Cowboys to sign Greg Hardy (Seahawks out)

HawkAroundTheClock

New member
Joined
Apr 4, 2010
Messages
2,417
Reaction score
0
Location
Over There
XxXdragonXxX":397wxook said:
I could, but it was a simple observation. Dont care enough to take it any further.
No, it was not a simple observation. It was an insinuation that the judge may have made the initial ruling based on her gender. Pathetic. It was a pathetic, sexist observation. And you did care to take it further when you articulated your insinuation:
XxXdragonXxX":397wxook said:
The decision of a single (possibly biased) judge in a bench trial doesn't hold much weight to me

Holder running off with all the money she got from the settlement screams that she was in it for the money all along.
And why would there be any money at all if Hardy didn't do anything wrong? If she still bailed on the jury trial without being paid off, then THAT would be a sign that she had no case. Then he could sue her for defamation and damages. But he didn't. Because he couldn't. Because he was not innocent. So he paid her to make the trial go away. Willingly and of his own accord. If that doesn't sink in and say anything to you about HIM, then there's no point in discussing this any more.

Also, your link about male victims is in the UK. I agree with the last line in that article that "Each victim should be seen as an individual and helped accordingly." But the statistics involved were only for the UK.

NorthDallas40oz":397wxook said:
I've watched it, and yes I still want him. His "girlfriend" is a shameless and notorious groupie who made a number of baseless claims against Hardy. If Hardy had done the all the things that she alleged, and she legitimately thought that he was going to "kill (her)," she surely would have prosecuted him to the fullest extent of the law (as her attorney also alluded to in that clip). Instead, when Hardy requested a jury trial, she chose not to pursue it and gladly took a nice fat check instead....which tells you all you need to know about her credibility and motives. Hardy has already paid a huge price, both legally and in the court of public opinion, now it's time to move on and get back to football. Bringing him in on a short term (even 1-year) deal where he's motivated to rehab both his football value and public image makes a ton of sense for both sides, and if he screws up again, you just cut him.
That's a nifty double standard there. She is "shameless" and lacks credibility when she takes the check... but Hardy has "paid a huge price" for writing the check. Maybe if he didn't do anything, he would have felt better about being exonerated AND saving his money. But he gets a pass because he would rather pay her money and leave the NFL-watching world to wonder what really happened than clear his name through proper legal channels? If he did nothing and had nothing to hide, why would he pay her ANYTHING? Tells you all you need to know about HIS credibility and motives.
 

-The Glove-

New member
Joined
Jan 20, 2011
Messages
7,689
Reaction score
0
HawkAroundTheClock":2sz0vasv said:
XxXdragonXxX":2sz0vasv said:
I could, but it was a simple observation. Dont care enough to take it any further.
No, it was not a simple observation. It was an insinuation that the judge may have made the initial ruling based on her gender. Pathetic. It was a pathetic, sexist observation. And you did care to take it further when you articulated your insinuation:
XxXdragonXxX":2sz0vasv said:
The decision of a single (possibly biased) judge in a bench trial doesn't hold much weight to me

Holder running off with all the money she got from the settlement screams that she was in it for the money all along.
And why would there be any money at all if Hardy didn't do anything wrong? If she still bailed on the jury trial without being paid off, then THAT would be a sign that she had no case. Then he could sue her for defamation and damages. But he didn't. Because he couldn't. Because he was not innocent. So he paid her to make the trial go away. Willingly and of his own accord. If that doesn't sink in and say anything to you about HIM, then there's no point in discussing this any more.

Also, your link about male victims is in the UK. I agree with the last line in that article that "Each victim should be seen as an individual and helped accordingly." But the statistics involved were only for the UK.

