Hill Investigated for Battery. Oh no.

[Adamixoye 604]

3 minutes ago, Handswarmer said:

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.

Yes, we now know *slightly* more about the incident, but Hill's role, if any, has not been established.

None of my other points have been addressed.

[Handswarmer 645]

6 minutes ago, Adamixoye said:

Yes, we now know *slightly* more about the incident, but Hill's role, if any, has not been established.

None of my other points have been addressed.

You are trying to asses Goodell's power, not me.

Kid got his arm broken by his parents- HIS PARENTS. They also lost custody of the child, something no one is talking about....

He has a history of DV with a conviction....this hasn't ended and won't end well for Hill. Just my opinion. 6 games suspended.

[Adamixoye 604]

2 minutes ago, Handswarmer said:

You are trying to asses Goodell's power, not me.

Well if you acknowledge we're discussing different things then perhaps you should stop quoting me.

2 minutes ago, Handswarmer said:

Kid got his arm broken by his parents- HIS PARENTS. They also lost custody of the child, something no one is talking about....

The DA would not confirm the former.  FWIW.  It's likely one of them was the perpetrator, but we honestly do not know for sure.

[Handswarmer 645]

1 minute ago, Adamixoye said:

Well if you acknowledge we're discussing different things then perhaps you should stop quoting me.

The DA would not confirm the former.  FWIW.  It's likely one of them was the perpetrator, but we honestly do not know for sure.

USA TODAY Sports obtained two separate police reports dated on March 5 and March 14. The first report is listed as a “child abuse / neglect” case with no victim, while the second is a “battery” incident in which the lone victim listed is a juvenile.- USA Today

[Adamixoye 604]

2 minutes ago, Handswarmer said:

USA TODAY Sports obtained two separate police reports dated on March 5 and March 14. The first report is listed as a “child abuse / neglect” case with no victim, while the second is a “battery” incident in which the lone victim listed is a juvenile.- USA Today

Yes, keep quoting random facts that don't address the issue.  I'm aware of both reports.

I watched the press conference.  The DA would not confirm the nature of the child's injuries.  He used the term "hurt" at one point but would not get more specific.

He was asked about other people in the house and the involvement of other parties and he would not comment on that either.

Hill was not listed on the second report that mentions battery, and there is some evidence he was out of town when it happened.  That's been out there since the beginning of this mess.

[Fmbl2187 2,279]

The whole thing that is weird is the double standard of outrage.  In our world, men have forever been given a pass for slapping around or beating their wives and inflicting corporal punishment on their kids, often being considered derelict for NOT doing so in some circles.  Add in the fact that football is a violent game played by aggressive and strong young men, and it is weird that anyone at all is upset about any of this.  I am upset, but I am one of those snowflakes that does not believe in slapping or punching around our own spouses and children, not to mention anyone else's.  Yet, I love this violent, graceful, complicated, and amazing sport.  I just cannot reconcile any of it in my reasoning brain.

[Adamixoye 604]

1 minute ago, Fmbl2187 said:

The whole thing that is weird is the double standard of outrage.  In our world, men have forever been given a pass for slapping around or beating their wives and inflicting corporal punishment on their kids, often being considered derelict for NOT doing so, in some circles.  Add in the fact that football is a violent game played by aggressive and strong young men, and it is weird that anyone at all is upset about any of this.  I am upset, but I am one of those snowflakes that does not believe in slapping or punching around our own spouses and children, not to mention anyone else's.  Yet, I love this violent, graceful, complicated, and amazing sport.  I just cannot reconcile any of it in my reasoning brain.

The intent of football is to physically overpower someone in a competition both parties consent to, not to injure a less powerful person.  Injuries are a risk but not the intent.

Contradiction solved.

[Fmbl2187 2,279]

4 minutes ago, Adamixoye said:

The intent of football is to physically overpower someone in a competition both parties consent to, not to injure a less powerful person.  Injuries are a risk but not the intent.

Contradiction solved.

That helps.  Yet, these players are expected to simply turn off the aggressive switch like a light switch once they walk out of the facility?  That still makes no sense psychologically.  Brains simply don't, and can't be expected to, work that way, at least for a significant percent of humans. The contradiction may be solved in the reasoning brain, but not in practical reality.

