Ray Rice Video Released

[cartman]

Do they realize he is no relation to Jerry Rice?

[cartman]

Commissioner Goodell, why weren't you able to watch the tape?

[BillJasper]

Originally Posted by cartman

Commissioner Goodell, why weren't you able to watch the tape?

Carrie Fisher was so hot back then. Too bad I hadn't hit puberty yet!

[mckerney]

Something, something, "Ignorance is no excuse," and, "If he didn't know what was going on, he should have."

[path12]

Originally Posted by Honolulu_Blue

I don't have issues with him either really. I don't think he will get fired, but someone will. There has to be a fall guy (or women) for this.

Besides Janay?

Still don't buy for a minute that the NFL didn't see the tape. It's always the cover-up that gets 'em.

[BillJasper]

According to security people from the hotel, it was Rice that spit on Palmer. Not the other way around.

[larrymcg421]

Originally Posted by molson

But why, NFL? Why is Ray Rice playing so damn important?

This is what I asked earlier. He is not a face of the league that they need. Even ignoring the moral implications, their actions make no sense at all.

[path12]

Sure is looking all of a sudden like folks are scrambling to distance themselves from Roger.

I did not think his job would be in jeopardy over this but am starting to wonder.

[thesloppy]

SOURCE SAYS RICE VIDEO SENT TO NFL

[thesloppy]

Originally Posted by thesloppy

SOURCE SAYS RICE VIDEO SENT TO NFL

oops, of course this was already posted long ago...

[dzilla77]

I am late to this thread, but my only thought is this:
If the NFL (and Ravens) got the police report (I am pretty sure they did) and it stated that Rice punched his fiance (I am pretty sure it did), why did they need to wait for a video to come out showing the incident before taking the appropriate response of indefinitely suspending him (and cutting him)?

Goodell should lose his job regardless of whether or not the NFL saw the video before this week, because its clear that the only reason they took the actions they did this week is to protect the image of the NFL, not because they actually believe the actions of Ray Rice warrant the punishment.

[Buccaneer]

Originally Posted by BillJasper

Part of me wonders if there isn't a wink-wink deal between the Players Association and the League on the issue of domestic violence?

Probably the exact same deal with HGH as well.

[Buccaneer]

Originally Posted by Honolulu_Blue

I don't have issues with him either really. I don't think he will get fired, but someone will. There has to be a fall guy (or women) for this.

I rather like Goddell because he came in taking harder stances and punishments, which Tag never did much. That's why I was surprised that he only slapped Rice's wrist.

[Matthean]

Originally Posted by Buccaneer

Probably the exact same deal with HGH as well.

Likely the "You can do it, just don't be stupid about it" deal.

[BillJasper]

Originally Posted by Buccaneer

I rather like Goddell because he came in taking harder stances and punishments, which Tag never did much. That's why I was surprised that he only slapped Rice's wrist.

Except for domestic violence. I was watching ESPN earlier and they said there had been 56 incidents of domestic violence since Goodell took over and every one ended with a slap on the wrist at most.

[Mota]

First of all, I agree with the punishment. It was horrible, and he deserves to be punished. No man should hit a woman. The way he treated her limp body after she was unconscious was disgusting. I think it was worse than the actual strike.

Now we did see on the video that she punched him at least two times before he punched her. Let's say she knocked him out cold with one of those punches. Would she be banned from her career and reviled around the world, or would people make fun of him and use the video as a "blooper reel" of some sorts?

[BishopMVP]

So you have a "law enforcement source" who was unauthorized to release the video sending it unsolicited to the NFL... Not only should the Roger Goodell not have watched the video, the person that sent it should be fired, whether the Rice case was active at the time or not.

[Blackadar]

Originally Posted by BishopMVP

So you have a "law enforcement source" who was unauthorized to release the video sending it unsolicited to the NFL... Not only should the Roger Goodell not have watched the video, the person that sent it should be fired, whether the Rice case was active at the time or not.

Do tell why Goodell should have NOT watched the video which is seemingly the singular piece of evidence given the NFL's drastic change in Rice's punishment.

[TroyF]

Originally Posted by Blackadar

Do tell why Goodell should have NOT watched the video which is seemingly the singular piece of evidence given the NFL's drastic change in Rice's punishment.

Seriously? If the NFL knew the tape was released by someone who was not allowed to release it, there is no way in hell they should have watched it. You don't get to break law so you can get the truth.

Before you go crazy on me, understand, I think Goodall should lose his job. I think the owner of the Ravens deserves a massive fine and that anyone and I mean anyone who was involved in this fiasco should lose their jobs.

I felt that way BEFORE this video came out by the way. 2 games was disgusting from the start.

What really is starting to get to me now is everyone focusing on Goodall and the NFL. Look, the police thought so much of the video they gave Ray Rice a deal where this won't even go on his record if he goes through the court ordered counseling sessions. These people saw the damned video and there is no debate about it.

Fire Goodall, boycott the NFl, scrap the entire NFL and cease to allow football to exist as a sport. . . you are still going to have the prosecutors and the judge giving mild slaps on the wrist.

[DaddyTorgo]

Yeah, but did the cops/prosecutor let him off easy because of who he was?