NorthDallas40oz":2sz0vasv said:
I've watched it, and yes I still want him. His "girlfriend" is a shameless and notorious groupie who made a number of baseless claims against Hardy. If Hardy had done the all the things that she alleged, and she legitimately thought that he was going to "kill (her)," she surely would have prosecuted him to the fullest extent of the law (as her attorney also alluded to in that clip). Instead, when Hardy requested a jury trial, she chose not to pursue it and gladly took a nice fat check instead....which tells you all you need to know about her credibility and motives. Hardy has already paid a huge price, both legally and in the court of public opinion, now it's time to move on and get back to football. Bringing him in on a short term (even 1-year) deal where he's motivated to rehab both his football value and public image makes a ton of sense for both sides, and if he screws up again, you just cut him.
That's a nifty double standard there. She is "shameless" and lacks credibility when she takes the check... but Hardy has "paid a huge price" for writing the check. Maybe if he didn't do anything, he would have felt better about being exonerated AND saving his money. But he gets a pass because he would rather pay her money and leave the NFL-watching world to wonder what really happened than clear his name through proper legal channels? If he did nothing and had nothing to hide, why would he pay her ANYTHING? Tells you all you need to know about HIS credibility and motives.
I'm not even going to touch on anything else because I'm indifferent about this whole Hardy situation...but a lot of people, rich people, pay because it is cheaper than going to trial
 

HawKnPeppa

New member
Joined
Oct 31, 2009
Messages
4,733
Reaction score
0
NorthDallas40oz":36rsv8n6 said:
Hawk-Lock":36rsv8n6 said:
http://espn.go.com/video/clip?id=11513357

Watch that link and tell me if you still want him. This guy is 100x worst than Ray Rice/Adrian Peterson/Aldon Smith/etc.
I've watched it, and yes I still want him. His "girlfriend" is a shameless and notorious groupie who made a number of baseless claims against Hardy. If Hardy had done the all the things that she alleged, and she legitimately thought that he was going to "kill (her)," she surely would have prosecuted him to the fullest extent of the law (as her attorney also alluded to in that clip). Instead, when Hardy requested a jury trial, she chose not to pursue it and gladly took a nice fat check instead....which tells you all you need to know about her credibility and motives. Hardy has already paid a huge price, both legally and in the court of public opinion, now it's time to move on and get back to football. Bringing him in on a short term (even 1-year) deal where he's motivated to rehab both his football value and public image makes a ton of sense for both sides, and if he screws up again, you just cut him.

Thank you!

Most NFL groupie hoes are just trying to get that payday. The smart organizations will do their homework and that's probably why Seattle is still interested. I get so tired of the women always being given the benefit of doubt despite the surrounding situation and their background.

Would any of the haters show remorse if they believed an accusation against them was false?

Give the man a 1-year deal laden with incentives for him to hang with the right crowds. I'm up for that.
 

HawKnPeppa

New member
Joined
Oct 31, 2009
Messages
4,733
Reaction score
0
-The Glove-":26cij7ua said:
HawkAroundTheClock":26cij7ua said:
XxXdragonXxX":26cij7ua said:
I could, but it was a simple observation. Dont care enough to take it any further.
No, it was not a simple observation. It was an insinuation that the judge may have made the initial ruling based on her gender. Pathetic. It was a pathetic, sexist observation. And you did care to take it further when you articulated your insinuation:
XxXdragonXxX":26cij7ua said:
The decision of a single (possibly biased) judge in a bench trial doesn't hold much weight to me

Holder running off with all the money she got from the settlement screams that she was in it for the money all along.
And why would there be any money at all if Hardy didn't do anything wrong? If she still bailed on the jury trial without being paid off, then THAT would be a sign that she had no case. Then he could sue her for defamation and damages. But he didn't. Because he couldn't. Because he was not innocent. So he paid her to make the trial go away. Willingly and of his own accord. If that doesn't sink in and say anything to you about HIM, then there's no point in discussing this any more.

Also, your link about male victims is in the UK. I agree with the last line in that article that "Each victim should be seen as an individual and helped accordingly." But the statistics involved were only for the UK.

