Source says Ray Rice video was sent from law enforcement to NFL back in April

[MTC]

Ugh, total PR move.

 

Former FBI Director Robert S. Mueller III will conduct an independent investigation Ray Rice incident, Commissioner Roger Goodell announced.

— Adam Schefter (@AdamSchefter)

September 11, 2014

[ColtsBlueFL]

I think comments coming from the NFLPA are sort of taking advantage because they smell blood in the water. They are negotiating several other issues with the league at the moment, and their sticking point with many of them is Goodell's role in levying suspensions and hearing appeals.

 

Because their position falls on deaf ears when the NFL is humming and raking in cash.  When are they supposed to get their point across then?

 

I also disagree that Goodell has been judge, jury and executioner. It's a catchy phrase, but it doesn't hold up. In cases of personal conduct, players have several methods of recourse, including legal recourse. Bountygate proves that.

 

Ex President of CBS Sport sees it different-  "Neal Pilson also noted how the NFL would be better off replicating the disciplinary process used by other major sports leagues, which have separate executives in charge of suspensions. The commissioner gets involved only if players appeal the decision."

 

As for the other pending domestic violence issues, first of all, it's probably a good thing that nothing has been done, yet. Any decisions made would seem tainted. And the primary difference between the other cases and the Rice case is that Goodell waited for the legal process to play out. That's best in most cases, unless the legal process is dragging on interminably. In this case, the incident happened in February, the legal process was "done" in May. No rush for the NFL, IMO.

 

What about a conviction that is then placed under appeal? Or McDonald?  Let him play? An expert that helped craft the new policy disagrees, as you'll see below.

 

I said this before, this incident highlights, to me, how Goodell and people in positions like his can't win. He comes out in the beginning of his tenure and establishes a reputation for being a hard-nosed, no nonsense commissioner who will drop the hammer on people who are continually running afoul of the law. He's resented for it (even though the violators were nut jobs, doing crazy things like beating up strippers and shooting guns in night clubs, etc.), and his actions are blown out of proportion because of a handful of high profile situations. Then Bountygate happens; he comes down hard, and his player suspensions are vacated entirely. The Ray Rice situation is the first incident that Goodell takes care of since Bountygate; perhaps he learned a lesson from Bountygate, but misapplied it. It used to be that people thought he was too hard on players, and now they're made at him for not being hard enough on Ray Rice. And now, he's dropped the hammer on Ray Rice, and people are complaining that his suspension isn't in keeping with the 6 game policy.

 

Neal Pilson again says - "Goodell and other NFL executives understand they fumbled the Rice situation. It’s a serious black eye for the league and for Roger. Looking back on it, the league should have insisted on seeing the tape,” said Pilson, the founder and president of Pilson Communications. “I think if Roger had seen the tape, the penalties would have been far more severe.”

 

So maybe if he's been proactive at getting the tape, he would never have said 2 games, and maybe not even changed it to 6 but maybe even more punitive.  That's the message he's sending.  Do you want to know what Average Joe or Jane think? Or even Morning Joe (Scarborough, the only show I watch on MSNBC).  That NFL punishes guys a year for smoking weed and 2 games for punching women.  No, they don't mention or even know it akes a 3rd offense to get that year.  But to average Joe/Jane not only doesn't matter, it isn't even brought up.

 

In reality, it IS in keeping with the policy. The policy, as the memo stated, allows for the commissioner to take whatever action he feels is appropriate, including an indefinite suspension, even on a first offense. If you read it, you'll see very clearly that it makes way for mitigating circumstances; it does not tie the commissioner to a strict six game suspension on a first offense. It could be more; it could even be less.

 

I don't think the general public is in agreement with his policy.  From what I see, they want something like immediate suspension on arrests, before the judicial system has even begun rolling.  and not sure 6 games will pass muster either.  Or that he picks and chooses who gets what.

 

Here is a freshly minted Stanford Report issue (9/9/2014), a must read about the Systemic Problems of the NFL right now.

 

http://news.stanford.edu/news/2014/september/nfl-domestic-abuse-090914.html

 

And Ray Rice is suspended indefinitely, not six games, not a year, not two years. He's suspended until he's on a roster and the commissioner reviews the entire situation, at some point in the future. If someone signed him tomorrow, the commissioner would review the case and determine whether Rice can play, and when. "Indefinite" isn't more, less, or equal to six games.

 

Finally, getting one players punishment potentially right after screwing it up to begin with does not mean he did a good job.  It means he and the league need further investigation and guidance to restore public trust. And, William B. Gould IV, professor emeritus at Stanford Law School and scholar of labor and discrimination law foresees Rice suing the NFL and arguing that he had already been punished once and that the termination and suspension is a case of double jeopardy. A trial might prove uncomfortable for the NFL, which would have to explain, for example, why it wasn't aware of the video showing Rice punching his then-fiancee.

 

To finish, I found one of those experts you mentioned helped craft the new and improved NFL domestic policy, and it is not endorsing at all-  Enjoy.

 

http://mmqb.si.com/2014/09/09/esta-soler-nfl-domestic-violence-policy-ray-rice/

[ColtsBlueFL]

Oh, BTW, the withdrawal and resubmission of Rice penalty is mistake #2 I refer to (discounting Bountygate for this purpose).  Because Ray is not eligible for arbitration, he has the right to sue the NFL and just might for double jeopardy.

[Superman]

Ugh, total PR move.

 

Former FBI Director Robert S. Mueller III will conduct an independent investigation Ray Rice incident, Commissioner Roger Goodell announced.

— Adam Schefter (@AdamSchefter)

September 11, 2014

 

So what should they do? Goodell should just resign, and then everything is right in the world, right?

 

Why not dig up all the bodies and figure out exactly what happened?

[ColtsBlueFL]

So what should they do? Goodell should just resign, and then everything is right in the world, right?

 

Why not dig up all the bodies and figure out exactly what happened?

 

The Ray Rice story should be buried, it's used up, unless/until he files a lawsuit vs. the NFL.  In my opinion, the next target is McDonald (who I feel should be suspended with pay until he is charged, or dismissed as a person of interest and is then allowed on the field).  Hardy has been convicted and should be suspended without pay while going through the appeals process, both IMO.  However the NFL is not taking a strong stance on domestic issues so are letting both play on...  IME, it shows me they really are not as committed to that new policy as they want us to believe.

[Poster X]

Someone in the NFL offices is getting fired. 

