Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

Has Voth changed his opinion of Hardy's future?


Nick_81

Recommended Posts

You can't reach a settlement in NC that is conditioned on a victim not testifying or not appearing in court.

The DA left that part out when he was trying to manipulate the press (successfully apparently)

Even more proof this entire thing was blown out of proportion. She was a lieing bitch the whole time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You can't reach a settlement in NC that is conditioned on a victim not testifying or not appearing in court.

The DA left that part out when he was trying to manipulate the press (successfully apparently)

Still can't mean she knew she would have to vanish. It will be the unspoken part of the deal. Happens all the time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't know why people keep thinking the courts or the government or someone would intervene to keep Greg Hardy from losing money.

He's part of a collective bargaining agreement. As long as the rules of that legal agreement are followed, what basis does he have to claim unfair treatment?

There are no rules for the current territory we find ourselves. I mean the NFLPA takes the NFL to court all the time because of these exact grey areas.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's well within the right of the NFL to suspend Hardy if those transcripts show misconduct.

You don't like it, I don't like it, but it's reality.

There is no precedent for a guy being forced to sit out 16 games and then trying to suspend them again based on a rule that was retroactively created after the issue occurred. When Hardy got in trouble the suspension was 2 games. After the fact, they increased it to 6.

How the courts rule on the Peterson case will be big on what the NFL can and can't do. This would be appealed and probably go to the courts as well.

He would effectively be getting punished much more harshly than two players who got caught and admitted guilt.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't know why people keep thinking the courts or the government or someone would intervene to keep Greg Hardy from losing money.

He's part of a collective bargaining agreement. As long as the rules of that legal agreement are followed, what basis does he have to claim unfair treatment?

Different set of circumstances but Ray Rice suspension overturned by court

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The main reason I hope it happens is to get a laugh at all the smartass know it all's who have outed themselves over the last 90 days.

 

 

Logic would have me believe that the main reason fans should want this is to have Hardy back on the field in a Panther uniform, but then again....I did say logic and that doesn't always fit in with mob mentality. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2015/02/13/nfl-formally-seeks-access-to-greg-hardy-court-file/

The NFL wants pertinent information relating to Hardy's case so that they can have a leg on to suspend him. Even though the NFLPA is a public defender compared to the NFL's F. Lee Bailey, I do think they would have a field day without this.

Disregard the dismissal of charges. That doesn't matter in any way, shape, or form.

What matters is if the NFL gets copies of these previously sealed court documents that show Hardy drinking and partying with a girl who was doing cocaine, and that partying led to a 'probable' physical altercation and communicated threats to that girl, then the NFL WILL ABSOLUTELY suspend Hardy.

The question at that point then is where on the 2-6 game spectrum will he land? One could argue that he should get the two that was made a precedent with Ray Rice. Goodell could then argue fug you its 6 games because your Union lawyers are a joke.

I'm more interested to see if the court overturns the motion to seal these records because the NFL is making the argument that due to the dismissal of charges they are no longer classified as preparatory documents needed to make a case against a defendant.

What's also interesting is that they want access to the transcripts that wouldn't even exist if Hardy's attorney didn't pay to have them done during the bench trial. If my employer thought I was stealing and the only evidence of me doing so was a video I made on my phone, I certainly wouldn't be giving them my phone to use it against me. Of course on the other hand that would give them grounds to say ok then you are hiding something Bye Felicia.

In the words of Jeffrey Lebowski;

"This is a very complicated case Maude. A lot of ins, lot of outs, lotta what have yous."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...