Don't know if it was posted but the Feminist Lawyer hand delivered a letter to the Commissioner's office on Friday accusing an NFL player who played last Sunday of raping her client. That left the Bears and Jets off the hook. Yesterday she wrote that she will be watching today to see whether the accused player is allowed to play 2 weeks in a row. The Giants and Redskins and Patriots and Chiefs don't play on Sunday
Link - ( New Window )
Falcons (week 3 Thu)
Buccaneers (week 3 thu)
Jets (week 3 mon)
Bears (week 3 mon)
Giants (week 4 thu)
Redskins (week 4 thu)
Patriots (week 4 mon)
Chiefs (week 4 mon)
Browns (week 4 bye)
Seahawks (week 4 bye)
Cardinals (week 4 bye)
Bengals (week 4 bye)
Broncos (week 4 bye)
Rams (week 4 bye)
should all be eliminated if this is true
When I become NFL commissioner, only weeks 7,8,9 will have a bye. Every team will bye on one of those 3 weeks.
It seems it was reported ...
“I will be watching tomorrow to see whether or not the accused player is allowed to play for his team for a second week in a row while rape allegations are pending,” Allred told the Daily News on Saturday.
She sent Goodell a letter Friday, asking whether he knew a rape suspect was allowed to play in a Sept. 21 game. Allred hasn’t named the player or team but noted a “criminal investigation is pending.”
The letter and a press release is for PR and has zippo to do with due process.
I guess if I file a complaint against Gloria Allred she should be barred from practicing law until a "pending investigation" is complete.
Quote:
employers should replace our judicial system.
And I think it's sad some think our judicial system should replace our personal judgement.
If we are discussing what you think of a person, then personal judgement matters. If we are discussing a crime, then personal judgement has no place. Otherwise the idea of innocent until proven guilty goes out the window.
So players should be suspended before any sort of investigation has even began?
If this works for her, next Wednesday I'm writing a letter to Roger stating that both Foles and McCoy raped Brett (even though I know it was consensual).
Why the fuck go to the NFL at all. She should have gone to the police who have jurisdiction. Filed the complaint and waited. Is not the accused allowed a fair investigation as well as the victim. Now every chick who does a one nighter is going to accuse any player of rape for the $$$$
The NFL needs to tell all of these money grabbers their employees deserve the same due process as any other citizen.
In a written statement, Allred said her office delivered a letter to NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell advising them that she represents a young woman who filed a police report Sept. 20 alleging that an NFL player raped her that morning.
Allred did not identify the accused player or his team.
Allred said her office informed the commissioner that police were contacted that morning, and that the alleged perpetrator was contacted by the police, who asked him to come to the station to be interviewed.
“The accused did respond to law enforcement's request and went to the police station, accompanied by a representative of his NFL team,” Allred said. “Thereafter, the accused was then allowed by his team to play the following day.”
Allred has asked the league whether the alleged rape was reported to them, and if the NFL approved of the player participating in the game despite the allegations. Allred also asked Goodell to “clarify the NFL's policy regarding allowing a player to play while serious allegations of criminal wrongdoing are pending with law enforcement.”
Said NFL spokesman Brian McCarthy: “We have no information on this alleged incident other than [Allred’s] letter.”
Link - ( New Window )
Because the last thing Gloria Allred cares about is justice. And as I stated having seem first hand women this themselves at athletes the amount of women going after dudes after consensual sex is going to explode now that that bottoms feeders like Allred smell $$$.
Time to go the Charlie Sheen route and only hire a pro. Pay now or pay later.
But the easiest way to forfeit public sympathy and concern is for the feminist equivalent of Reverend Al and Jesse to smell blood in the water. If charges are brought he will not play. If they are not he probably will.
This. What an opportunistic ambulance chasing piece of shit.
Of course, if the complaining woman feels that it is a conspiracy and does not trust the cops, she can always bring a civil suit for battery where she can get a jury trial and have a lower standard of proof in order to win cash rather than put the guy in jail.