NorthDallas40oz":26cij7ua said:
I've watched it, and yes I still want him. His "girlfriend" is a shameless and notorious groupie who made a number of baseless claims against Hardy. If Hardy had done the all the things that she alleged, and she legitimately thought that he was going to "kill (her)," she surely would have prosecuted him to the fullest extent of the law (as her attorney also alluded to in that clip). Instead, when Hardy requested a jury trial, she chose not to pursue it and gladly took a nice fat check instead....which tells you all you need to know about her credibility and motives. Hardy has already paid a huge price, both legally and in the court of public opinion, now it's time to move on and get back to football. Bringing him in on a short term (even 1-year) deal where he's motivated to rehab both his football value and public image makes a ton of sense for both sides, and if he screws up again, you just cut him.
That's a nifty double standard there. She is "shameless" and lacks credibility when she takes the check... but Hardy has "paid a huge price" for writing the check. Maybe if he didn't do anything, he would have felt better about being exonerated AND saving his money. But he gets a pass because he would rather pay her money and leave the NFL-watching world to wonder what really happened than clear his name through proper legal channels? If he did nothing and had nothing to hide, why would he pay her ANYTHING? Tells you all you need to know about HIS credibility and motives.
I'm not even going to touch on anything else because I'm indifferent about this whole Hardy situation...but a lot of people, rich people, pay because it is cheaper than going to trial

Hint, hint...'notorious' says this girl has a history with this sort of thing. ND40oz obviously wasn't basing that on her accepting the current settlement. Good gawd :roll:
 

HawKnPeppa

New member
Joined
Oct 31, 2009
Messages
4,733
Reaction score
0
-The Glove-":1uteur5r said:
HawkAroundTheClock":1uteur5r said:
XxXdragonXxX":1uteur5r said:
I could, but it was a simple observation. Dont care enough to take it any further.
No, it was not a simple observation. It was an insinuation that the judge may have made the initial ruling based on her gender. Pathetic. It was a pathetic, sexist observation. And you did care to take it further when you articulated your insinuation:
XxXdragonXxX":1uteur5r said:
The decision of a single (possibly biased) judge in a bench trial doesn't hold much weight to me

Holder running off with all the money she got from the settlement screams that she was in it for the money all along.
And why would there be any money at all if Hardy didn't do anything wrong? If she still bailed on the jury trial without being paid off, then THAT would be a sign that she had no case. Then he could sue her for defamation and damages. But he didn't. Because he couldn't. Because he was not innocent. So he paid her to make the trial go away. Willingly and of his own accord. If that doesn't sink in and say anything to you about HIM, then there's no point in discussing this any more.

Also, your link about male victims is in the UK. I agree with the last line in that article that "Each victim should be seen as an individual and helped accordingly." But the statistics involved were only for the UK.

NorthDallas40oz":1uteur5r said:
I've watched it, and yes I still want him. His "girlfriend" is a shameless and notorious groupie who made a number of baseless claims against Hardy. If Hardy had done the all the things that she alleged, and she legitimately thought that he was going to "kill (her)," she surely would have prosecuted him to the fullest extent of the law (as her attorney also alluded to in that clip). Instead, when Hardy requested a jury trial, she chose not to pursue it and gladly took a nice fat check instead....which tells you all you need to know about her credibility and motives. Hardy has already paid a huge price, both legally and in the court of public opinion, now it's time to move on and get back to football. Bringing him in on a short term (even 1-year) deal where he's motivated to rehab both his football value and public image makes a ton of sense for both sides, and if he screws up again, you just cut him.
That's a nifty double standard there. She is "shameless" and lacks credibility when she takes the check... but Hardy has "paid a huge price" for writing the check. Maybe if he didn't do anything, he would have felt better about being exonerated AND saving his money. But he gets a pass because he would rather pay her money and leave the NFL-watching world to wonder what really happened than clear his name through proper legal channels? If he did nothing and had nothing to hide, why would he pay her ANYTHING? Tells you all you need to know about HIS credibility and motives.
I'm not even going to touch on anything else because I'm indifferent about this whole Hardy situation...but a lot of people, rich people, pay because it is cheaper than going to trial

Take your political posts (IE 'SEXIST!') to the political forum puhlease! :roll:
 

HawKnPeppa

New member
Joined
Oct 31, 2009
Messages
4,733
Reaction score
0
Tical21":l52lu6xn said:
What Ray Rice did isn't even in the same category as Hardy. That woman is lucky to be alive. Hardy is as crazy and a bad of dude as there is in this league. I don't think he deserves to be on any team, let alone walking the streets. Guys as bad as him need to be locked up or put in a body bag. Having been around domestic violence before, I will go as far as to say if the Seahawks sign him, the Jacksonville Jaguars will be my new team.