[FANATIC 852]

Per Hills Attorney 

 

Brooke Pryor‏Verified account @bepryor 18m18 minutes ago

More

Also in the Hill release: “Tyreek has maintained from the inception and throughout the investigation that he was innocent of any crime. Contrary to some media reports, Tyreek cooperated with law enforcement, waived his 5th Amend rights, and answered Qs from both police and DCF”

[Adamixoye 604]

6 minutes ago, Fmbl2187 said:

That helps.  Yet, these players are expected to simply turn off the aggressive switch like a light switch once they walk out of the facility?  That still makes no sense psychologically.  Brains simply don't, and can't be expected to, work that way, at least for a significant percent of humans. The contradiction may be solved in the reasoning brain, but not in practical reality.

I don't know that it is true that so people can't compartmentalize.  If it is true then more care must be taken to address that in those individuals, but I don't feel I am hypocritical or encouraging violence for enjoying the sport.

[Adamixoye 604]

2 minutes ago, FANATIC said:

Per Hills Attorney 

 

Brooke Pryor‏Verified account @bepryor 18m18 minutes ago

More

Also in the Hill release: “Tyreek has maintained from the inception and throughout the investigation that he was innocent of any crime. Contrary to some media reports, Tyreek cooperated with law enforcement, waived his 5th Amend rights, and answered Qs from both police and DCF”

I really hope this is true BUT considering the DA won't comment on this, it's unlikely we'll get it confirmed and entirely possible his lawyers are saying this because they know they can get away with it.

[Fmbl2187 2,279]

19 minutes ago, Adamixoye said:

I don't know that it is true that so people can't compartmentalize.  If it is true then more care must be taken to address that in those individuals, but I don't feel I am hypocritical or encouraging violence for enjoying the sport.

I enjoy the violence of the sport, no question.  BUT...no.  Most people cannot compartmentalize their emotions.  It just isn't the case.  If we had a bad day at work, we come home irritable and short-tempered.  We don't leave our emotional state at the office door.  Get real.

[Calichief 3,016]

23 minutes ago, FANATIC said:

Per Hills Attorney 

 

Brooke Pryor‏Verified account @bepryor 18m18 minutes ago

More

Also in the Hill release: “Tyreek has maintained from the inception and throughout the investigation that he was innocent of any crime. Contrary to some media reports, Tyreek cooperated with law enforcement, waived his 5th Amend rights, and answered Qs from both police and DCF”

I was just getting ready to post this. People need to slow their roles. Everyone assumes it was hill because of his past. This guy 99% wasn’t involved. Just because the DA said a crime had been committed, doesn’t it mean he’s talking about hill. Smh

[Adamixoye 604]

Just now, Fmbl2187 said:

I enjoy the violence of the sport, no question.  BUT...no.  Most people cannot compartmentalize their emotions.  It just isn't the case.  If we had a bad day at work, we come home irritable and short-tempered.  We don't leave our emotional state at the office door.  Get real.

Big difference between not being able to compartmentalize general emotions and not being able to compartmentalize playing football vs. hitting your kids.

[Fmbl2187 2,279]

5 minutes ago, Adamixoye said:

Big difference between not being able to compartmentalize general emotions and not being able to compartmentalize playing football vs. hitting your kids.

Depends on the person.  Someone who experienced violence against them as a child would be far less able to compartmentalize than a football player who had a different kind of emotional programming.

[kkuenn 3,597]

4 minutes ago, Fmbl2187 said:

Depends on the person.  Someone who experienced violence against them as a child would be far less able to compartmentalize than a football player who had a different kind of emotional programming.

I have came home from long deployments before and still knew right and wrong. Sure you have a case or 2 but a person knows a lot of the time it is wrong. Now this will not include anyone suffering from a TBI as know one knows unless the person seeks help, what is going on in the head. I even suffer from PTSD but I still never hit my wife or kids.

[Adamixoye 604]

I'm willing to buy it's an issue for some small subset of people but I would need a lot more data before I thought there was an undeniable issue that leads to a widespread problem.

Just think about how many people who play football at the HS or college level and aren't guilty of DV.

[Fmbl2187 2,279]

3 minutes ago, kkuenn said:

I have came home from long deployments before and still knew right and wrong. Sure you have a case or 2 but a person knows a lot of the time it is wrong. Now this will not include anyone suffering from a TBI as know one knows unless the person seeks help, what is going on in the head. I even suffer from PTSD but I still never hit my wife or kids.

