Hill Investigated for Battery. Oh no.

[FANATIC 852]

2 minutes ago, Adamixoye said:

I still don't see how anyone can say this until more is known.  But we may very well have a better idea after this press conference.

Doing it the day before the draft seems intentional? Maybe KC and the League asked for some clarification so KC can adjust accordingly? 

 

[liquidfriend 1,151]

The Chiefs didn't even know this press conference was even happening until it was announced, so yeah.

[Adamixoye 604]

1 minute ago, liquidfriend said:

He doesn't need to be charged at all to face a suspension.

I get that, I didn't say otherwise.  But for what seems like the zillionth time, there has to be at least SOMETHING substantial.  Everyone is so gun shy of Goodell that they just think he's suspend you four games for making the wrong face.  He has a lot of power, but if he's crazy unreasonable he will have a fight on his hands.

Here's a hypothetical:  what happens if the press conference basically says, "The child sustained an injury, we did our due diligence and could not determine what happened but it seems Tyreek was not directly involved"?  Do you really think he gets suspended in that case?  I don't.  Now, the press conference may tell a very different story.  But there are scenarios in which this goes away, and scenarios in which it doesn't.

[liquidfriend 1,151]

5 minutes ago, Adamixoye said:

I get that, I didn't say otherwise.  But for what seems like the zillionth time, there has to be at least SOMETHING substantial.  Everyone is so gun shy of Goodell that they just think he's suspend you four games for making the wrong face.  He has a lot of power, but if he's crazy unreasonable he will have a fight on his hands.

Here's a hypothetical:  what happens if the press conference basically says, "The child sustained an injury, we did our due diligence and could not determine what happened but it seems Tyreek was not directly involved"?  Do you really think he gets suspended in that case?  I don't.  Now, the press conference may tell a very different story.  But there are scenarios in which this goes away, and scenarios in which it doesn't.

There's plenty of proof the kid infact had a broken arm at one point.  That's all Roger needs.

He doesn't weigh in guilt or innocence.  It's about protecting the 'brand' and punishing people who he feels have tarnished that brand.

[Adamixoye 604]

Just now, liquidfriend said:

There's plenty of proof the kid infact had a broken arm at one point.  That's all Roger needs.

He doesn't weigh in guilt or innocence.  It's about protecting the 'brand' and punishing people who he feels have tarnished that brand.

(A) I have not seen "plenty of proof" that the kid had a broken arm.  It's certainly possible, but there was the tweet after the report where the kid seemed fine.  I haven't seen a single direct report of the broken arm, only second-hand rumor.

(B) The rest I guess we have to agree to disagree.  You think the NFLPA or owners are going to stand for it if Goodell hands down a suspension for a kid's injury when there is no evidence the player was a direct or indirect cause?  An injury is not "all Roger needs," as I gave examples of earlier - his power has its limits.

[liquidfriend 1,151]

7 minutes ago, Adamixoye said:

(A) I have not seen "plenty of proof" that the kid had a broken arm.  It's certainly possible, but there was the tweet after the report where the kid seemed fine.  I haven't seen a single direct report of the broken arm, only second-hand rumor.

(B) The rest I guess we have to agree to disagree.  You think the NFLPA or owners are going to stand for it if Goodell hands down a suspension for a kid's injury when there is no evidence the player was a direct or indirect cause?  An injury is not "all Roger needs," as I gave examples of earlier - his power has its limits.

(A) There are pictures of the kid in a cast.  That ends that debate.

(B) The NFLPA and owners have no power.  It's in the CBA.

[Adamixoye 604]

The core of what I'm saying is that most people are oversimplifying and not willing to live with uncertainty.  We don't know what happened, Goodell's power is not absolute, there are a lot of ways this COULD play out, some more probable than others.

And if this turns out poorly for Tyreek and the Chiefs it won't mean I was wrong about withholding judgment until now.  But hopefully most of that uncertainty goes away today.

[Adamixoye 604]

Just now, liquidfriend said:

(A) There are pictures of the kid in a cast.  That ends that debate.