The top dog needs to go, and the people bellow him will soon follow.

[Andy]

I've always been a fan of Roger Goodell. He's made his mistakes, but I find he's done a great job with the league.

 

However, he has not handled this situation properly. Had he had rules and conditions set in place for domestic violence, we wouldn't be in this mess, or at least this deep. For starters, this doesn't have to be repeated, but 2 games was nothing and it's a joke. 

 

I'm not saying that he has seen the video and he's lying. No one, not even "insider sources" know if he has truly seen the film. There could be an issue within the NFL and they never got the film. The law that Goodell stated is a valid law and it makes sense. 

 

Honestly, at this point, it doesn't even matter if he's seen it or not, he just hasn't handled it properly. It's a mess and he knows it. Now, what pisses me off even more is that the National Organizations for Women come out of the woodworks and start asking for his resignation. Those dumb groups should keep their mouths shut and worry about their own business. The fact that there is an organization solely for women in the 21st century is a joke, and the fact that they are coming out and saying this is even funnier. Personally, I think those groups give women in general a bad rap. Anyways, this is not a road I want to go down.

 

To recap, I wish people and the media would quit pressuring Goodell and the NFL and let this play out. The point is, Rice is out of the NFL for a long time and has a lot of issues to deal with. The preparation wasn't great but the execution was proper. That's all that matters in the end. As I mentioned, he's not in the league anymore. Anything Goodell and the NFL does is for the better of the league, that's why there has been a rapid growth in the NFL in both North America and in International markets in the Goodell era. At this point, I don't care if he saw the video in April or not, he made the right call in the end and he learnt from his (2 game ban) mistake.

[Superman]

Because their position falls on deaf ears when the NFL is humming and raking in cash.  When are they supposed to get their point across then?

 

If the NFLPA had said "this situation highlights why Goodell shouldn't have the authority he has, and why we've been fighting to get some separation of powers," that would be different. What they said was 'Goodell messed this up to begin with, and we knew that he'd mess this up, and that's why we've been trying to get him to give up power.' And that's bogus, because the argument from the NFLPA has always been that Goodell is too harsh. Now, he's too lenient, and that has no legs because the Ravens knew everything Goodell knew, and they could have levied a more harsh punishment against Rice if they chose to do so. The NFLPA could have investigated on their own and determined that Rice deserved more than two games.

 

If anything, this situation runs counter to the NFLPA's argument all these years. They are exploiting it to get what they want. Good for them, but it's cheap, and I disagree with their angle to begin with. As I said, I think it's backwards. Out of the other side of his mouth, DeMaurice Smith is questioning why Rice is being suspended indefinitely. Anything to defend their union, whether it's on the level or not.

 

Ex President of CBS Sport sees it different-  "Neal Pilson also noted how the NFL would be better off replicating the disciplinary process used by other major sports leagues, which have separate executives in charge of suspensions. The commissioner gets involved only if players appeal the decision."

 

That's fine. Doesn't mean Goodell has had autonomy over situations like this. And again, this is an entirely misplaced argument in the context of Ray Rice. Or Ray McDonald, for that matter, where again, the argument is that the policy is too lenient and not acting fast enough. If Goodell had suspended Ray McDonald as soon as he was arrested, prior to the Rice situation, people would be crying foul for Goodell being overly zealous. If he suspended him post-Rice, it's a PR move (see comments in this very thread as evidence). If he waits, he's not doing enough soon enough. No win for the NFL. Everyone hates everything they do when it comes to player conduct suspensions.

 

What about a conviction that is then placed under appeal? Or McDonald?  Let him play? An expert that helped craft the new policy disagrees, as you'll see below.

 

Again, I think it's fair to consider this. But I'm relatively certain that, a couple weeks ago, the NFLPA was arguing against immediate suspensions for players arrested for anything, including domestic violence and DUI.

 

Neal Pilson again says - "Goodell and other NFL executives understand they fumbled the Rice situation. It’s a serious black eye for the league and for Roger. Looking back on it, the league should have insisted on seeing the tape,” said Pilson, the founder and president of Pilson Communications. “I think if Roger had seen the tape, the penalties would have been far more severe.”

 

So maybe if he's been proactive at getting the tape, he would never have said 2 games, and maybe not even changed it to 6 but maybe even more punitive.  That's the message he's sending.  Do you want to know what Average Joe or Jane think? Or even Morning Joe (Scarborough, the only show I watch on MSNBC).  That NFL punishes guys a year for smoking weed and 2 games for punching women.  No, they don't mention or even know it akes a 3rd offense to get that year.  But to average Joe/Jane not only doesn't matter, it isn't even brought up.

 

I don't think the general public is in agreement with his policy.  From what I see, they want something like immediate suspension on arrests, before the judicial system has even begun rolling.  and not sure 6 games will pass muster either.  Or that he picks and chooses who gets what.

 

The average Joe or Jane doesn't know what they're talking about, or does know but would rather deal in sound bites and absolutes. The whole "two games for beating your wife, a year for smoking weed" angle is misinformed, and IMO, it makes anyone who repeats it sound ignorant. Two games for domestic violence is obviously not appropriate, but the personal conduct policy is entirely different from the substance abuse policy, and YOU know that as well as anyone else on this forum. I don't think the NFL should base their policies on what the misinformed masses think.

 

And whether Goodell saw the tape or not, two games wasn't appropriate. Everyone said so at the time, and none of us had seen the tape. If the new policy were in place, it would still have been at Goodell's discretion to determine the length of the suspension, based on mitigating factors. Again, the six games guideline isn't a hard and fast rule. If a player resorts to domestic violence, he can be suspended more (or less) than six games for a first offense. 

 

Here is a freshly minted Stanford Report issue (9/9/2014), a must read about the Systemic Problems of the NFL right now.

 

http://news.stanford...use-090914.html

 

An interesting piece. I'm going to ruminate on it, but one thing that stands out to me is how Gould says that the reaction to the initial penalty set the stage. That's kind of what I've been saying. People have been dissatisfied with the handling of this situation from the beginning. People who said Rice should be out of the league aren't happy now, even though he's out of the league. When will they be satisfied? Does everyone have to go down with Rice? As he said: "No matter what happens, the NFL comes out looking bad." That's their own fault, but at what point will the thirst for blood be quenched?

