If Hardy's conviction isn't overturned, he might not play for awhile

[panthers55]

Correct me if I am wrong but they haven't decided on these new rules yet? If so then hardy needs to go ahead and get the case over with.

Sent from my iPhone using CarolinaHuddle

If they make new rules for cases going forward I doubt they would apply the new standards to an old case.  The whole point of increasing the punishment is to serve as a deterrent. It would make no sense to punish him under new rules since there would be no deterrent and the penalty would be excessive for when he did the crime compared to a guy like Rice who did his at about the same time.

[332nd]

It is sad that media hypocrisy is driving this. Domestic abusers have gotten small suspensions forever while drug offenders get much more serious punishments for smoking weed (because there is no leeway in the CBA). Why is there such an uproar now when this has been happening for decades?

There's compelling video that they can play on a loop.

[Happy Panther]

There's compelling video that they can play on a loop.

Yep

[Happy Panther]

Again a bench decision is not the same as being found guilty by a jury so until the appeal is heard, he is essentially not going to get any punishment.  Think about it for a minute.  If he wins the jury trial and he already got fined by the league it would be a lawsuit for sure.  

Meh semantics. He was found guilty. You said he was not.

 

But as far as a lawsuit, what legal basis does he have? The NFL/Goodell have full leeway to hand down punishment for personal conduct violations whether there is a guilty verdict or not. I'm confused what argument a lawyer would make.

[panthers55]

Meh semantics. He was found guilty. You said he was not.

 

But as far as a lawsuit, what legal basis does he have? The NFL/Goodell have full leeway to hand down punishment for personal conduct violations whether there is a guilty verdict or not. I'm confused what argument a lawyer would make.

It isn't semantics but the judicial system.  

 

What basis does he have for a lawsuit?  If he is not found guilty of anything then he was punished unfairly, his salary was cut by millions and  his reputation was harmed which can impact how much he gets on a future contract based on the suspension and the presumption of guilt which was found to be incorrect on appeal.  Given pain and suffering and impacting his ability to pursue his livlihood since the NFl is a monopoly, it would be worth tens of millions in damages. Goodell has no evidence to prove his conduct was a problem given there was no video tape and it was largely he said versus she said.  At this point where is the proof he violated anything?? The jury verdict will trump anything the judge said or did.  All there is at this point is a judge's opinion which is still up for debate. There is no reason to punish him now versus in 6 months so it would be an easy case to show the league jumped the gun and punished him to make an example of him when they could have easily waited until the court case was resolved.  Particularly given how lenient they have been in the past.

[Happy Panther]

It isn't semantics but the judicial system.  

 

What basis does he have for a lawsuit?  If he is not found guilty of anything then he was punished unfairly, his salary was cut by millions and  his reputation was harmed which can impact how much he gets on a future contract based on the suspension and the presumption of guilt which was found to be incorrect on appeal.  Given pain and suffering and impacting his ability to pursue his livlihood since the NFl is a monopoly, it would be worth tens of millions in damages. Goodell has no evidence to prove his conduct was a problem given there was no video tape and it was largely he said versus she said.  At this point where is the proof he violated anything?? The jury verdict will trump anything the judge said or did.  All there is at this point is a judge's opinion which is still up for debate. There is no reason to punish him now versus in 6 months so it would be an easy case to show the league jumped the gun and punished him to make an example of him when they could have easily waited until the court case was resolved.  Particularly given how lenient they have been in the past.

None of this has any basis in reality. There is no legal reason to sue a private organization for laying down punishment when it has been granted the authority to do so. There is no unfair punishment, pain and suffering has no bearing, and the NFL is not a monopoly but that would not  matter anyway. Goodell has no responsibility to provide evidence to anyone.

 

Honestly the first half of that paragraph is imbecilic.

 

[rmoneyg35]

If they make new rules for cases going forward I doubt they would apply the new standards to an old case. The whole point of increasing the punishment is to serve as a deterrent. It would make no sense to punish him under new rules since there would be no deterrent and the penalty would be excessive for when he did the crime compared to a guy like Rice who did his at about the same time.

Well I think if he happens to become convicted after new rules then he could be screwed.

Sent from my iPhone using CarolinaHuddle

[panthers55]

None of this has any basis in reality. There is no legal reason to sue a private organization for laying down punishment when it has been granted the authority to do so. There is no unfair punishment, pain and suffering has no bearing, and the NFL is not a monopoly but that would not  matter anyway. Goodell has no responsibility to provide evidence to anyone.

 

Honestly the first half of that paragraph is imbecilic.

Are you an attorney specializing in franchise law?  If not what is the basis for your expertise?   None, apparently.....

 

The NFL is a monopoly since there is no other football league with any standing. hence the reason for the frequent antitrust issues that arise every year.  Goodell has to abide by the CBA and his decisions can be appealed and have been overturned by mediation.Look at how many of gis suspensions have been either overturned or shortened.  And in a civil lawsuit there is absolutely pain and suffering if it proven that the league acted unfairly.  Goodell has every responsibility to both the owners and the players association who negotiated the CBA.  And don't tell me you can't sue Goodell or the league or you forget the lawsuit that Brees and Manning and other players brought against the league to essentially overturn the concept of free agency.

 

Your whole post reeks of ignorance. 

[panthers55]

Well I think if he happens to become convicted after new rules then he could be screwed.

Sent from my iPhone using CarolinaHuddle

I doubt it.  There has been a lot of grumbling about Goodell overstepping his authority.  This would be one more problem he doesn't want if he were too punitive.

[Happy Panther]

Are you an attorney specializing in franchise law?  If not what is the basis for your expertise?   None, apparently.....

 

The NFL is a monopoly since there is no other football league with any standing. hence the reason for the frequent antitrust issues that arise every year.  Goodell has to abide by the CBA and his decisions can be appealed and have been overturned by mediation.  And in a civil lawsuit there is absolutely pain and suffering if it proven that the league acted unfairly.  Goodell has every responsibility to both the owners and the players association who negotiated the CBA.

 

Your whole post reeks of ignorance. 

Well one of us is ignorant for sure.

[csx]

Again a bench decision is not the same as being found guilty by a jury so until the appeal is heard, he is essentially not going to get any punishment.  Think about it for a minute.  If he wins the jury trial and he already got fined by the league it would be a lawsuit for sure.  

Yet Ben Roethlis..whatever was suspended 6 games when charges were not even filed against him.  Given that he was never arrested or charged you can't make such an assumption regarding Hardy.

[rmoneyg35]

I doubt it. There has been a lot of grumbling about Goodell overstepping his authority. This would be one more problem he doesn't want if he were too punitive.

I hope so but remember people are pretty upset about Ray Rice just receiving a 2 game ban.

Sent from my iPhone using CarolinaHuddle

[panthers55]

Well one of us is ignorant for sure.

Again where is your expertise or any special knowledge here.  If you are going to call someone ignorant you ought to have special education or standing  to back up your comments.  You can disagree for sure but if you are going to post like some kind of expert at least have the credentials to back it up.  Particularly when you don't have a clue what you are talking about.

[panthers55]

Yet Ben Roethlis..whatever was suspended 6 games when charges were not even filed against him.  Given that he was never arrested or charged you can't make such an assumption regarding Hardy.

Apples and oranges.  The NFL did their own investigation and found the evidence that the rape occurred.  Charges were not pressed because the girl didn't want to go through a public trial.  The facts in the case were clear.  Not the same as with Hardy were the facts are very much in dispute.