Jump to content
49erurtaza

NFL Expected to not suspend Reuben Foster LB Redskins

Recommended Posts

On 4/15/2019 at 8:10 AM, Superman(DH23) said:

You are contradicting yourself, and I read the report, granted 2 years ago, but I read it and it was a solid basis of again, a more likely than not.  The team's job wasnt to determine guilt or innocence, it was to make a decision of whether or not the evidence met a "more likely than not" standard.  You, like many others, operate under the fallacy that the team would or should have to prove that dv was committed, and believe that proof has to be all encompassing and can not fall under question. It doesn't.  It merely has to be enough to show that it is 51% or more likely to have occurred.  That was demonstrated through the evidence.  Did Zeke beat and abuse the victim? We dont know, nor is it for us, or the NFLs investigators to come to that conclusion.  The question put in front of the investigators was "is it more likely than not that some form of DV has occurred"?  Again this was the most thorough and transparent investigation the NFL has ever conducted in these matters. It's time to just LET IT GO!

And the lead investigator said "more then likely not". Yet they were going to punish anyway. It's not rocket science. Investigator's said there should be no punishment saying it more then likely didn't happen. But Goodell and puppet Friel decided to say yea there was enough evidence. There is no 51% rule, because it is only based on what Goodell thinks. There is no calculation done. Especially if other evidence was thrown out that would have supported the defendent. Also if the person who stood against the decision with their "expertise" and had both their evidence discarded and council ignored and then be forced out only some months after it came out in the media they could prove their innocence. Then that entire case was based on BS from the start.

Next your gonna tell me the NFL didn't intentionally blackball certain players last years. Because everything there goes by the book.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Calvert28 said:

And the lead investigator said "more then likely not". Yet they were going to punish anyway. It's not rocket science. Investigator's said there should be no punishment saying it more then likely didn't happen. But Goodell and puppet Friel decided to say yea there was enough evidence. There is no 51% rule, because it is only based on what Goodell thinks. There is no calculation done. Especially if other evidence was thrown out that would have supported the defendent. Also if the person who stood against the decision with their "expertise" and had both their evidence discarded and council ignored and then be forced out only some months after it came out in the media they could prove their innocence. Then that entire case was based on BS from the start.

Next your gonna tell me the NFL didn't intentionally blackball certain players last years. Because everything there goes by the book.

You are so wrong here.  It's not Goddell as God when it comes to punishments.  In order to stand up against arbitration and possible court proceedings.  You want to completely ignore that Zeke appealed and lost the appeal.  No it's all Goddell.  Goddell is a lawyer.  He understands that what he does has to stand up to legal precedent.  The 51% standard is how the Civil legal system works.  Seriously go read up on how this all works legally, maybe then you can have some peace.

Just to further my point that you need to read up more on the results of the investigation.  Peter Harvey, former AG of NJ, and one of the 4 advisors appointed by the commissioner, is quoted as saying that based on the evidence he believed that physical violence had occurred, committed by Elliott.  The Columbus prosecutor who dropped the charges stated that although he couldnt "prove" (meaning the 100% beyond a reasonable doubt standard) what happened, the evidence lead him to believe that a number of violent interactions had occurred.  Let me be clear, I am in no way absolving Tiffany Thompson of wrong doing here, she lied to investigators, may have even obstructed justice in the criminal investigation.  But the evidence is certainly enough to meet the preponderance standard, required by civil law.

Edited by Superman(DH23)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



×