All I can say is don't let your son/daughter marry a criminal lawyer. The moral scruples are the first to go.
seeking women. No misogyny on this thread
Only if she's on fire too.
Thinking about it, I really can't remember her ever going to trial. For all the time she spends on the cable talk shows you figure there would be at least one time after appearing in a court room. Not doing exhaustive research means I could be wrong, but it's not an off the wall question.
If this results in charges absolutely, take action against the accused. But unless and until it does, the mere fact that she is using this to do what she usually does - grab headlines - is not reason enough to take action against the player.
Going to trail would mean exhaustive preperation and work. She hasn't been in a courtroom as a practicing lawyer in years. She's a media personality who carved out a niche. And since many "news" shows put piles of shit like her on discussing these types of cases people assume she legit.
While I don't rapists should be playing, I'm not comfortable with penalizing people before due process has spun its wheels.
It's jackholes like her that make it difficult for people with legitimate claims to get anywhere in the legal system.
Here's a suggestion: don't watch it?
Anyone who doesn't think that professional AND college FB stars get differential treatment from the police is hallucinating. Allred may be a shitstain, but she knows how to work the publicity chain, which is essential when taking on a star athlete.
Link - ( New Window )
I see this exactly the opposite of most of you, I guess, without being any more impressed with Allred. I will bet dollars to donut holes that she has the goods on whoever she is chasing. She sees the NFL mess as her next money tree, so why would she go after anyone whom she doesn't have the goods on? That would just burn down her money tree if there isn't any proof.
Whatever.
Maybe?
Same in the Duke Lacrosse case.
In the NFL, if she had a difficult case to prove, all she would have to do is wait a few weeks, and a better one would come around. No one has yet invented a way to keep FB stars from misusing their fists and their penises.
And the thing is, victims frequently have to go to the NFL for redress. That is why all of this has become so urgent, politically. Local cops don't want to piss off their buddies, and local DAs want to get re-elected or re-appointed. So, the victim loses if the NFL isn't playing its proper role.
I saw an interview with the wife in one of the high profile cases--forget which one. She talked about repeatedly calling the cops, and when they showed up, all they wanted to do was talk football with her husband.
You may be onto something.
Same in the Duke Lacrosse case.
In the NFL, if she had a difficult case to prove, all she would have to do is wait a few weeks, and a better one would come around. No one has yet invented a way to keep FB stars from misusing their fists and their penises.
And the thing is, victims frequently have to go to the NFL for redress. That is why all of this has become so urgent, politically. Local cops don't want to piss off their buddies, and local DAs want to get re-elected or re-appointed. So, the victim loses if the NFL isn't playing its proper role.
I saw an interview with the wife in one of the high profile cases--forget which one. She talked about repeatedly calling the cops, and when they showed up, all they wanted to do was talk football with her husband.
The careers of the leaders of a witchhunt (deserved or not - some witchhunts are richly deserved) are rarely ended if and when the thing blows up. Only Mike Nifong's career was ruined by the Duke Lacrosse scandal, Selena Roberts certainly emerged no worse for the wear. Some of Jesse Jackson's missteps have been criminal, and yet people still put a microphone in front of him.
And I don't doubt that some of these guys get away with more than we'll ever know (I heard from some Nashville cops that Pacman Jones was constantly getting into and out of trouble and he was only ever prosecuted for a fraction of it). But the DA's in these college towns wouldn't last a term if they hadn't figured out the boundaries of their community's patience (and since the donors often live outside of these towns that line isn't necessarily where you might think it is).
If Allred goes after a player who is ultimately proven innocent, it blows her up. And like I said, she doesn't need to go there. The pickings are far from slim.
I am pretty confident she didn't just make an accusation. There is some corroboration floating around, too, I would bet.
Filth? Someone else said shitstain. I like that better.
I'm not saying this is the case in this matter, but then what would stop someone crying rape to intentionally get a player suspended before a big game? For example, if the 49ers and Seahawks are getting set to play in a few days, and someone from San Francisco jumps up and screams, "Richard Sherman raped me last year!" Do they expect Richard Sherman to be suspended just long enough to miss the 49ers' game, after which the allegations are found to be without merit?