 

Finally, getting one players punishment potentially right after screwing it up to begin with does not mean he did a good job.  It means he and the league need further investigation and guidance to restore public trust. And, William B. Gould IV, professor emeritus at Stanford Law School and scholar of labor and discrimination law foresees Rice suing the NFL and arguing that he had already been punished once and that the termination and suspension is a case of double jeopardy. A trial might prove uncomfortable for the NFL, which would have to explain, for example, why it wasn't aware of the video showing Rice punching his then-fiancee.

 

To finish, I found one of those experts you mentioned helped craft the new and improved NFL domestic policy, and it is not endorsing at all-  Enjoy.

 

http://mmqb.si.com/2014/09/09/esta-soler-nfl-domestic-violence-policy-ray-rice/

 

I'm certain I never said Goodell did a good job. I said the indefinite suspension is the right call, despite the way they reached that point. Do you disagree with that?

 

I'm not a legal expert like Gould, but it's hard to imagine a private entity like the NFL being sued for double jeopardy. I'm pretty sure double jeopardy is a constitutional protection from the government. And Rice wasn't tried for anything, as the NFL didn't hold a trial before determining his guilt and punishment. I feel, based on my limited knowledge, that double jeopardy doesn't apply. 

 

To the bolded, the NFL has announced an independent investigation. So far, the announcement has been met with boos.

 

Soler says she stands by the policy. Her problem is with the implementation of the policy, so far. I'm not sure what that has to do with Rice, but she says that McDonald should be suspended with pay, pending a resolution of his situation. That's a fair stance, I think, but as I said earlier, I doubt the NFLPA would take that lying down (which is duplicitous on their part). 

[Superman]

The Ray Rice story should be buried, it's used up, unless/until he files a lawsuit vs. the NFL.  In my opinion, the next target is McDonald (who I feel should be suspended with pay until he is charged, or dismissed as a person of interest and is then allowed on the field).  Hardy has been convicted and should be suspended without pay while going through the appeals process, both IMO.  However the NFL is not taking a strong stance on domestic issues so are letting both play on...  IME, it shows me they really are not as committed to that new policy as they want us to believe.

 

I don't get this. Why should the NFL decide against an independent investigation? And how is that related to Rice potentially filing a (bogus, IMO) lawsuit against the league?

 

The Hardy situation is messy. He was convicted by a judge, but has appealed to have a trial by jury (and his case has always seemed fishy to me, even before the girl admitted to using cocaine). As I said earlier, it makes sense to have a paid suspension pending outcome, but the NFLPA would fight against that with all their might. 

[ColtsBlueFL]

I don't get this. Why should the NFL decide against an independent investigation? And how is that related to Rice potentially filing a (bogus, IMO) lawsuit against the league?

 

The Hardy situation is messy. He was convicted by a judge, but has appealed to have a trial by jury (and his case has always seemed fishy to me, even before the girl admitted to using cocaine). As I said earlier, it makes sense to have a paid suspension pending outcome, but the NFLPA would fight against that with all their might. 

 

Because the NFL really has not clarified the threshold for what constitutes a domestic violence “offense” under the new policy. Along those lines, it is not clear whether “offense” requires a conviction or guilty plea, or a lesser threshold of an arrest, civil lawsuit or mere accusation.  It is poor implementation.  And NFLPA going against doing the right thing is why the NFL needs to be investigated itself.  It seems to be selfishness at the expense of others, of which appears to run rampant in the NFL at every turn.

 

I'm not a legal expert like Gould, but it's hard to imagine a private entity like the NFL being sued for double jeopardy. I'm pretty sure double jeopardy is a constitutional protection from the government. And Rice wasn't tried for anything, as the NFL didn't hold a trial before determining his guilt and punishment. I feel, based on my limited knowledge, that double jeopardy doesn't apply.

 

Maybe not double jeopardy in the 5th amendment judicial sense, but what about Article 46 of the NFL's collective bargaining agreement which I believe states that neither the NFL nor a team (such as the Ravens) can punish a player twice for the same conduct or act?

 

Now do you want to know why what Goodell knew when is so important?  because -

 

"If the NFL knew of the elevator video when it originally suspended Rice but now uses the video’s public disclosure to  justify its harsher suspension on Rice, Rice would surely sue the NFL as acting outside the wide boundaries of the personal conduct policy. While the policy is decidedly broad, it is not limitless, and Rice might contend that an elongated suspension based on information the league already knew constitutes “arbitrary and capricious” decision-making.  Rice would assert that it is arbitrary to use old information to justify a new penalty but not take that approach with other players, and it would also be capricious since Goodell would seem unpredictable and erratic. In addition, the NFLPA could file an unfair labor practices charge with the National Labor Relations Board if Goodell imposed a new penalty based on prior information."

 

I am of the belief the NFL cannot claim that the contents of the video are new evidence, as they were aware of the video's existence and chose not to ensure they saw the video before exacting discipline.  Otherwise, the commissioner would have to explain why they weren't aware of the other tape inside the elevator before ruling the first time if they continue to claim they made a new decision based upon new information.

 

One other potential legal complication. Goodell unilaterally imposed the domestic policy. It was not collectively bargained. While collectively bargained rules that impact players’ wages, hours and working conditions are exempt from federal antitrust law, those same rules are subject to antitrust law when the rule is unilaterally imposed. So that gives Rice a method to sue the NFL under antitrust law, forcing the NFL to litigate the policy and argue it is an extension to the personal conduct policy.  With Rice already suspended, just how attractive a test case would that make? 

 

I'm sure there are great legal minds that can and will come up with all sorts of things on both sides.  I'll be searching for it, and would love Gould to expound on his theory that opens the NFL to a lawsuit, unless it is related to Article 46 mentioned up top.

 

Oh, and I guess I am for the independent investigation of the whole charade. Just like Wells dis for Incognito / Martin.

[amfootball]

The farther this gets along, the more ridiculous I think the scrutiny of the NFL is. Not of how they handled it, but how people really expect them to handle any of these matters in general, and how everyone gets worked up over various punishments doled out by the league. Why do people care what the NFL does with a player who commits a crime? Nobody would care if Ray was just some guy living in Idaho. They wouldn't be calling for him to be fired and shunned from society and executed. What you should really be angry about is the stone-cold evidence they have against him, and yet the justice system does nothing. That is the real problem. What his employer does really shouldn't even be in a conversation. But for some unknown reason, personal insecurities or jealousy of the more fortunate I don't know, people are more concerned with how an employer treats their employee rather than how the legal system does. 

