- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Criminal charges are much more likely now (in my unsupported opinion)
Posted on 4/5/12 at 3:02 pm to MrLSU
Posted on 4/5/12 at 3:02 pm to MrLSU
Lulz, let's take football players to court for hitting us too hard. If anyone even attempts to take it to court then it shows how much the NFL has been pussified.
0
Posted on 4/5/12 at 3:03 pm to LakeViewLSU
quote:hurting people's feelings
Nobody was injured i'n the San Fran game What would the charges be?
Posted on 4/5/12 at 8:19 pm to MrLSU
You cant be found guilty of doing something simply because someone was caught on tape telling you to do it. I have not seen any illegal hits called that would be evidence of someone intending to do harm to another player. If that was the case then they would have to charge every defensive player in the NFL with something. Any criminal charges that are sought after will not stick. Book it!
Posted on 4/6/12 at 8:25 am to PortCityTiger82
quote:
You cant be found guilty of doing something simply because someone was caught on tape telling you to do it.
this
Posted on 4/6/12 at 8:51 am to Breesus
There's really nothing to discuss unless there's a charge that would cover this.
Unnecessary roughness isn't punishable by a court.
Unnecessary roughness isn't punishable by a court.
Posted on 4/6/12 at 2:21 pm to PortCityTiger82
quote:
PortCityTiger82
Criminal charges are much more likely now (in my unsupported opinion)
You cant be found guilty of doing something simply because someone was caught on tape telling you to do it. I have not seen any illegal hits called that would be evidence of someone intending to do harm to another player. If that was the case then they would have to charge every defensive player in the NFL with something. Any criminal charges that are sought after will not stick. Book it!
Zactly.. How in the ever loving HELL are you going to prove INTENT to injure and "kill the head" ????
The only one IMO who 'killed the head' was the 49er who head-butted PT.
Criminal charges would set a RIDICULOUSLY dangerous precedent for future litigation by players against the League. Not gonna happen.
At least, I hope not.
Posted on 4/7/12 at 1:24 am to MrLSU
Again...where did we actually do anything wrong to their players??? I'm sure Pierre would love to counter file for having the defender go head to head on him.
Posted on 4/7/12 at 10:03 am to 504hornets
quote:
not really all defensive coordinators say the same thing that williams was leaked saying before the 49ers game
Most of them have the sense to not say it in front of a documentary film maker after being asked by the league to stop though.
Williams is like a death row inmate who brings spare ammunition for the firing squad, just in case.
This post was edited on 4/7/12 at 10:09 am
Posted on 4/7/12 at 10:04 am to St Augustine
quote:
Again...where did we actually do anything wrong to their players??? I'm sure Pierre would love to counter file for having the defender go head to head on him.
Legal tackle.
Posted on 4/7/12 at 10:27 am to Mephistopheles
quote:
I have not seen any illegal hits called that would be evidence of someone intending to do harm to another player.
With the exception of VERY rare stuff like Suh stomping on another player.
But that's a discipline issue, not a LEGAL issue!!
And I've said this before, the irony of that San Fran game was that it was PT who got speared in the head and knocked out. And it DID change the complexion of the game from the start. And I wouldn't doubt the tackler got a bonus for it either!
Posted on 4/7/12 at 10:36 am to Tiger Khan
I don't know if this has been covered already (I haven't read the thread), but IMHO, the lawyering up by the players is not for fear of criminal prosecution (though that is the excuse being used). It's actually so when they get asked pointed questions by Commissar Goodell, their lawyers can advise them to not answer the question without fear of repercussion from Goodell. In essence, they can take the 5th. That way, they can't indict themselves or other players and they can't get caught in one of Goodell's traps. Goodell will have nowhere to go. Actually a brilliant move on their part.
This post was edited on 4/7/12 at 10:39 am
Posted on 4/7/12 at 12:47 pm to kclsufan
I think that is 100% correct.
Posted on 4/7/12 at 1:48 pm to kclsufan
quote:
It's actually so when they get asked pointed questions by Commissar Goodell, their lawyers can advise them to not answer the question without fear of repercussion from Goodell. In essence, they can take the 5th. That way, they can't indict themselves or other players and they can't get caught in one of Goodell's traps.
Can they then be punished for their non-cooperation? I know in some states refusing to be breathlysed is considered a failed test, could the same principle apply?
Posted on 4/7/12 at 1:58 pm to MrLSU
quote:
with the releasing of this tape today. If the tape wasn't released then nothing would be filed but now every single defensive player who wore a Saints uniform better find themselves a criminal defense attorney and quick, if they haven't already. There will be a district attorney who presses criminal charges and San Fran is the likely venue. The NFL tried to shut this down but this documentary film maker needed a producer when his original producer left and now he just created a huge opportunity for himself. The entire thing just sucks.
NO!
You cannot charge anyone based on what was said, first off.
If I said to go murder someone and you did, that would be different but in this case, they will not be criminals.
You can't prove whether a hit they made was criminal or just a football hit. If they do find anyone guilty, it could spell the end of the NFL.
Posted on 4/7/12 at 2:16 pm to Mephistopheles
quote:
Can they then be punished for their non-cooperation? I know in some states refusing to be breathlysed is considered a failed test, could the same principle apply?
Goodell does not have law enforcement authority. My guess is if he tried that, the player's union would take that as a direct challenge to their authority and the players rights. I don't think Rog wants that fight. He's already started one shitestorm.
Posted on 4/7/12 at 4:32 pm to Mephistopheles
quote:
Legal tackle
Exactly my point.
Posted on 4/7/12 at 5:00 pm to MrLSU
you are insane.
because a coach said one thing?
it's about actions. the saints had no actions on the field to warrant criminal charges. this is beyond a fricking joke.
because a coach said one thing?
it's about actions. the saints had no actions on the field to warrant criminal charges. this is beyond a fricking joke.
Posted on 4/7/12 at 5:00 pm to MrLSU
This may be one of the most off base and erroneous opinions I have ever heard.
Posted on 4/7/12 at 6:41 pm to nolatiger88
quote:
This may be one of the most off base and erroneous opinions I have ever heard.
Welcome to TIGERDROPPINGS 2012
Page 2 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News