Yes, I realize the person who falsely accused would be opening herself to massive civil suits, but do you honestly think some people are smart or sane enough to think that far ahead? Remember when the guy stabbed Monica Seles back in the early 90s because he wanted Steffi Graf to be No. 1 again?
Please remember that in this country, the accused are innocent until proven guilty. Obviously there are some circumstances (Ray Rice, Adrian Peterson) where the guilt is so obvious that preemptive actions must be taken. But in cases like this, it's next to impossible to have such obvious guilt.
If Allred goes after a player who is ultimately proven innocent, it blows her up. And like I said, she doesn't need to go there. The pickings are far from slim.
I am pretty confident she didn't just make an accusation. There is some corroboration floating around, too, I would bet.
How does it hurt her? She never goes to court or even files a suit. That's what a real lawyer does. Negotiating to make her client go away is her deal. She wrote a letter to the NFL. And made it public. As a public figure the player has few legal rights if she names him.
Let's assume there was sex. Allred can say that's proof enough. I'm sure the player will say it was consenaual. So while I'm certainly not going to absolve anyone of rape , unless there are physical signs, GHN on a tox report or a third party witness how does anyone know what happened. Allred can get up on a podium and repeat a baseless claim and not have any type of censure even if she knows what she is saying is false. She can just say she believed her client.
It's very sad but knowing Alleeds past leaves me
Personally with a very jaundiced eye. Especially w this leaked info about writing a letter to the NFL. She has other motivations by leaking that. What does that info going public do to help her client one bit?
Without corroboration of any kind, it's then a he said-she said event and given today's culture, the tendency is to believe the woman over the man. College disciplinary anecdotes seem to suggest this.
If so, in my opinion, even publicizing a "rape" accusation is damaging and effin' unAmerican, but the media sharks feed off this stuff.
My suspicion is that many of the accusations, as I described above, might be feelings of regret on the part of the woman. If this regret is strong enough, and often it is, what is left for them but to suggest and/or accuse rape. There's no "regret" hotline center, there are no tox reports for regret and yet I believe women want some kind of justification for what they did.
None of these observations are meant to minimize the real and terrible instances of rape, domestic or otherwise.
Without corroboration of any kind, it's then a he said-she said event and given today's culture, the tendency is to believe the woman over the man. College disciplinary anecdotes seem to suggest this.
If so, in my opinion, even publicizing a "rape" accusation is damaging and effin' unAmerican, but the media sharks feed off this stuff.
My suspicion is that many of the accusations, as I described above, might be feelings of regret on the part of the woman. If this regret is strong enough, and often it is, what is left for them but to suggest and/or accuse rape. There's no "regret" hotline center, there are no tox reports for regret and yet I believe women want some kind of justification for what they did.
None of these observations are meant to minimize the real and terrible instances of rape, domestic or otherwise.
That's like saying "with all due respect..." It is not really in dispute that only a minority of rapes are ever reported, an even smaller minority ever result in charges, a smaller minority still result in convictions, and that many of those are for lesser charges that may not even be of a sexual nature. So the fact that colleges have quasi-kangaroo courts (with severe consequences for the accused, no doubt, but without the means of incarcerating someone or putting him on a registry) does not mean that rape does not occur, or that the innocent are frequently found guilty. We don't subject the victim in an assault and battery or a robbery case to that sort of scrutiny, assuming he or she is lying or overreacting. Why do we do it to victims of a crime where the investigation is the most physically intrusive of all and where merely coming forward is to subject oneself to shame and embarrassment?
But, 'with all due respect,' it doesn't come anywhere near addressing the specific point I was making, which is the existence of a great deal of remorse and regret young college women and adults feel after consensual sex, especially of the quick "hook-up," kind and generally with first time strangers. And I'm guessing that that remorse and regret can morph into a rape allegation as these women try to make sense of what they did and justify in some way what happened.