The legal system was handcuffed once his fiancé married him and then by spousal law did not have to testify against him. If the victim does not testify then there is little the law can do to him. It really is that simple and why domestic violence is so complex and disturbing on so many levels.

 

In terms of the NFL, I am not sure I get your point? The NFL is the one with the moral code that suspends players whether they are convicted of a crime or not. It is Goodell that told the fans back when he was hired that his number one job was to clean up the league. And we care because a star player's career is at stake and it would appear that the league did either A) one of the shoddiest jobs investigating the Rice situation or B) covered it up and in the process went from giving him a two game suspension to an indefinite suspension. I mean how do you want fans to react exactly?

[amfootball]

Yeah I still can't justify the public interest in the employment repercussions

Domestic violence doesn't receive this kind of attention without the nfl being involved

There are far worse things happening

Nobody cares unless there is a celebrity's scandle component

In short I really do believe people are far more interested in bringing down celebrities than they are in really doing something about domestic violence

To the bolded- this is a good thing. It often does take a story of this kind for people to get educated and to do something. Very often the ugliness gives way to something beautiful. Many women may be helped by this because they will feel the courage to say something or do something to change their awful situation.

[amfootball]

My thoughts exactly. ;) Great minds think alike.

And you accuse me of bringing the Pats into every thread? And before you say jvan brought it up, you responded saying you had the same thoughts.

[Nadine]

To the bolded- this is a good thing. It often does take a story of this kind for people to get educated and to do something. Very often the ugliness gives way to something beautiful. Many women may be helped by this because they will feel the courage to say something or do something to change their awful situation.

 

I suppose.

 

But I do see people's point about excessive attention and excessive trial by public outrage.Seems like the sort of thing that feeds on itself

 

There are far worse things that happen that nobody seems to care about so I'm getting more than a little uncomfortable with the excessive attention

 

For example this and the heroic man who saved this woman:  http://www.cnn.com/2014/09/08/justice/mobile-home-captive-freed/

 

Now the NFL has hired a former FBI agent to investigate their investigation?  It's starting to feel like the NFL is like the white house or the royal family with all the attention it gets on things like this.

 

It just kind of creeps me out.

 

I agree that what Rice did was really bad but, you have to admit, this thing has taken on a life of it's own.

[Susie Q]

And you accuse me of bringing the Pats into every thread? And before you say jvan brought it up, you responded saying you had the same thoughts.

Well having the same thoughts and starting  or bringing them up in multiple threads isn't the same in my opinion. 

[amfootball]

I suppose.

 

But I do see people's point about excessive attention and excessive trial by public outrage.Seems like the sort of thing that feeds on itself

 

There are far worse things that happen that nobody seems to care about so I'm getting more than a little uncomfortable with the excessive attention

 

For example this and the heroic man who saved this woman:  http://www.cnn.com/2014/09/08/justice/mobile-home-captive-freed/

 

Now the NFL has hired a former FBI agent to investigate their investigation?  It's starting to feel like the NFL is like the white house or the royal family with all the attention it gets on things like this.

 

It just kind of creeps me out.

 

I agree that what Rice did was really bad but, you have to admit, this thing has taken on a life of it's own.

But this is our culture right now. Everything goes viral and becomes larger than life. Our media landscape has been this way for quite some time. Sensationalism is what drives the news cycle. TMZ as much as we hate them only exists because we crave what they dish out. Honestly, I became disenchanted with communications long ago which is why I am not longer in PR. It is unbelievably hard to get control of social media and public opinion. You almost just have to wait for the next big news story to come along to take its place.

 

But in terms of the NFL, football is the number one sport in America. It receives the attention it does because of its popularity and the fact that it is the most bet on sport. I really think Goodell to some extent went so light on Rice because of how Bountygate blew up in his face. He made a mistake obviously but in the end, as he said, he is accountable to a paying public that helps the NFL rake in billions. So much of this is self-created. If you are going to be a commish whose MO is to rid the league of thugs and crime then the scrutiny is going to be intense. I said on the other Rice thread that if the NFL is serious about this objective then they should back up the process and start getting involved with players in college or even high school and educating them on fame, the media, how to handle their money, women, etc. To punish them after the fact seems counterproductive. Have to get to them before they enter the league.

[amfootball]

Well having the same thoughts and starting  or bringing them up in multiple threads isn't the same in my opinion. 

No worries. I will have your post ready the next time you point the finger at me ... ;)

[Susie Q]

No worries. I will have your post ready the next time you point the finger at me ... ;)

Well the forum wouldn't be any fun if you didn't do that .

[ColtsBlueFL]

I suppose.

 

But I do see people's point about excessive attention and excessive trial by public outrage.Seems like the sort of thing that feeds on itself

 

There are far worse things that happen that nobody seems to care about so I'm getting more than a little uncomfortable with the excessive attention

 

For example this and the heroic man who saved this woman:  http://www.cnn.com/2014/09/08/justice/mobile-home-captive-freed/

 

Now the NFL has hired a former FBI agent to investigate their investigation?  It's starting to feel like the NFL is like the white house or the royal family with all the attention it gets on things like this.

 

It just kind of creeps me out.

 

I agree that what Rice did was really bad but, you have to admit, this thing has taken on a life of it's own.

 

I think part of this is some who have dealt with the NFL throughout their careers do not always agree with how NFL security handles situations.  Lester Munson for one-

 

http://thebiglead.com/2014/09/10/espn-legal-analyst-nfl-security-has-been-digging-up-information-and-hiding-it-for-years/

 

And I saw another one sum up why this is blowing up-

 

"Although Rice's actions were truly despicable, League officials must be forced to correctly discipline players on their first attempt. Otherwise, no discipline is ever final."

[JerodMayo51]

The farther this gets along, the more ridiculous I think the scrutiny of the NFL is. Not of how they handled it, but how people really expect them to handle any of these matters in general, and how everyone gets worked up over various punishments doled out by the league. Why do people care what the NFL does with a player who commits a crime? Nobody would care if Ray was just some guy living in Idaho. They wouldn't be calling for him to be fired and shunned from society and executed. What you should really be angry about is the stone-cold evidence they have against him, and yet the justice system does nothing. That is the real problem. What his employer does really shouldn't even be in a conversation. But for some unknown reason, personal insecurities or jealousy of the more fortunate I don't know, people are more concerned with how an employer treats their employee rather than how the legal system does. 