Your emotional trauma came as an adult, though.  Something placed on top of a longer life of normal experiences.  That is very different from the emotional damage inflicted on someone when they are 2 or 3 years old.  PTSD will make you anxious, reactive, and depressed at times, and that is extremely difficult.  My heart goes out to you.  But it is a different thing from the immediate anger response that is programmed when you are 3.  You still have choices and other values.  You can still have a few seconds to choose and react to things appropriately.

[Adamixoye 604]

1 minute ago, Fmbl2187 said:

Your emotional trauma came as an adult, though.  Something placed on top of a longer life of normal experiences.  That is very different from the emotional damage inflicted on someone when they are 2 or 3 years old.  PTSD will make you anxious, reactive, and depressed at times, and that is extremely difficult.  My heart goes out to you.  But it is a different thing from the immediate anger response that is programmed when you are 3.  You still have choices and other values.  You can still have a few seconds to choose and react to things appropriately.

This is now a different topic.  We were talking about whether playing football professionally made you more violent in your private life.  If you're talking about trauma as a young child that's not relevant.

[kkuenn 3,597]

11 minutes ago, Fmbl2187 said:

Your emotional trauma came as an adult, though.  Something placed on top of a longer life of normal experiences.  That is very different from the emotional damage inflicted on someone when they are 2 or 3 years old.  PTSD will make you anxious, reactive, and depressed at times, and that is extremely difficult.  My heart goes out to you.  But it is a different thing from the immediate anger response that is programmed when you are 3.  You still have choices and other values.  You can still have a few seconds to choose and react to things appropriately.

I thought we were talking of Hill and him and other NFL players being able to shut off from the physical play of the NFL. Even abused kids can learn from their past and not do it too. Sure more than likely they will offended at a higher rate but my past as a child was not great either.

 

It is why I am, who I am and doing what I do to correct it in my life for my kids. This is not a poor me. I made my choice to go military  to better myself and stay 24 years in for the betterment of my kids life. This is just my POV as I seen plenty of it in the military.

[Fmbl2187 2,279]

8 minutes ago, Adamixoye said:

This is now a different topic.  We were talking about whether playing football professionally made you more violent in your private life.  If you're talking about trauma as a young child that's not relevant.

We were talking about professional football players who have a history of DV.  That isn't a different topic.  Violent trauma as a young child inflicted in a domestic situation is extremely relevant to this and explains why some football players have this and some don't...and not just football players.

 

[Handswarmer 645]

So let us review:

-Hill was convicted of punching and choking Espinal in 2014while she was pregnant (His child?)

-Hill completes his diversion program in 2018 and has charges expunged from record.

-Police called twice to Hill's home in 2019, once for "Child Abuse" and once for "Assault on Juvenile"

-Hill NOT arrested, was, along with Espinal, being investigated by Police and CPS

-Child was removed from the their (Hill's and Espinal's) custody

-Police believe a crime occurred but lack the evidence to determine whom to charge

-NFL asks for info, but is rebuffed by DA due to the nature of the "ongoing investigation"

-Hill not out of the woods yet; could face charges if new evidence comes to light

-Conspiracy theories abound

[Handswarmer 645]

On 3/15/2019 at 5:55 PM, Mloe68 said:

Don't agree at all. What Hunt did was out of rage and completely innappropriate in any context. If Tyreek or his wife was spanking a kid and he reaches back to protect his butt and it somehow breaks his arm, I'd call that an accident. If he's chasing the kid around the house beating him Rodney King style, I've got no sympathy. There is a very fine line here. 

I would hope you do not still feel this way.

[KC Warpaint 3,234]

23 hours ago, Calichief said:

I was just getting ready to post this. People need to slow their roles. Everyone assumes it was hill because of his past. This guy 99% wasn’t involved. Just because the DA said a crime had been committed, doesn’t it mean he’s talking about hill. Smh

damage has been done, regardless of whether he was or was not directly involved in this particular incident. i dont give a shit about him or his so called fiancee

what we should be concerned with is the child and the unborn children she is carrying, who will protect them?

[BroncoStud 3,253]

On 4/24/2019 at 11:19 AM, 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.

^^^ I'll take "Comments that aren't aging well" for $500 Alex ^^^