I have no disagreement with your post. I'm trying to open up discussion of the issue to other aspects of rape allegations. I think this is an aspect of human nature separate from whether a rape, legitimate or otherwise, is reported or not.
1. No means no. If you prevent her from saying no by putting your hand over her mouth, that also means no.
2. Don't put something in a girl's drink and then have sex with her when she is incapacitated.
3. If you're sober or close to it, don't try to bed girls who are falldown drunk.
There are certainly cases that aren't covered by the above three rules, but most accusations that are investigated by law enforcement are encompassed by one of those three rules.
“It’s pretty clear that in a community like a college campus, you will expect and you will see that there are serial offenders, and they account for the vast majority of sexual assaults that occur in that community,” he said.
Not a remourse accusation in this bunch, of course.
The cover story on NY Magazine this week is about a young woman who carries a mattress everywhere she goes on campus as a form of protest over the fact that her rapist is still on campus. Two other women accused him in credible and similar testimony, but a hearing centering on remarkably stupid investigation techniques let him walk, and a dean confirmed the result.
Yeah, there are some remourse accusations, but that isn;t the main problem. There are three main problems.
1) Universities have no clue as to how to conduct a proper investigation, often losing massive amounts of forensic evidence, if it is collected at all;
2) Until the recent, growing wave of Title IX investigations against 70+ Universities (and growing), the basic goal was to minimize damage to a University's reputation; and
3) Actual cops and detectives know how to do these investigations, but there are agreements with Universities, who are primary local employers, that keep them out.
Drunken sex + remorse absolutely exists. But it isn't the main problem, particularly where only the female is drunk.
Link - ( New Window )
"He dragged her by her hair into the hallway and was beating her there," Ridolfi-Starr said. "How did they find her responsible? I don't know how those people came to that assessment. I can't fathom it."
Columbia unveiled a new sexual assault policy this summer, after activists said school administrators told them there would be no overhaul without their input.
Link - ( New Window )
If Allred goes after a player who is ultimately proven innocent, it blows her up. And like I said, she doesn't need to go there. The pickings are far from slim.
I'm not sure this is accurate. If she never takes it through trial it most likely just quietly fades away. And she rarely goes to trial.
The NFL, by contrast, is a monopoly. A player who doesn't like the NFL's disciplinary policies can't make comparable money playing in another league.
I'm actually in favor of a tough personal-conduct policy for professional sports leagues. I just don't see college campuses providing a relevant model.
To be PC, its also likely that the victim was socioeconomically advantaged because she found high-powered representation on short notice. To be crude, I'm thinking white. I just hope the player isn't black.
You have to remember, ability to get her on TV is almost as important as the ability to pay. I'm not sure you're right.
2) Pro FB players all used to be college FB players. If they saw/experienced patterns of feeble responses by universities, they may have learned a bad lesson from that.
At the players expense. Even if guilty, the implication that due process should be trampled over is shameful.
Name names or shut up - ( New Window )
To be PC, its also likely that the victim was socioeconomically advantaged because she found high-powered representation on short notice. To be crude, I'm thinking white. I just hope the player isn't black.
"I'm thinking white." Who gives a fuck? The operative feature isn't that the girl is affluent, she may be or she may not be. The operative feature is that the player, and moreover the league, is wealthy, and shaming it could be lucrative.
No institution should get credit for prosecuting rape and treating it at least as seriously as any other crimes, including assault and property damage, or for treating the victims of rape with the same respect as the victims of any other kind of crime. That ought to be a baseline.
"Innocent until proven guilty" means little when the system is biased to favor athletic stars. Ray Rice's criminal diversion program is not supposed to be provided for violent criminals. But a football star doesn't meet the stereotype of a criminal.
And for every Duke Lacrosse Team, there are hundreds if not thousands of cases of acquaintance and gang rape where the case is suppressed, and the victim is pressured to disappear into obscurity. Only very recently has criticism focused on the common practice of minimizing the offense by citing the intoxication of the victim. The more frequent situation in universities and elite institutions has been to suppress and cover up such cases...and to shame the victim into dropping charges and out of school.