 

 

Great post.

 

People act like its the NFL's job to go around enforcing the laws of this country.  The police arrested him and the justice system issued no punishment to him criminally WITH THE VIDEO EVIDENCE.

 

The NFL jumped in and suspended him, as they do for all cases like this, and suddenly its this huge national story.  Its beyond ridiculous, and the fact that people still follow so closely and its filling up the radio stations, websites and TV with non-stop chatter about this incident that was already reported months ago is a telling sign of where our society is at as a whole..  and its a frightening reality...

[DougDew]

I suppose.

 

But I do see people's point about excessive attention and excessive trial by public outrage.Seems like the sort of thing that feeds on itself

 

There are far worse things that happen that nobody seems to care about so I'm getting more than a little uncomfortable with the excessive attention

 

For example this and the heroic man who saved this woman:  http://www.cnn.com/2014/09/08/justice/mobile-home-captive-freed/

 

Now the NFL has hired a former FBI agent to investigate their investigation?  It's starting to feel like the NFL is like the white house or the royal family with all the attention it gets on things like this.

 

It just kind of creeps me out.

 

I agree that what Rice did was really bad but, you have to admit, this thing has taken on a life of it's own.

Very good post Nadine. 

 

And why has it taken on a life of its own?  There are many reasons, but most of them deal with what goes on inside a person's own mind...their point of view....their place in life...or their view of the world...and they want that fed and validated before they can move on. 

 

Often with things like this, facts don't matter.

 

The latest story is that "a law enforcement official sent a copy to the NFL"

 

Is that even legal?  Can police send a copy of evidence in a criminal case to a company that is not named a defendent?  If so, I want a copy too.  I want a copy of all hotel elevator tapes everywhere, because I think my rival did something embarrasing and I want the public to know.

 

What is the name of the law enforcement offical?  Should he lose his job for handing evidence to a thrid party?  I doubt that the people who want Goodell's head will ask those questions.

 

Should the NFL admit to have received criminal case evidence illegally?

 

This is becoming nothing more than a bunch of little puny Davids...trying to feel powerful as a collective...trying to take down a Goliath. 

 

Although rude....sometimes the best response is just to give em all the finger.....instead of responding sincerely.  Doing so, just gives them credibility.

[ColtsBlueFL]

Very good post Nadine. 

 

And why has it taken on a life of its own?  There are many reasons, but most of them deal with what goes on inside a person's own mind...their point of view....their place in life...or their view of the world...and they want that fed and validated before they can move on. 

 

Often with things like this, facts don't matter.

 

The latest story is that "a law enforcement official sent a copy to the NFL"

 

Is that even legal?  Can police send a copy of evidence in a criminal case to a company that is not named a defendent?  If so, I want a copy too.  I want a copy of all hotel elevator tapes everywhere, because I think my rival did something embarrasing and I want the public to know.

 

What is the name of the law enforcement offical?  Should he lose his job for handing evidence to a thrid party?  I doubt that the people who want Goodell's head will ask those questions.

 

Should the NFL admit to have received criminal case evidence illegally?

 

This is becoming nothing more than a bunch of little puny Davids...trying to feel powerful as a collective...trying to take down a Goliath. 

 

Although rude....sometimes the best response is just to give em all the finger.....instead of responding sincerely.  Doing so, just gives them credibility.

 

Lester Muinson, ESPN legal Analysis, says this about the NFL security force-

 

"They are expert investigators, former federal agents, a lot of police chiefs, a lot of detectives — they know exactly what they’re doing. And, if they want something, believe me they can get it.”

“My takeaway is they did not want to see the video of what happened in the elevator, and therefore they didn’t get it. They could have had it if they wanted it. If TMZ can get it, the NFL security force can get it.”

 

Others feel NFL tried to do their typical M.O. give a quick sentence, filter the info, and let it blow over.  But the Public won't stand for two game suspension for Punching out your significant other, while giving 4 games for taking her Clomid! (too soon?) 

 

So they come up with a domestic policy. But when a video comes out, NFL re-punishes Rice, not to the new policy standard, but even beyond it in knee jerk reaction. And the new policy does not define when domestic violence has taken place.  There are many that want this straightened out and tightened up with meaningful suspensions for a serious issue.  Then move forward.  McDonald and Hardy are still playing and getting paid, and there is something not right about that as well that needs to be addressed.

 

If the NFL can administer punishment, it is indeed their duty to retrieve all information regarding such before rendering the decision.  The contention is they could have gotten the tape, or at least waited until they did before handing Rice's punishment, and purposely did not so they can take the stance they are trying to take right now.  And that apparent position of the NFL is likely going to be put to the test soon.

 

Ray Rice was wrong, no question, and NJ felt it was a PTI case vs probation.  And probation case would drag the victim through the process, so NJ went with PTI.  So the story is now about the NFL Policy, and getting the exact when, how, and how long, and how often.  Because the fact Hardy and McDonald are still playing sends a message that the league isn't really that serious about enforcing this policy.

 

Here's interesting reading-

 

http://deadspin.com/does-the-nfl-think-ray-rices-wife-deserved-it-1612138248

[Nadine]

But this is our culture right now. .

 

Doesn't make it right or even necessarily productive.  We have a short attention span and we crave sensationalism.  So we all play a part in all of this playing out

[Nadine]

I think part of this is some who have dealt with the NFL throughout their careers do not always agree with how NFL security handles situations.  Lester Munson for one-

 

http://thebiglead.com/2014/09/10/espn-legal-analyst-nfl-security-has-been-digging-up-information-and-hiding-it-for-years/

 

And I saw another one sum up why this is blowing up-

 

"Although Rice's actions were truly despicable, League officials must be forced to correctly discipline players on their first attempt. Otherwise, no discipline is ever final."

 

yeah, news people v investigators,players v owners...........I'm sure it all plays into what we are seeing.

Still.........I think we all need to take a step back and look at all of this.

 

Why it's such a massive news story. News isn't news anymore. It's tabloid tv

 

We don't care about domestic violence.........we care about drama

[Nadine]

Very good post Nadine. 

 

And why has it taken on a life of its own?  There are many reasons, but most of them deal with what goes on inside a person's own mind...their point of view....their place in life...or their view of the world...and they want that fed and validated before they can move on. 

 

Often with things like this, facts don't matter.