See ya. :roll: :1:
 

HawKnPeppa

New member
Joined
Oct 31, 2009
Messages
4,733
Reaction score
0
olyfan63":hr3aqpqp said:
XxXdragonXxX":hr3aqpqp said:
The decision of a single (possibly biased) judge in a bench trial doesn't hold much weight to me, especially when the DA decided not to submit the testimony of the "victim" from said bench trial due to a lack of credibility and inconsistencies in her story.

Holder running off with all the money she got from the settlement screams that she was in it for the money all along.

There's a certain percentage of Boy Scout males who put all women on a pedestal and refuse to believe there are women so devious, and that it must always be the evil man's fault.

Holder knew she would lose in a jury trial, and not just lose, but be ripped to shreds in public, exposed as an evil, mentally ill fraud. Accepting a "generous settlement" and maintaining a veneer of victimhood would sound a lot more appealing as an alternative.

This ^^^^

Not just that, but I smell a rather large stench coming from the intoxicated '3rd party witness,' who just happened to be occupying the same room.

Sounds like these two gold diggers were working as a team.

Sackhawk might want to pass, but I give this guy a hearty FAP! :mrgreen:
 

McGruff

New member
Joined
Mar 2, 2007
Messages
5,260
Reaction score
0
Location
Elma, WA
The fact that we are three pages into this possibility, and the discussion in 80% legal minutae and technicalities and not field production tells me all I need to know.

We don't need the distraction and controversy swirling over our heads.
 

FargoHawk

New member
Joined
Sep 26, 2009
Messages
912
Reaction score
0
Well, it is the offseason. All that changes when the season starts.
 

aawolf

New member
Joined
Apr 28, 2012
Messages
638
Reaction score
0
I have inside knowledge on how these assault on female proceedings work, as I'm an attorney in NC. In my experience, 75% of the time, the guy is guilty of slapping a woman around and is justly charged and convicted. However, in about 25% of the cases I've come across, the woman is a self-serving wench that wants to cause problems for the guy because she wants to unfairly streamline a custody situation or because she is unsatisfied with a break up or because she wants leverage to get something the guy has. In this case, I'm not familiar with the case enough to adjudge one way or another whether he was guilty of assaulting her. However, not showing up for the trial is a clear sign that either 1) she was out just to get money or 2) the injuries possibly sustained were not worth the trouble of showing up. I'm of the opinion, without a further documented investigation of the incident, that this woman is not credible and that there should be no punishment given what we now know. If it comes out that there are multiple witnesses and that the assault was especially heinous, then I reserve the right to change my opinion. Right now, though, based on the simple fact that he was charged by a judge in a lower court and then the charges were dismissed on appeal to a jury trial, I would not suspend him.
 

Hawkfan77

Active member
Joined
Feb 27, 2011
Messages
3,280
Reaction score
0
McGruff":1uqe8vzi said:
The fact that we are three pages into this possibility, and the discussion in 80% legal minutae and technicalities and not field production tells me all I need to know.

We don't need the distraction and controversy swirling over our heads.
What else would we talk about now?

I mean the Suh thread had over 11 pages I think. This is what happens during the off season
 

ctrcat

New member
Joined
Feb 20, 2014
Messages
866
Reaction score
0
HawKnPeppa":o648tp5j said:
NorthDallas40oz":o648tp5j said:
Hawk-Lock":o648tp5j said:
http://espn.go.com/video/clip?id=11513357

Watch that link and tell me if you still want him. This guy is 100x worst than Ray Rice/Adrian Peterson/Aldon Smith/etc.
I've watched it, and yes I still want him. His "girlfriend" is a shameless and notorious groupie who made a number of baseless claims against Hardy. If Hardy had done the all the things that she alleged, and she legitimately thought that he was going to "kill (her)," she surely would have prosecuted him to the fullest extent of the law (as her attorney also alluded to in that clip). Instead, when Hardy requested a jury trial, she chose not to pursue it and gladly took a nice fat check instead....which tells you all you need to know about her credibility and motives. Hardy has already paid a huge price, both legally and in the court of public opinion, now it's time to move on and get back to football. Bringing him in on a short term (even 1-year) deal where he's motivated to rehab both his football value and public image makes a ton of sense for both sides, and if he screws up again, you just cut him.

