Dr LBC Posted August 11, 2017 Share Posted August 11, 2017 1 hour ago, DeSean Jackson said: Wow another suspension for the cowboys! Shocker! But they're just unlucky! Trolling like this isn't acceptable. If I see you doing it again, you can expect a formal warning and then it's on Webby whether or not you get the designation of being the first person banned from the new site. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BayRaider Posted August 11, 2017 Share Posted August 11, 2017 1 hour ago, cddolphin said: So the NFL could interview "more than a dozen" eye-witnesses and "thousands" of texts, but the prosecutor somehow didn't have enough evidence? None of this adds up. You need a ton of evidence to prosecute someone for criminal charges. Evidence could be very strong but not enough. I'm sure the NFL knows more than we do and did their own research on the matter. Plus, as said before in this thread, the NFL does not need as much as evidence to suspend Elliott. Their guidelines are much less than an criminal investigation. If they needed that much evidence then nobody would ever be suspended for anything. They are obviously very confident Elliott is guilty and they have an absolute zero tolerance on domestic violence. Something the NFL is guilty of by far over any other sport. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xmad Posted August 11, 2017 Share Posted August 11, 2017 Eh. Either the NFL finally got it right for once ( I doubt it) or Zeke actually did it despite the texts brought up earlier. I'm just gonna assume the NFL screwed up and Zeke is just a douchebag. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rockice_8 Posted August 11, 2017 Share Posted August 11, 2017 That letter is pretty damning, nobody should be trying to defend Zeke on this. He seems like he deserves everything he got. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shanedorf Posted August 11, 2017 Share Posted August 11, 2017 The bar for Criminal vs Civil likely isn't the most important criteria here Its how the advertisers and networks feel - they are the source of all the TV money that this league runs on. Hence all the commentary about Protecting the Shield The court of public opinion/perception is the one they are worried about the most, and with the NFL hell-bent on winning over more female viewers, its not difficult to understand why they did what they did. The NFL is also facing a huge PR backlash over the CTE studies- and guess who decides if Little Johnny is gonna play tackle football or another sport ? Moms.... Who coincidentally, are mostly women. Really looking forward to watching Jerruh fight this one, hopefully he has time to put his pants back on before the appeal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deadpulse Posted August 11, 2017 Share Posted August 11, 2017 That picture isn't necessary @Shanedorf Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kiltman Posted August 11, 2017 Share Posted August 11, 2017 Eagles fans, this isn't the place to troll...if you need to share your laughter you may do it in our forum and that's it. I don't want any of you banned for it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeSean Jackson Posted August 11, 2017 Share Posted August 11, 2017 If zeke takes this to court it can be really risky on his part. It can re open his case and he can be found guilty if nfl pleads a good case. If I'm zeke I would just take the punishment Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jakuvious Posted August 11, 2017 Share Posted August 11, 2017 55 minutes ago, BroncoSojia said: http://www.espn.com/pdf/2017/0811/Ezekiel-Elliott-Discipline Letter_8-11-17.pdf Not a good look for Zeke. This is worth reading for anyone concerned, upset, or honestly just interested in this case. This makes it pretty compelling that, if nothing else, the NFL sure did their due diligence with this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fretgod99 Posted August 11, 2017 Share Posted August 11, 2017 That criminal charges weren't filed has nothing to do with what the NFL is looking at. I know it has been stated in this thread a number of times, but it bears repeating because apparently people still don't quite understand the difference between criminal guilt and non-criminal culpability. That's not necessarily an indictment of anybody, because if you haven't spend any time learning about the criminal system it can seem a bit strange, but they are fundamentally different things. As was mentioned before, it's why OJ Simpson can be acquitted of criminal charges, yet help civilly responsible for causing the deaths of the people he was accused of murdering. One is seeking to determine guilt beyond any reasonable doubt, the other is seeking to determine whether a person is more likely than not responsible for what happened. "More likely than not" is worlds apart from "beyond a reasonable doubt". And if anybody has any questions about circumstances when a prosecutor might choose not to file or further pursue criminal charges despite the existence of some level of compelling evidence, feel free to ask. Suffice it to say, it is not the least bit curious to me that a suspension would be handed down in an instance such as this despite the absence of criminal charges. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johnny Nix Posted August 11, 2017 Share Posted August 11, 2017 Sucks for the Cowboys. I think if they appeal it will be reduced to like 3 games. I think the NFL just wants to appear to be coming down hard on these charges. They don't want bad press. If they came out and said 2 games everyone would be saying "that's it!?!" In reality, the NFL is about money, and debatably its #1 money making team's best young player is doubtful to be suspended that long. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ramssuperbowl99 Posted August 11, 2017 Share Posted August 11, 2017 17 minutes ago, fretgod99 said: That criminal charges weren't filed has nothing to do with what the NFL is looking at. I know it has been stated in this thread a number of times, but it bears repeating because apparently people still don't quite understand the difference between criminal guilt and non-criminal culpability. That's not necessarily an indictment of anybody, because if you haven't spend any time learning about the criminal system it can seem a bit strange, but they are fundamentally different things. As was mentioned before, it's why OJ Simpson can be acquitted of criminal charges, yet help civilly responsible for causing the deaths of the people he was accused of murdering. One is seeking to determine guilt beyond any reasonable doubt, the other is seeking to determine whether a person is more likely than not responsible for what happened. "More likely than not" is worlds apart from "beyond a reasonable doubt". And if anybody has any questions about circumstances when a prosecutor might choose not to file or further pursue criminal charges despite the existence of some level of compelling evidence, feel free to ask. Suffice it to say, it is not the least bit curious to me that a suspension would be handed down in an instance such as this despite the absence of criminal charges. I find it kind of funny that this thread is basically full of people yelling about how this makes no sense and then the only 2 lawyers in the thread are like 'eh yeah this all works'. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomas5737 Posted August 11, 2017 Share Posted August 11, 2017 17 minutes ago, Jakuvious said: This is worth reading for anyone concerned, upset, or honestly just interested in this case. This makes it pretty compelling that, if nothing else, the NFL sure did their due diligence with this. I dunno. I admit if there wasn't evidence of her lying about details of some of these incidents that it would be a lot easier to believe her version over his. As it stands, she is a proven liar and he is just a possible, even if likely, liar/abuser. "In the commissioner's judgement, there has been no persuasive evidence presented on your behalf with respect to how Ms Thompson's obvious injuries were incurred other than conjecture" "There was no evidence that anyone else could have caused these injuries" So he had to prove how the injuries happened to another person to clear himself? I don't think that is how it is supposed to work whether it is the judicial system or the NFL. O.J. would have searched for the real killer in other places than the golf course if that was the case. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cddolphin Posted August 11, 2017 Share Posted August 11, 2017 1 hour ago, Shanedorf said: and guess who decides if Little Johnny is gonna play tackle football or another sport ? Moms.... Who coincidentally, are mostly women. Maybe for the Beta Dads.. but football is a game for Alphas so.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cddolphin Posted August 11, 2017 Share Posted August 11, 2017 30 minutes ago, ramssuperbowl99 said: I find it kind of funny that this thread is basically full of people yelling about how this makes no sense and then the only 2 lawyers in the thread are like 'eh yeah this all works'. But does that say more about the judicial system, or the opinion of the majority? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.