 

The latest story is that "a law enforcement official sent a copy to the NFL"

 

Is that even legal?  Can police send a copy of evidence in a criminal case to a company that is not named a defendent?  If so, I want a copy too.  I want a copy of all hotel elevator tapes everywhere, because I think my rival did something embarrasing and I want the public to know.

 

What is the name of the law enforcement offical?  Should he lose his job for handing evidence to a thrid party?  I doubt that the people who want Goodell's head will ask those questions.

 

Should the NFL admit to have received criminal case evidence illegally?

 

This is becoming nothing more than a bunch of little puny Davids...trying to feel powerful as a collective...trying to take down a Goliath. 

 

Although rude....sometimes the best response is just to give em all the finger.....instead of responding sincerely.  Doing so, just gives them credibility.

 

I wondered about that tape being sent. I wondered about motivation. Did they send it because they cared about the incident? Or, did they send it because they wanted to have a connection to the NFL?

 

And why did they tape record the conversation?  And isn't taping recording phone conversations illegal?

 

Creepy

[amfootball]

Doesn't make it right or even necessarily productive.  We have a short attention span and we crave sensationalism.  So we all play a part in all of this playing out

Yes we do. Might I suggest a book that is one of the best I have ever read on how America went from a serious, critical thinking society to one that craves to be entertained? The books is called, "Amusing Ourselves to Death" by Neil Postman, http://www.amazon.com/Amusing-Ourselves-Death-Discourse-Business/dp/014303653X/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1410441099&sr=8-1&keywords=amusing+ourselves+to+death+public+discourse+in+the+age+of+show+business

 

He wrote it in 1985 and it is more spot on predicting our society today than Orwell's 1984 as Orwell thought that the government ("big brother") would control the masses when in fact the masses gave that control away willfully to be entertained. The book discusses how forms of public discourse regulate or even dictate what content can issue from such forms. It is kind of an apologetic for books but he uses the dawn of the TV age as the crux of his argument. Of course Postman did not live to see the Internet/social media age, which only confirms his hypothesis. This book will change the way you view everything you hear and read. The first 60 pages where he gives a history of information/communications is worth the price of the book alone. I am hoping his son who wrote the foreword in the 2006 edition will write a follow up and apply his father's thoughts to today's digital age.

 

[Sports Central1]

What did Roger Goodell know?  Is there any proof he himself saw the video months ago and not a lower level employee of the NFL?  The NFL has around 20,000 employees from what I read.

 

People need to stop using this controversy to exploit it to go after Goodell because they have a personal grudge and vendetta against him.  Goodell has a lot of enemies and critics and they been waiting for anything to use to go after him.

 

Why would the fans not like Goodell?  He's done nothing but bend over backwards for the fans to make the NFL more fan friendly and appealing to a larger audience.

 

Now, why would the players not like Goodell?  He's that person in a authority role who tells the punk to pull up his sagging pants hanging by his legs.  The Chris Brown's of the world wouldn't like Goodell.

 

Let's say hypothetically that the NFL saw the video months ago,  Ok, the NFL should be punished for that, but we should not take our focus off of what Ray Rice did.  And NO! Ray Rice should NOT be allowed back in the NFL.  This is all about Ray Rice's actions assaulting a woman.  That's the main point.  Ray Rice and the NFL wouldn't be in this position today if Rice wouldn't have knocked out his fiance.  To blame the NFL?  That's like blaming the prison warden when the inmates are out of control.

 

What's creepy and dangerous are all the insecure guys with mommy issues who think what Ray Rice did wasn't that bad and try to defend him.  That shows criminal element themselves. Those are the type of people who hate the cops and always have excuses to make when they get in trouble.  It's a national crisis in the U.S. of guys thinking it's ok or not that big a deal what Rice did.  It's like the mentality of muslim men who treat women that way.  This is the U.S., not Nigeria or Pakistan.  It comes from a bad upbringing and often single parent homes.

 

For Ray Rice's wife to blame the media for this is outrageous and ludicrous.  She claims she wants privacy and this is a violation of privacy, well she and her fiance were fighting and he Mike Tyson'ed her in a casino with security cameras in every room.

[Sports Central1]

lol @ Ray Rice knocking out a woman on video and the people want to go after Goodell.

 

Seriously, all you Chris Brown fans get over your issues with women.  It's like the people who say: "You can't judge Ray Rice."  lol  When you say that it makes you come across sympathetic to Rice and you yourself think hitting women isn't that bad.  "Well that's because you don't know the ghetto, you were never raised in the ghetto."  lol  Always making excuses for bad behavior.

 

And all the people who defend the Rice's and think this is a violation of their privacy are the same people who thought it was great that Donald Sterling's privacy was violated.

[ColtsBlueFL]

I wondered about that tape being sent. I wondered about motivation. Did they send it because they cared about the incident? Or, did they send it because they wanted to have a connection to the NFL?

 

And why did they tape record the conversation?  And isn't taping recording phone conversations illegal?

 

Creepy

 

Odd about the sent tape.  I'm sure in time the story will come out from the investigation being started. But many legal analysts are stating it doesn't matter because-

 

1. The NFL has powerful staff capable of securing the video if it truly wanted it, and they did have knowledge of its existence.

2. They made the initial punishment (which became deemed far short of worthy) without waiting to actually secure the tape and view it.

 

Some feel that the policy was made with greater number of game suspension at a later time isbecause he did get to view it.  I don't feel that way.  I do feel he possibly did all that he could to not have or know about a copy on the NFL premises so he could take the stance he is taking.  But some legal analysts feel his change of punishment after TMZ releases the video has opened the doors to a Ray Rice lawsuit, (because it only demonstrates what can be assumed form the earlier video, or confession by Rice himself) especially since the change went beyond the newly instituted policy guidelines.

 

There are reports that Rice initially told NFL and/or Ravens his Fiancee (wife) caused his reactionary response.  Then there are reports he later came completely clean and told both the NFL and the Ravens the whole ugly truth, so theyclain the NFL truly knew the whole story without needing the video as verification.  So I guess the investigation is to find what the truth is and thus allowing the NFL to get policies and procedures adjusted and in place to remedy how and when the domestic policy is administered.

 

as far as the voice recording, I thought it was left as a voice mail?  That isn't illegal. And it likely has a date / time stamp so phone records can be located rather easily.