You all can kill the messenger in Allred, but the fact is that only 10% of all civil cases actually go to trial. She is not doing anything different than what any other trial lawyer does. 90% of all civil cases end up being settled. Nothing new there, and thank goodness for that. Is there some other trial attorney, experienced in women's rights, who would be better?
In NJ, only 1% of violent offenders get deferred prosecution. What a coincidence that it happened to be a star football player.
In NJ, only 1% of violent offenders get deferred prosecution. What a coincidence that it happened to be a star football player.
I'm with you on the gun law enforcement, but what is a violent offender? Likely a very narrow class of felons that does not include misdemeanor A&B or A&B on a family member, which is probably where this was headed with an uncooperative victim.
As for the possible cynicism of university administrators, they are running corporations. Branding matters, and so does damage control. If a college does the right thing partly for commercial reasons, that's better than not doing it at all.
Link - ( New Window )
Read your post and agree with almost all of it. First, I don't think I said "MOST" of the accusations were a result of remorse or regret. But I think it's a factor and given human nature, I bet there are more than one thinks. And, of course, it doesn't fit the rape narrative to acknowledge it or instances where that's the case. You're savvy enough to know that "remorse" (for want of a better term) isn't eyeball worthy, rape is. It's the times we live in.
You offer as a rebuttal that "patterns on campus don't reflect the remorse or regret" possibilities.
What patterns? Not being snarky here, but what is the evidence that shows these patterns?
[i]"Yeah, there are some remourse accusations, but that isn;t the main problem."[/]
Never said that it was. In fact, I'm in totally agreement with the problems you've indicated and the shitty way rape "survivors" have been treated. I'm limiting my posts to my one specific concern.
This is not to diminish at all the legitimacy of rape accusations, but the national dialogue here and elsewhere rings of the Olivia Benson SVU certainty that all women who cry rape are truly raped by sexual bad guys. This mindset is fairly overwhelming and I'm afraid a lot of innocent men will be caught up in it. And it's not dismissive of rape accusations to be concerned about that, is there?
Let's look at a scenario. A young lady has some drunken consensual sex with a guy she met at a bar. She feels awful. She's not that kind of girl, she thinks. And maybe she really isn't. And yet she did it, against her better judgment, her upbringing, or just on the legitimate sense of her own dignity. In an effort to salvage her self-image, and maybe even to rehabilitate her social image, she accuses the guy of rape.
So ... the wheels are in motion. Do you think, realistically, that this woman will recant that accusation? If she does, she will be vilified and lose whatever shred of authenticity she ever had.
That's kind of why I need to know what these "patterns" are, and how they've been measured.
Good talking with you. (BTW) Send me an E-mail. My address is above. Got an extra seat for Sunday's game.
The two scenarios make roughly equal sense. Just because a woman feels regret and/or shame, that doesn't mean she's likely to act out her misgivings by destroying her partner's life. People do stuff they regret all the time. Very few seek solace by accusing another person of a major felony.
Out of shame and guilt- "she was asking for it"- she doesn't tell anyone.
The above is BY FAR the bigger issue and much more common than, "I don't want people to think I'm a slut, so I'll cry rape" mental gymnastics being performed above.
Just one comment, of many possibilities: It's way safer and accepted socially and culturally and politically to call rape than to shoot someone dead. Good lord, how are those choices 'roughly equal?'
I think the push to get universities to set up what are essentially kangaroo courts has something to do with the "Will" attitude. Yes, treat it the way we treat other crimes. But that means the defendant can retain counsel and can question his accuser.
Sure. I agree. The reasons are as complex as is a human being. My only point was that these false accusations happen and we won't really know how many. Meanwhile, some college kid's reputation is ruined for life.
Going off the deep end is one of my pastimes. No problem.
I also don't know if it's statistically significant. My belief is that we'll never know because of the stigma attached to recanting. Haven't you read the many stories of women recanting years and years after the event, often with the rapist doing twenty to life? Google it up.
Meanwhhile --- Beat the Falcons.
