Greg Hardy suspended 10 games

[PandaPancake]

Nice to see that Hardy threads consistently last 20+ pages still.

Beer forum has really calmed down

[jtm]

The NFL was allowed to see the court exhibits that contained pictures of Holder's injuries that have not been released to the public. Seems these pics must have been bad.

http://espn.go.com/espnw/news-commentary/article/12745022/how-nfl-roger-goodell-got-right-greg-hardy-suspension

[Snake]

This was the reason why Jerry and co did not want Hardy back. The NFL was going to punish the guy who looked a little different no matter what because he is a good patsy. All the while Ray Rice who beat his wife unconscious is NFL eligible to play day one.

[top dawg]

The NFL was allowed to see the court exhibits that contained pictures of Holder's injuries that have not been released to the public. Seems these pics must have been bad.

http://espn.go.com/espnw/news-commentary/article/12745022/how-nfl-roger-goodell-got-right-greg-hardy-suspension

Easy to think on the surface, but then you have to ask yourself why the police didn't take Hardy to jail if Holder looked that bad. The easy answer is that she didn't. In the state of North Carolina, they will take a person to jail for domestic violence. Both Hardy and Holder could have easily been arrested. I know a couple that has been arrested for less.

[jtm]

Easy to think on the surface, but then you have to ask yourself why the police didn't take Hardy to jail if Holder looked that bad. The easy answer is that she didn't. In the state of North Carolina, they will take a person to jail for domestic violence. Both Hardy and Holder could have easily been arrested. I know a couple that has been arrested for less.

Fair perspective but I trust a guilty conviction from a judge over the Huddle. None of us have seen all the court documents, pics, etc. and the people that have (judge and NFL to an extent) seem to think what Hardy did was bad. Also, don't think for a second that the Panthers didn't see the same information.

I'll never understand why anyone defends a player just because he is famous and has God gifted athleticism. As I've said many times, once I heard "alcohol, drugs, and assault riffles out in the open" Hardy lost the benefit of doubt.

[top dawg]

Fair perspective but I trust a guilty conviction from a judge over the Huddle. None of us have seen all the court documents, pics, etc. and the people that have (judge and NFL to an extent) seem to think what Hardy did was bad. Also, don't think for a second that the Panthers didn't see the same information.

I'll never understand why anyone defends a player just because he is famous and has God gifted athleticism. As I've said many times, once I heard "alcohol, drugs, and assault riffles out in the open" Hardy lost the benefit of doubt.

For me, the fact that Hardy is a pro football player really doesn't have anything to do with it. History of both the parties involved, and the nebulous facts of the circumstances are more important to me.

I understand why you would take a judge's point of view, or the NFL's point of view, but forgive me if I don't particularly trust either. I am sure that due to my life experience, I see things from a whole different perspective than many of you.

Just like Hardy loses your benefit of doubt, I have doubt about Nicole Holder. I don't see how anyone doesn't have some doubt about both parties, but that's just me. That being the case, I am not going to view Hardy as the devil, and Holder as an angel. As far as run-ins with the law, Holder had a history prior to the incident, and I don't believe that Hardy did. I think that you can chalk the entire situation up to stupidity.

By the way, it would be highly unlikely that the Panthers viewed anything as any pics were always officially property of the court. Both the NFL, court officials and the Panthers would have had to break the law.

[jtm]

For me, the fact that Hardy is a pro football player really doesn't have anything to do with it. History of both the parties involved, and the nebulous facts of the circumstances are more important to me.

I understand why you would take a judge's point of view, or the NFL's point of view, but forgive me if I don't particularly trust either. I am sure that due to my life experience, I see things from a whole different perspective than many of you.

Just like Hardy loses your benefit of doubt, I have doubt about Nicole Holder. I don't see how anyone doesn't have some doubt about both parties, but that's just me. That being the case, I am not going to view Hardy as the devil, and Holder as an angel. As far as run-ins with the law, Holder had a history prior to the incident, and I don't believe that Hardy did. I think that you can chalk the entire situation up to stupidity.

By the way, it would be highly unlikely that the Panthers viewed anything as any pics were always officially property of the court. Both the NFL, court officials and the Panthers would have had to break the law.

Everyone is entitled to their own opinions and I see where you are coming from. Since I work in the legal field I have a different perspective than most and I understand how difficult it is to get a conviction and judges are super smart people.

[CarolinaSamurai]

Everyone is entitled to their own opinions and I see where you are coming from. Since I work in the legal field I have a different perspective than most and I understand how difficult it is to get a conviction and judges are super smart people.

If you work in the legal field how come you think the judge found hardy guilty? Do you practice in NC because if you do you should know Trail De Novo and that the judges verdict no longer exists in the eyes of the law. You should also be aware that NC uses bench trails in these cases to test if it's worth going to a jury trial at all which causes the guilty verdict.

[top dawg]

If you work in the legal field how come you think the judge found hardy guilty? Do you practice in NC because if you do you should know Trail De Novo and that the judges verdict no longer exists in the eyes of the law. You should also be aware that NC uses bench trails in these cases to test if it's worth going to a jury trial at all which causes the guilty verdict.

Which is what a lot of people don't realize apparently. In these instances, the bench trial is essentially a test as to whether or not there is enough evidence for it to be considered by a jury, not saying that the judge doesn't believe the defendant isn't guilty.

As for judges being super smart, they are. Some of them are too smart for their own good. I was in law school for roughly a year before I decided that it wasn't my cup of tea (yeah that year cost me a lot of unnecessary money). There was a saying that A students were future professors, the B students future judges, and the C students your average lawyer.

[jtm]

If you work in the legal field how come you think the judge found hardy guilty? Do you practice in NC because if you do you should know Trail De Novo and that the judges verdict no longer exists in the eyes of the law. You should also be aware that NC uses bench trails in these cases to test if it's worth going to a jury trial at all which causes the guilty verdict.

I think the judge found Hardy guilty because he is guilty. Further, innocent people don't pay off witnesses.

I don't practice in NC and the appeals process for Hardy's conviction is rather unusual. De novo is just a standard of review and doesn't erase a guilty verdict.

[CarolinaCoolin]

I think the judge found Hardy guilty because he is guilty. Further, innocent people don't pay off witnesses.

I don't practice in NC and the appeals process for Hardy's conviction is rather unusual. De novo is just a standard of review and doesn't erase a guilty verdict.

No. The appeals process for Hardys conviction is pretty standard in NC. What are you talking about

[jtm]

No. The appeals process for Hardys conviction is pretty standard in NC. What are you talking about

NC's process for misdemeanor appeals is unusual in my opinion.

[Fidel Cashflow]

Luke's 5year option just picked up.

 

someone start a thread

[CarolinaCoolin]

NC's process for misdemeanor appeals is unusual in my opinion.

Do you believe misdemeanor charges don't warrant appeals? In that case your opinion would be categorically wrong