[OffensivelyPC]

This is the one scenario that I didn't think could happen because it shouldn't and it makes the least sense.  There's no reason for the video to have been sent to the NFL and Goodell not know about it.  Where's the motivation?  It makes absolutely no sense at all.  Plausible deniability?  That just makes Goodell look incompetent.  I've generally been a supporter of Goodell, but this time, there's really no supporting him.  Forget about the suspension, this is just bad practice as a company.  Had the video been properly handled and Goodell had seen it, he could hvae been criticized for the suspension.  The league would be heavily criticized if it had seen the video and given two game suspension to Rice.  It already has been.  But to add incompetent business structure to the mix?  Oy. 

[ColtsBlueFL]

What did Roger Goodell know?  Is there any proof he himself saw the video months ago and not a lower level employee of the NFL?  The NFL has around 20,000 employees from what I read.

 

People need to stop using this controversy to exploit it to go after Goodell because they have a personal grudge and vendetta against him.  Goodell has a lot of enemies and critics and they been waiting for anything to use to go after him.

 

Why would the fans not like Goodell?  He's done nothing but bend over backwards for the fans to make the NFL more fan friendly and appealing to a larger audience.

 

Now, why would the players not like Goodell?  He's that person in a authority role who tells the punk to pull up his sagging pants hanging by his legs.  The Chris Brown's of the world wouldn't like Goodell.

 

Let's say hypothetically that the NFL saw the video months ago,  Ok, the NFL should be punished for that, but we should not take our focus off of what Ray Rice did.  And NO! Ray Rice should NOT be allowed back in the NFL.  This is all about Ray Rice's actions assaulting a woman.  That's the main point.  Ray Rice and the NFL wouldn't be in this position today if Rice wouldn't have knocked out his fiance.  To blame the NFL?  That's like blaming the prison warden when the inmates are out of control.

 

What's creepy and dangerous are all the insecure guys with mommy issues who think what Ray Rice did wasn't that bad and try to defend him.  That shows criminal element themselves. Those are the type of people who hate the cops and always have excuses to make when they get in trouble.  It's a national crisis in the U.S. of guys thinking it's ok or not that big a deal what Rice did.  It's like the mentality of muslim men who treat women that way.  This is the U.S., not Nigeria or Pakistan.  It comes from a bad upbringing and often single parent homes.

 

For Ray Rice's wife to blame the media for this is outrageous and ludicrous.  She claims she wants privacy and this is a violation of privacy, well she and her fiance were fighting and he Mike Tyson'ed her in a casino with security cameras in every room.

 

Yup!  Rice did a very bad thing. No question.  But how, when, and for how long does the NFL punish the next Ray Rice?  They (now!) have a 6 game and 1 year suspension, but when is it deemed the policy was violated? 2-3 years down the road after all judicial system appeals are used up and the final verdict rendered?  All the while the player continued to play on collect his full contract pay over the years as the case was being tried?  The NFL needs to define this better, and to the satisfaction of the NFL, NFLPA, and outside experts in domestic issues.  Because the fact McDonald and Hardy are still playing and collecting huge payroll even after the new policy was instituted isn't sitting well with many legal and domestic experts outside the NFL.  And they will most likely continue to leverage pressure until the ambiguous areas are addressed.

 

And Goodell initially giving a 2 game suspension for knocking a women out vs. giving 4 games for taking a female fertility pill is ludicrous, even if the jucial system opted to allow PTI for Rice. That was the tipping point.  I'll never be a Ray Rice supporter, but the NFL needs to straighten it's ship up as well, and quick.

[Coffeedrinker]

Yes we do. Might I suggest a book that is one of the best I have ever read on how America went from a serious, critical thinking society to one that craves to be entertained? The books is called, "Amusing Ourselves to Death" by Neil Postman, http://www.amazon.com/Amusing-Ourselves-Death-Discourse-Business/dp/014303653X/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1410441099&sr=8-1&keywords=amusing+ourselves+to+death+public+discourse+in+the+age+of+show+business

 

He wrote it in 1985 and it is more spot on predicting our society today than Orwell's 1984 as Orwell thought that the government ("big brother") would control the masses when in fact the masses gave that control away willfully to be entertained. The book discusses how forms of public discourse regulate or even dictate what content can issue from such forms. It is kind of an apologetic for books but he uses the dawn of the TV age as the crux of his argument. Of course Postman did not live to see the Internet/social media age, which only confirms his hypothesis. This book will change the way you view everything you hear and read. The first 60 pages where he gives a history of information/communications is worth the price of the book alone. I am hoping his son who wrote the foreword in the 2006 edition will write a follow up and apply his father's thoughts to today's digital age.

 

How can such a smart guy be a Pats fan? .  With all the talk about Pats/Colts, etc. I had started to forget why you are one of my favorite posters on this board.

 

A funny story about Orwell and 1984, my HS Lit teacher told me this and I have never researched it to verify.  The original title of the book was The Last Man in Europe.  But the publisher said the title was too long, so in searching for a new title he just decided to reverse the last two digits of the published year when he sent the final manuscript to the publisher which was December 1948.

[amfootball]

How can such a smart guy be a Pats fan? .  With all the talk about Pats/Colts, etc. I had started to forget why you are one of my favorite posters on this board.

 

A funny story about Orwell and 1984, my HS Lit teacher told me this and I have never researched it to verify.  The original title of the book was The Last Man in Europe.  But the publisher said the title was too long, so in searching for a new title he just decided to reverse the last two digits of the published year when he sent the final manuscript to the publisher which was December 1948.

Thanks for the kind words. I didn't realize I had a fan.   And ironically, coffee is my favorite drink.

 

That is a great story about 1984. It would not surprise me if it is true as titles of books are generally the last part of the publishing process. Kind of like headlines for news stories. It goes to show you how sometimes brilliance and luck work together.

 

I have come to find out that Postman's book is assigned in many colleges because it is so relevant to today. I majored in communications at Boston University and was never assigned Postman's book. I wish I read it then and actually feel that my first comms job should have assigned it to me.

[Sports Central1]

Yup!  Rice did a very bad thing. No question.  But how, when, and for how long does the NFL punish the next Ray Rice?  They (now!) have a 6 game and 1 year suspension, but when is it deemed the policy was violated? 2-3 years down the road after all judicial system appeals are used up and the final verdict rendered?  All the while the player continued to play on collect his full contract pay over the years as the case was being tried?  The NFL needs to define this better, and to the satisfaction of the NFL, NFLPA, and outside experts in domestic issues.  Because the fact McDonald and Hardy are still playing and collecting huge payroll even after the new policy was instituted isn't sitting well with many legal and domestic experts outside the NFL.  And they will most likely continue to leverage pressure until the ambiguous areas are addressed.

