|
|
Â
|
| Quote: |
| Adam Schefter & #10004; @AdamSchefter NFL determined that neither the Lions nor Matt Patricia will be subject to any discipline in regards to previous allegations made against Detroit’s HC, per sources. The league met last week with the Lions and Patricia. 1:30 PM - May 21, 2018 |
No interviews or comments from her?
"According to a Detroit News story, Patricia was charged in August 1996 with aggravated sexual assault, but he was never prosecuted for it and the case was dismissed five months later in January 1997.
The alleged incident occurred when Patricia was 21 years old, during spring break in South Padre, Texas. According to The News, many details surrounding the case are unclear."
They are reporting on something that MIGHT have happened 22 years ago with no input from the victim? I want to hear what she has to say ... today! Her silence is speaking volumes ...
(unless she is not around anymore - passed away?)
No interviews or comments from her?
"According to a Detroit News story, Patricia was charged in August 1996 with aggravated sexual assault, but he was never prosecuted for it and the case was dismissed five months later in January 1997.
The alleged incident occurred when Patricia was 21 years old, during spring break in South Padre, Texas. According to The News, many details surrounding the case are unclear."
They are reporting on something that MIGHT have happened 22 years ago with no input from the victim? I want to hear what she has to say ... today! Her silence is speaking volumes ...
(unless she is not around anymore - passed away?)
The fact that she didn't want to testify 22 years ago means there's a good chance she doesn't want to publicly re-visit it now. She very well could be more upset about a reporter digging up this story than he is. If she has move on with her life and had put this behind her to have it resurface now could be traumatizing for her.
I don't think her silence speaks to anything, and she certainly doesn't owe any of "us" a word on the subject.
Quote:
No interviews or comments from her?
"According to a Detroit News story, Patricia was charged in August 1996 with aggravated sexual assault, but he was never prosecuted for it and the case was dismissed five months later in January 1997.
The alleged incident occurred when Patricia was 21 years old, during spring break in South Padre, Texas. According to The News, many details surrounding the case are unclear."
They are reporting on something that MIGHT have happened 22 years ago with no input from the victim? I want to hear what she has to say ... today! Her silence is speaking volumes ...
(unless she is not around anymore - passed away?)
The fact that she didn't want to testify 22 years ago means there's a good chance she doesn't want to publicly re-visit it now. She very well could be more upset about a reporter digging up this story than he is. If she has move on with her life and had put this behind her to have it resurface now could be traumatizing for her.
I don't think her silence speaks to anything, and she certainly doesn't owe any of "us" a word on the subject.
That is true Steve ... I was wondering why the reporter even brought this up though. I was wondering if he did try to make contact with her and she declined (for whatever reasons are her own good ones) .... but, then I was thinking maybe the reporter got one of those "annonymous phone calls" from her ... or someone in her family?
She doesn't owe us anything you are right. And, if that is what she chooses, then why even publish it in the paper - all this time later (if she doesn't want to get involved).
Some reporters really are shit stirrers - obviously : )
If the reporter had her input - then there is a real story there. The story in this form - not so much.