I haven't seen any data suggesting this happens enough to make this aspect worth discussing.
That isn't remotely the same as women holding wealthy men (pro athletes, for example) hostage with the rape allegation as a tactic to obtain money from them. Nor is it to say that even in this case, that the number in question even approaches a significant percent. We've seen how many of these young (and sometimes not-so-young) men conduct themselves poorly so that sexual misconduct wouldn't be an outlandish claim.
Quote:
They're not. We need to treat rape the way we treat other crime and not reflexively distrust the victim or minimize the offense until it is not one. That's what the George Wills of the world don't get. It is a poisonous notion that keeps victims, yes real victims, from coming forward and comforts and reassures those who commit acts of sexual violence.
I think the push to get universities to set up what are essentially kangaroo courts has something to do with the "Will" attitude. Yes, treat it the way we treat other crimes. But that means the defendant can retain counsel and can question his accuser.
Will is conflating the two. As I mentioned above, kangaroo courts are both overbroad and underbroad. On the one hand they probably bring in a class of alleged offender whose actions perhaps ought not be criminal, and they subject him to serious consequences. On the other hand they can preclude prosecution of serious criminals - some of whom really are predators - by mucking up evidence and by purporting to stand in for the criminal justice system. And I don't minimize the importance of this to the former class. But understand that those individuals, while we should certainly attempt to prevent inappropriate punishment of them, pale in number compared to the women who do not come forward. Here in Central Virginia a local politician was accused of forcible sodomy. When he was finally in shackles multiple victims came forward and said the same thing had been done to them. It STILL resulted in misdemeanor charges because it is very difficult to prove.
Of course the University proceedings are lame and don't even do a good job at adjudication over the matters they do have jurisdiction over, but I'm sure a guy facing serious jail time would take that over the worst sanctions a University proceeding could mete out: Expulsion, kicking a frat off campus, bring kicked off a team or suspended from school.
Universities should be required by law to turn all sexual assault cases over to the police, not campus police. Such matters belong with a criminal justice system that is competent to adjudicate them.
Universities do have internal codes of conduct, and they do have the right to impose University sanctions of expulsion, suspension, etc. But it is wrong that these kinds of proceedings have evolved into an alternative to criminal prosecution. They can and should run parallel to criminal proceedings.
Quote:
In comment 11891274 Dunedin81 said:
Quote:
They're not. We need to treat rape the way we treat other crime and not reflexively distrust the victim or minimize the offense until it is not one. That's what the George Wills of the world don't get. It is a poisonous notion that keeps victims, yes real victims, from coming forward and comforts and reassures those who commit acts of sexual violence.
I think the push to get universities to set up what are essentially kangaroo courts has something to do with the "Will" attitude. Yes, treat it the way we treat other crimes. But that means the defendant can retain counsel and can question his accuser.
Will is conflating the two. As I mentioned above, kangaroo courts are both overbroad and underbroad. On the one hand they probably bring in a class of alleged offender whose actions perhaps ought not be criminal, and they subject him to serious consequences. On the other hand they can preclude prosecution of serious criminals - some of whom really are predators - by mucking up evidence and by purporting to stand in for the criminal justice system. And I don't minimize the importance of this to the former class. But understand that those individuals, while we should certainly attempt to prevent inappropriate punishment of them, pale in number compared to the women who do not come forward. Here in Central Virginia a local politician was accused of forcible sodomy. When he was finally in shackles multiple victims came forward and said the same thing had been done to them. It STILL resulted in misdemeanor charges because it is very difficult to prove.
But would the additional victims in the Central Virginia case have come forward if the case had gone to a university panel?
But aren't there more viable alternatives, methods of support which are CLEARLY needed, than the university panels? Not for one minute am I suggesting that these women be left in the cold. I'm just questioning whether this is the best solution.
[url]http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/football/cowboys-player-accused-sexually-assaulting-woman-article-1.1960275?cid=bitly?$242424&utm_content=bufferc0d5f&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_campaign=NYDailyNewsTw[/url]
cowboys