 

And Goodell initially giving a 2 game suspension for knocking a women out vs. giving 4 games for taking a female fertility pill is ludicrous, even if the jucial system opted to allow PTI for Rice. That was the tipping point.  I'll never be a Ray Rice supporter, but the NFL needs to straighten it's ship up as well, and quick.

 

I agree.

 

But with regards to Mathis' suspension for clomid.  Anyone in the bodybuilding industry knows clomid is THE drug of choice for PCT - Post Cycle Therapy, to use after a steroid cycle to bring back the testes and stimulate LH and restart one's natural testosterone production.  Yes, it is a fertility drug, it's also the most common PCT drug.

 

"IF" Mathis was taking clomid to get his wife pregnant he should have known it was on the banned substance list or even ask the NFL for permission to use it before he did.

[thedude]

Ugh, total PR move.

 

https://twitter.com/AdamSchefter/status/509897311980642304

You're right. This is simply a PR move. The man doing the "independent" investigation is currently with a law firm with close ties to the NFL. This investigation will confirm that things happened the way the commissioners office said they happened.

[ColtsBlueFL]

This is the one scenario that I didn't think could happen because it shouldn't and it makes the least sense.  There's no reason for the video to have been sent to the NFL and Goodell not know about it.  Where's the motivation?  It makes absolutely no sense at all.  Plausible deniability?  That just makes Goodell look incompetent.  I've generally been a supporter of Goodell, but this time, there's really no supporting him.  Forget about the suspension, this is just bad practice as a company.  Had the video been properly handled and Goodell had seen it, he could hvae been criticized for the suspension.  The league would be heavily criticized if it had seen the video and given two game suspension to Rice.  It already has been.  But to add incompetent business structure to the mix?  Oy. 

 

And the players haven't overlooked this as well.  They ganged up on Goodell yesterday.

 

http://www.sfchronicle.com/49ers/article/NFL-s-Goodell-s-handling-of-Rice-case-widely-5747459.php

 

NFL needs to come clean asap and define their domestic policy better.  But I hope that the NFLPA will sit on the sidelines should Ray Rice decline to put forth a suit and not do it for him.  As bad as it seems , there is consensus Ray has the ability to do so (file a lawsuit). but possibly he won't

[OffensivelyPC]

You're right. This is simply a PR move. The man doing the "independent" investigation is currently with a law firm with close ties to the NFL. This investigation will confirm that things happened the way the commissioners office said they happened.

I think you're being overly critical of the move if you believe the investigators are going to tailor their findings to what the NFL wants because there's really no good way out of this.  Either they "find" that Goodell didn't have the video, fire someone, and the NFL's commissioner and business structure gets mocked for its incompetence, or they find that Goodell lied about the video and he gets fired.  At this point, I can't imagine a scenario where the NFL can win.  However, from the owners perspective, it doesn't matter what the findings are as long as they take the appropriate action so they can save face with their investors.  That's what this is all really about.  You think they really care about keeping Goodell?  If it's found he lied, they're appointing a successor so they don't have to deal with advertising companies using the fact that Goodell is still the commissioner as a bargaining chip while in negotiations.  If the bottom line here is that the owners care most about bringing in more profits - and the reason tehy liked goodell was because he did precisely that - then they aren't going to keep a commissioner that hurts that revenue stream.  You can always bring in another business savvy person without having to deal with his baggage.

[OffensivelyPC]

And the players haven't overlooked this as well.  They ganged up on Goodell yesterday.

 

http://www.sfchronicle.com/49ers/article/NFL-s-Goodell-s-handling-of-Rice-case-widely-5747459.php

 

NFL needs to come clean asap and define their domestic policy better.  But I hope that the NFLPA will sit on the sidelines should Ray Rice decline to put forth a suit and not do it for him.  As bad as it seems , there is consensus Ray has the ability to do so (file a lawsuit). but possibly he won't

The players are the one group of people that I just can't really take seriously on this issue.  For two reasons, the players' criticism seems to me to be more about using this as a platform to oust Goodell.  At every turn, no matter how big or small, there's players criticizing Goodell.  Yet when one of their own gets busted for something, nothing but crickets.  Yeah, they've come out on this one a bit, but that's because every reporter is shoving mics in everyone's faces asking about it.  It's THAT big of a deal to the media.  But when you criticize every move of goodell, the chorus gets old and I can't really take it seriously.  That's especially true when you criticize him for being too harsh, then too lenient when all along, the players collectively bargained to give Roger Goodell the right to oversee player discipline.  Their motives behind their constant outbursts are too biased to be credible IMO. 

 

The other reason I can't really take them serious, and this is really more of a reflection on the NFLPA as opposed to any individual player, is that the NFL takes heavy criticism for its handling of the case.  Fine.  But where was the NFLPA in all this?  Why is it that all the criticism gets placed on the NFL when the NFLPA was fully capable of carrying out its own investigation.  Yet, when there's a video that magically turns up and no one seemed to know about it the NFLPA gets to point the finger and cry foul?  Goodell's failure to know that a copy of the elevator video is no better or worse than the NFLPA's failure to discover the same facts and then later point fingers.

[ColtsBlueFL]

I agree.

 

But with regards to Mathis' suspension for clomid.  Anyone in the bodybuilding industry knows clomid is THE drug of choice for PCT - Post Cycle Therapy, to use after a steroid cycle to bring back the testes and stimulate LH and restart one's natural testosterone production.  Yes, it is a fertility drug, it's also the most common PCT drug.

 

"IF" Mathis was taking clomid to get his wife pregnant he should have known it was on the banned substance list or even ask the NFL for permission to use it before he did.

 

Agreed, and that is why clomid is listed n the Steroid Policy. So not arguing that.  But getting twice as many game suspension for taking it vs domestic violence was the outrage. Then they went over the top in reaction to the pushback, especially after the video was released. And the new policy has yet to been enforced, even though there are two guys that is could be used on and isn't.  So it's a mess. But it will all work itself out in time. And Roger is likely to still be the commish when it is all said and done.

[MTC]

So I'm assuming Ravens will be in a whole lot of trouble. Starting with the owner and president.