Thank you!

Most NFL groupie hoes are just trying to get that payday. The smart organizations will do their homework and that's probably why Seattle is still interested. I get so tired of the women always being given the benefit of doubt despite the surrounding situation and their background.

Would any of the haters show remorse if they believed an accusation against them was false?

Give the man a 1-year deal laden with incentives for him to hang with the right crowds. I'm up for that.

By the way, I wanted to add one more thing-Drew Rosenhaus is his agent. Again, for the 2nd time in the thread I will say I and Panther fans love the guy, but there's a reason Kony Ealy was drafted in the 2nd last year and it's not just because Kraken has a screw lose. Beggars can't be choosers so we'll see what happens, but Drew and Greg love money, lots of it.
 

Largent80

New member
Joined
Mar 1, 2007
Messages
36,653
Reaction score
5
Location
The Tex-ASS
They are simply trying to establish a market for him.

His price tag will be way too much for the Hawks me thinks. Obviously the guy can play, and obviously Pete has a handle on how to handle players and situations.

None of us were in the room when this stuff supposedly went down, and regarding court. MANY people have gotten away with stuff in life and gotten away in the courtroom as well. OJ comes to mind.
 

titan3131

Active member
Joined
Mar 13, 2013
Messages
1,592
Reaction score
0
I have inside knowledge on how these assault on female proceedings work, as I'm an attorney in NC. In my experience, 75% of the time, the guy is guilty of slapping a woman around and is justly charged and convicted. However, in about 25% of the cases I've come across, the woman is a self-serving wench that wants to cause problems for the guy because she wants to unfairly streamline a custody situation or because she is unsatisfied with a break up or because she wants leverage to get something the guy has. In this case, I'm not familiar with the case enough to adjudge one way or another whether he was guilty of assaulting her. However, not showing up for the trial is a clear sign that either 1) she was out just to get money or 2) the injuries possibly sustained were not worth the trouble of showing up. I'm of the opinion, without a further documented investigation of the incident, that this woman is not credible and that there should be no punishment given what we now know. If it comes out that there are multiple witnesses and that the assault was especially heinous, then I reserve the right to change my opinion. Right now, though, based on the simple fact that he was charged by a judge in a lower court and then the charges were dismissed on appeal to a jury trial, I would not suspend him.


This is exactly how I feel. I appreciate your experience and insight in this matter.
I found this and this is very informative.

this is quoted from

http://blackandbluereview.com/recapping ... ppearance/


Now that I’ve had time to digest what was said in court, what was claimed afterward by Hardy’s accuser’s lawyer, and the details included in the restraining order filed against Hardy, my main emotion is sadness.

Screen Shot 2014-05-14 at 2.31.29 PM

We have no idea yet who is telling the truth. It’s a he said/she said, and it’s sad that two young lives are now in the spotlight for this.

Yes, this could ultimately affect the Panthers. It could certainly affect Hardy. But more importantly, this is a story with two sides, and it’s sad that whoever is telling the truth will be so affected by whoever is lying.

There are many details, accusations, assumptions and rumors flying around, so let’s break it all down into what we know as of Wednesday afternoon.

