago, Matts4313 said: But thats not what happened. The lead investigator from the NFL said he didnt do it. Let's try this again. Need your source. Feel free to use Mknight's. But I would strongly advise against that since it clearly doesn't say that Kia Roberts said Zeke didn't do it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.