Until found guilty by a jury of your peers.

[LA_Panther]

kraken is in deep poo ... goddell will make an example out of him

[Panthers_Rake]

I just love how the media & NFL upper office portrays themselves AS the law. They are not, the media is there to write informative journalism. I worked in public access & Government TV for years, there is a right to free speech. Its just pathetic how many people listen to these moronic ramblings. And the NFL office is even worse with their inconsistency and blatant favoritism.

 

 

 

 

[Happy Panther]

This is incorrect. This was not a hearing to determine the validity of the charges. Greg went through the entire legal process, was found guilty, sentenced, and is now working on his appeal. The "real trial" has already happened. Greg is no longer known as "the defendant" in this case. He is known as "the appellant" because his guilt is now presumed until proven otherwise. The success rate of appeals in criminal proceedings is generally considered to be very, very, low and in the event that they are successful they are usually on account of egregiously poor handling of evidence. I would wager that North Carolina has an appeal rating of above 80% of verdicts being confirmed by the superior court. Greg has already gone through the preliminary hearing, pretrial motions, and his actual trial. Those events are over.

In legal terms, this is the 4th quarter Hail Mary with :10 left on the clock from midfield.

 

The original trial was simply to determine if there was enough evidence to shoot it up the ladder. Everyone knew that it would be immediately appealed. That is how it was explained to me.

[Ricky Spanish]

That's why I'm reserving all judgement on the matter right now. If he's found guilty, then the dude seriously must have done it. I mean he's crazy rich and can afford the best attorneys. If he doesn't win then he definitely did it. 

[JawnyBlaze]

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2014/09/10/hardys-case-isnt-ripe-for-nfl-discipline-yet/

 

Didn't see this in any of the threads, so if it's already been posted I missed it.  Florio with a whopper of a good article, shits on all this "he's already been found guilty so he's guilty and should be suspended" nonsense that's floating around here from peons and mods alike.  Most relevant part:

 

 

In some cases, the NFL can take action before the case is resolved.  When dealing with a first-time offender, however, the NFL typically defers to the legal process.

That’s the point that folks like the editors of the Charlotte Observer are missing in calling for premature action against Hardy.  Eventually, Hardy will have his day in the NFL’s court of law.  It can’t come until after Hardy has his day in a real court of law.  While North Carolina procedure has caused some to mistakenly believed that’s happened, it hasn’t.

edit: bolded for emphasis

[Diehardpanther02]

found guilty in a kangaroo court. it was a formality

I hope so, all i meant is that no suspension comes of it at least until the appeal. Hardy is an asset. Im not so sure any back up that we have, tho will most likely be above average, can produce equal to or at least close to hardys level. He is a bad man and he can stop the run along with rush the qb, we will deploy abunch of solid starters tho i jus hope they can keep the edge locked

Down. Will be nice when franks back, and eal is fully healthy. Addison is a change

Of dude

[solorca]

The real wording is "innocent until guilty by a court of law". That happened. He's been found guilty.

Like it or not, it's true.

[PandaPancake]

The real wording is "innocent until guilty by a court of law". That happened. He's been found guilty.

Like it or not, it's true.

I would love to know what's in your past. I bet you have skeletons to hide

[Pox 08]

inb4:Guffaw,  he was already found guilty.

 

 

 

[solorca]

I would love to know what's in your past. I bet you have skeletons to hide

I assure you, I've never done anything at the level of what Hardy has been found guilty of.

I have no clue what that has to do with correcting the incorrect wording of the post though.

[PandaPancake]

I assure you, I've never done anything at the level of what Hardy has been found guilty of.

Let's do a background check and talk to every woman you've been romantic with.

[solorca]

Let's do a background check and talk to every woman you've been romantic with.

Feel free. I'd remember if I beat the poo out an ex... I promise.

[Fox007]

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2014/09/10/hardys-case-isnt-ripe-for-nfl-discipline-yet/

 

Didn't see this in any of the threads, so if it's already been posted I missed it.  Florio with a whopper of a good article, shits on all this "he's already been found guilty so he's guilty and should be suspended" nonsense that's floating around here from peons and mods alike.  Most relevant part:

 

edit: bolded for emphasis

 

Yup...lots of lemmings have just been spouting off at the mouth without knowing poo about what they are talking about....

 

Just another example of how ignorant many in society have become...bunch of sheeples.

[Vagrant]

1.  It's not a miscalculation.  Every Defendant charged with a misdemeanor in North Carolina has a trial with a judge first, assuming they don't enter into a plea bargain.  That opportunity was taken and he was found guilty, thus the appeal.  Her drug use is certainly relevant to her memory and her perception of the events that night.  It could have been considered malpractice for his lawyers not to inquire about her recent drug use.  I am sure it will come back up before the jury.

 

2.  He is still referred to as the Defendant.  He is not an "appellant" in Superior Court and would only be referred to as an appellant if he were to lose his jury trial and go to the NC Court of Appeals.  He is also still presumed innocent.  I think you are confusing an appeal to the Court of Appeals or NC Supreme Court with an appeal to Superior Court.  He is innocent until proven guilty and the jury will be instructed as such at his trial.

 

3.  They can do all the digging they want but unless it fits into a category of actual prior convictions for criminal activity or her recent drug use that day it's not coming into evidence.  You have actually made the case for it not to come into evidence.  Hardy cannot be convicted of a crime because he is a "bad person" and goes to nightclubs every weekend, gets drunk, throws money at strippers and stays out until 4 am.  The jury isn't allowed to hear any of that because it is not relevant to the charge of which he is accused.  

 

I have been a practicing criminal defense attorney for 6 years, I think my information on this process is more informed than yours.  

 

I would no doubt defer to your experience in this matter, but there's also a degree of subjectivity regarding certain terminology surrounding the events that can either work for or against your opinion of Greg Hardy if you were inclined to pursue them. I understand that in front of the jury there is no way he would be called the appellant as that would obviously indicate and express the outcome of his bench verdict. But my supposition was that in all legal documents pertaining to the case he would be referenced as the appellant because he is in the process of an appeal. It is also my understanding that during the first phase of the trial he could have made a motion to have his case heard by a jury before a verdict was even handed down from the bench as per his constitutional rights. Is that not correct?

 

And why is it that he is presumed innocent on charges that a judge has ruled him guilty upon? He lost his bench trial. What does that make him? This seems to be circular logic to avoid calling him guilty when as much has been decided in court already. As of today, before his appeal, he has been found guilty. Why is it errant to say as much?

 

And yes, I know that you're not allowed to mindlessly attack the character of either party by presenting evidence that is irrelevant to the charges. It was my assumption that by being allowed more time to prepare in this instance, that more witnesses could be produced that could potentially have harmful testimony to add to this case that could be detrimental to either side and that the burden of any good attorney is to identify those witnesses and push for the inclusion of their testimony as pertinent to charges.