(B) The NFLPA and owners have no power.  It's in the CBA.

(A) First I'm hearing of that, I haven't seen the pictures.

(B) Simply not true, the CBA gives Goodell wide latitude but his power is not absolute as shown in the Elliott case.

[liquidfriend 1,151]

Uh yeah, his power is totally absolute when it comes to disciplining players for being involved in conduct that's considered a detriment to the league. 

[kkuenn 3,597]

Broken arm, if so when? I ask when because was he even there then? What I remember he was not even in town during the 2nd incident and the first was already dropped

[Mloe68 1,521]

2 hours ago, Adamixoye said:

Side note, this is a misunderstanding of what "circumstantial" evidence is.  People get convicted of crimes based on "circumstantial" evidence all of the time, and the legal system allows for that.  But circumstantial evidence can be strong - a DNA match, motive, opportunity, etc.

What we have with Tyreek is less than that.  There is pretty good circumstantial evidence that something negative happened to the child, enough for the authorities to be concerned.  There is pretty much zero evidence, circumstantial or otherwise - at least that is publicly available - that indicates the who, what, and how.  We could add Tyreek's history with DV as a piece of circumstantial evidence, but even that doesn't move the needle when when the other facts are unknown.  For example, what are the child's injuries, if any?  I don't think the allegations of a broken arm are anything more than rumor at this point.

Good points. 

[Adamixoye 604]

1 minute ago, liquidfriend said:

Uh yeah, his power is totally absolute when it comes to disciplining players for being involved in conduct that's considered a detriment to the league. 

When you provided information that contradicted my assumptions, like the existence of a photo of the kid in a cast, I tried to address it and acknowledge that there was maybe something I didn't know about.

But there are well-known cases that show the limits of Goodell's power, you can keep ignoring them if you want, but they are there.

[liquidfriend 1,151]

You guys must have been living under a rock when Tom Brady faced his month long suspension for not actually doing anything involving breaking the law, and they had zero actual proof of him being involved.

[reesebobby 5,662]

2 minutes ago, liquidfriend said:

You guys must have been living under a rock when Tom Brady faced his month long suspension for not actually doing anything involving breaking the law, and they had zero actual proof of him being involved.

That was for football related on the field cheating. There’s a difference between maintaining the integrity of the game vs managing the personal affairs of players. 

[Adamixoye 604]

7 minutes ago, liquidfriend said:

You guys must have been living under a rock when Tom Brady faced his month long suspension for not actually doing anything involving breaking the law, and they had zero actual proof of him being involved.

You're shifting the goal posts.  The fact that Brady didn't break the law is irrelevant, again I have said several times that I understand suspensions do not require a conviction or even charges.  Also, there were some pretty questionable texts in the Brady case.  Brady fought it and many of his court losses were split decisions, he gave up before taking it to the Supreme Court and we don't know what might have happened there.

Elliott got his suspension delayed for a LONG time and shortened in the end, even though the evidence (testimony, photos) was pretty damning in that case.

As of right now there is far less publicly known evidence against Tyreek than in either of those cases.

[liquidfriend 1,151]

5 minutes ago, reesebobby said:

That was for football related on the field cheating. There’s a difference between maintaining the integrity of the game vs managing the personal affairs of players. 

There is absolutely no difference what so ever.  He can punish players for conduct that's a detriment to the NFL, even without charges pressed. 

Ezekiel Elliot, Adrian Peterson, Johnny Manziel (suspended before any actual resolutions), Brady

Goodell can rule like a god an basically your only recourse is in a federal court, which isn't player friendly.

[Mloe68 1,521]

8 minutes ago, liquidfriend said:

You guys must have been living under a rock when Tom Brady faced his month long suspension for not actually doing anything involving breaking the law, and they had zero actual proof of him being involved.