WHAT WE KNOW
Early Tuesday morning, after he was seen at a Charlotte nightclub, Hardy held an after party at his uptown condominium. Two of the attendees were his girlfriend, named in court as Nicole Holder, and his friend, Sammy Curtis.
At 4:18 a.m., Charlotte Mecklenburg police received a domestic violence call from Hardy’s condominium. Police responded to the call and filed an incident report. In the report, police describe minor scratches and bruises on the 24-year-old Holder. She refused treatment.
A few hours later, a warrant was filed for Hardy’s arrest. He later turned himself in on misdemeanor charges of assault on a female and communicating threats.
Mecklenburg County policy requires a 24-hour “cooling-off period” for a person arrested and accused of domestic violence. Hardy spent Tuesday night in jail.
At 9:35 Wednesday morning, he walked into a Mecklenburg County Courthouse courtroom handcuffed, wearing an orange prison jumpsuit. Hardy stood and stared straight ahead during the 10-minute hearing. His attorney, Chris Fialko, disputed claims made by Holder.
Fialko claimed Hardy asked Holder to leave his condominium, but she refused. She then attacked Hardy and Curtis and Hardy called 911. Fialko added that phone records show Holder later called Curtis more than a dozen times attempting to speak to Hardy.
District Judge Becky Thorne Tin read part of the allegations against Hardy, which included “areas of bruising and swelling” on Holder’s back. Citing “concerns” about Holder’s safety, Tin ordered Hardy to avoid contact with Holder. The judge set a total bond of $17,000.
Hardy and Holder were intoxicated during the incident. Tin ordered Hardy to attend Alcoholics Anonymous meetings three times per week.
Hardy’s agent, Drew Rosenhaus, attended the meeting with Curtis. They both left declining comment.
Holder’s lawyer, Stephen Goodwin, talked to media for about 15 minutes outside the courthouse.
Goodwin said Holder went to the emergency room Tuesday with bruises and an injury to her elbow. He said she is currently in a sling. Goodwin said Holder injured her elbow when Hardy threw her into a tiled bathtub.
When asked why Hardy, and not Holder, called 911, Goodwin answered, “she couldn’t because she was being held down.” Goodwin added Curtis held Holder down while Hardy called 911.
Holder was at the courthouse, but not in the courtroom for the hearing. The restraining order request was filled out during Hardy’s hearing and filed at 9:41.
In the restraining order, Holder checked an option indicating “I believe there is danger of serious and immediate injury.” She also checked boxes accusing Hardy of having firearms and making threats with those firearms.
Holder claimed Hardy “has approximately 25-30 firearms. Ak-47’s, automatic weapons, shotguns, rifles and pistols.”
Holder repeated Goodwin’s accusation that Hardy threw her into a bathtub: “(He) pulled me from the tub by my hair, screaming at me that he was going to kill me, break my arms and other threats that I completely believe. He drug me across the bathroom and out into the bedroom. Hardy choked me with both hands around my throat while I was lying on the floor. Hardy picked me up over his head and threw me onto a couch covered in assault rifles and/or shotguns. I landed on those weapons. Hardy bragged that all of those assault rifles were loaded. Landing on those weapons bruised my neck and back.”
Holder repeated Goodwin’s accusation that Curtis held her down: “I wasn’t nearly strong enough to escape. I begged them to let me go and I wouldn’t tell anyone what he did. They took me out into the hall, pushed me down and went back inside his apartment. I crawled to the elevator and ran into CMPD.”
After filing the restraining order, Holder stood in the courthouse hallway with her sister.
Hardy was later released from jail. Wearing a black tank top and black workout pants, he left without comment.
Hardy’s next court date is scheduled for June 27. Before that date, the Panthers have three weeks of OTAs and a minicamp. The team is continuing its investigation.
 

twisted_steel2

Active member
Joined
Mar 4, 2007
Messages
6,848
Reaction score
1
Location
Tennessee
Interesting. So Hardy called 911, then after the event she tried to contact him more than a dozen times. Then she's a no show to court? Hhhhmmmm :|
 

titan3131

Active member
Joined
Mar 13, 2013
Messages
1,592
Reaction score
0
Im just very disappointed how the radio media and espn spun this. They leave it incredibly biased. Specifically brock and salk didnt put any conversation into the possibility that he didnt do it.

My education was based on teaching us to think for ourselves and make the best decision from there.

If you just believe the spoonfed info from the media your entire life I pray for you.
 

Latest posts

Top