Its a good point about Goodell pretty much being able to do whatever he wants right now. But they did have text messages between the equipment manager and a locker room attendant which obviously implicated Brady. And we've clearly established breaking the law doesn't mean anything. The NFL drug rules aren't necessary illegal drugs but make up 95 percent of the penalties.

In any case texts between two other parties is indeed circumstancial though. Of course we all know he was without question guilty. Then again after reading many other QBs comment on this, it really wasn't unusual. 

[liquidfriend 1,151]

9 minutes ago, Adamixoye said:

You're shifting the goal posts.  The fact that Brady didn't break the law is irrelevant, again I have said several times that I understand suspensions do not require a conviction or even charges.  Also, there were some pretty questionable texts in the Brady case.  Brady fought it and many of his court losses were split decisions, he gave up before taking it to the Supreme Court and we don't know what might have happened there.

Elliott got his suspension delayed for a LONG time and shortened in the end, even though the evidence (testimony, photos) was pretty damning in that case.

As of right now there is far less publicly known evidence against Tyreek than in either of those cases.

No I'm not lmao

The point is Goodell can suspend freely and doesn't need any concrete evidence or actual charges filed to do it.  He can do whatever he wants as he's the judge, the jury and the executioner.  This isn't rocket science.

Backing that up by citing multiple examples of Roger Goodell doing as he pleases isn't moving the goal posts at all.  Try again, space cowboy.

[Mloe68 1,521]

46 minutes ago, liquidfriend said:

The Chiefs didn't even know this press conference was even happening until it was announced, so yeah.

The Johnson County DA could care less about the NFL draft. Then again maybe he's a season ticket holder. LOL.  I know this county well and all they care about is money. 

[liquidfriend 1,151]

6 minutes ago, Mloe68 said:

The Johnson County DA could care less about the NFL draft. Then again maybe he's a season ticket holder. LOL.  I know this county well and all they care about is money. 

He's notoriously difficult to work with, so I don't think he gives a shit about the Chiefs or the draft or anything.  No hidden agendas.

Think they've just had enough time to investigate the claim and make a decision from the hearing they had.

Publicly announcing charges would be a bold strategy for the DA that may not favor well in court.

[Fmbl2187 2,279]

1 hour ago, Adamixoye said:

Seems like this is either good news or bad news instead of maintaining the unknown status quo

[Calichief 3,016]

Tyreek did nothing. Nothing will happen.

[FANATIC 852]

2 hours ago, Mloe68 said:

The Johnson County DA could care less about the NFL draft. Then again maybe he's a season ticket holder. LOL.  I know this county well and all they care about is money. 

How do you know that?  Care less?Rumor has it he is a Donkey Season Ticket Holder. Yes Fanatic Started that rumor.

[Mloe68 1,521]

3 hours ago, FANATIC said:

How do you know that?  Care less?Rumor has it he is a Donkey Season Ticket Holder. Yes Fanatic Started that rumor.

Hey it was probably a Chargers fan that probably leaked the Kareem Hunt video so who knows for sure. I’ve just lived in this county a long time and know how they roll. They want to nail someone for the fines or court costs alone. Feeds the machine. 

[Handswarmer 645]

On 4/24/2019 at 9:49 AM, Adamixoye said:

• "Jamaal just made phone call"
• "Ray just broke up a fight"
• "No one got shot"

Yeah, definitely doesn't sound like you're downplaying those incidents at all.

And again, that all misses the point.  You made an earlier statement that Tyreek was "in the house at the time" of the instances of abuse - do we even know that?  We do not.

IIRC Ray Lewis wasn't suspended for his incident, so it's pretty much irrelevant (though as Mloe points out, it was a different league under Paul than Roger), and actually supports my point - you'll need something more substantial before Tyreek could be suspended, rather than just affiliation and innuendo.

The Johnson County (Kansas) District Attorney's office has declined to file charges against Kansas City Chiefs star wide receiver Tyreek Hill or his fiancée, it was announced Wednesday.

District Attorney Stephen M. Howe said that although he believes a crime occurred, the evidence in the case doesn't clearly establish who committed the crime.