Either they did and they should be fired, or they didn't and they should be fired for not taking their jobs seriously.

[henry296]

Add legislators who write the laws that allow these sentences. There was an article today with quotes from prospector who said is was normal based on the existing laws and if he went to trial the worst punishment would be probation.

[DaddyTorgo]

Originally Posted by henry296

Add legislators who write the laws that allow these sentences. There was an article today with quotes from prospector who said is was normal based on the existing laws and if he went to trial the worst punishment would be probation.

Yep!

[TroyF]

Originally Posted by henry296

Add legislators who write the laws that allow these sentences. There was an article today with quotes from prospector who said is was normal based on the existing laws and if he went to trial the worst punishment would be probation.

Exactly. This SHOULD be a chance for the groups against domestic violence to start screaming for the laws to change and for prosecutors and judges who sentence like this to be thrown out on their asses.

Instead, everyone is focused on Goodall and everyone seems to be focused on "did he see the tape or not?"

WHO GIVES A CRAP? He should lose his job because he gave Rice two games for something that clearly deserved more. Focus on the laws and the prosecutors. Those are the changes that will help EVERYONE long term. Or we could just focus on getting Goodall out so the NFL can hire another good old boy to be their figurehead and the .000000001 percent of the population who beats their wives AND plays in the NFL will think twice about hitting a women.

What this thing has taught me is that if I want to throw a full throttle, violent punch at a date in Atlantic City, I won't even have to worry about it being on my record, much less actual jail time. Goodall is reeling and the NFL is reeling. Feel free to throw more jabs at them people. . . just save the haymaker for those who deserve it just a touch more.

Just my opinion, I could be wrong. . .

[BishopMVP]

Originally Posted by Blackadar

Do tell why Goodell should have NOT watched the video which is seemingly the singular piece of evidence given the NFL's drastic change in Rice's punishment.

Because it could compromise an active case in the criminal justice system? Now, it doesn't matter in this case because domestic abuse is a slap on the wrist in the court system (again, why is the media outrage focused on the NFL here? For the same reason it keeps showing the video - because the letters NFL get ratings, but I digress.) But imagine if someone in Fall River District Court decides to leak all the Aaron Hernandez home surveillance video to the NFL. Admittedly I'm not an expert in the judicial system (feel free to chime in here Molson!), but I'd guess that not only does that give good grounds for an appeal, it might even be enough to get the evidence thrown out of the initial trial and be the difference between a conviction and a Not Guilty verdict.

I could just imagine the headlines - NFL Star Ray Rice gets off with probation after punching his wife - and here's the video his lawyer got thrown out because the NFL improperly obtained it! (TMZ does really long headlines, right?)

[miami_fan]

Originally Posted by TroyF

Seriously? If the NFL knew the tape was released by someone who was not allowed to release it, there is no way in hell they should have watched it. You don't get to break law so you can get the truth.

Before you go crazy on me, understand, I think Goodall should lose his job. I think the owner of the Ravens deserves a massive fine and that anyone and I mean anyone who was involved in this fiasco should lose their jobs.

I felt that way BEFORE this video came out by the way. 2 games was disgusting from the start.

What really is starting to get to me now is everyone focusing on Goodall and the NFL. Look, the police thought so much of the video they gave Ray Rice a deal where this won't even go on his record if he goes through the court ordered counseling sessions. These people saw the damned video and there is no debate about it.

Fire Goodall, boycott the NFl, scrap the entire NFL and cease to allow football to exist as a sport. . . you are still going to have the prosecutors and the judge giving mild slaps on the wrist.

Wait, now sports leagues should not review information from sources not authorized to release it? When that information reflects badly on the league? This sort of thing has been happening for years. Why would the NFL decide this is the case to stop reviewing unauthorized evidence?

I, for one, am not focusing any less on the law enforcement. If you want to fire them, that works for me as well. We can do both. There have been posts about how insignificant domestic violence is taken not just by law enforcement but the general public. Seeing how this is a thread primarily about this case and the NFL, I think it is very fair to have the full focus on the NFL's handling of it, especially since Goodell has taken such a hard line on so many other issues.

[Desnudo]

I feel like the NFL Is writing a case study in how not to manage a crisis. Incredulality.

NFL Announces "Independent Investigation" Into Ray Rice Handling

[DaddyTorgo]

Originally Posted by Desnudo

I feel like the NFL Is writing a case study in how not to manage a crisis. Incredulality.

NFL Announces "Independent Investigation" Into Ray Rice Handling

LOL yeah.

"Independent" my ass.

[Desnudo]

Also when is someone going to sack up and start naming names, unnamed law enforcement official handled video to unnamed secretary to unarmed commissioner. Unbelievable the cowardice.

[bhlloy]

I really would have more sympathy for Goodell if it wasn't for the bountygate scandal, where basically there was very little evidence and players testifying that there was no bounty system and he still suspended Payton for a year. What goes around comes around - if you want to be judge, jury and executioner, don't complain and say "I'm just a commissioner" when something like this happens

[Blackadar]

Originally Posted by DaddyTorgo

LOL yeah.

"Independent" my ass.

When it's Mara and Rooney heading the investigation, you can be assured that it will be conducted with integrity. The NFL has no owners more respected than the Mara and Rooney families and Robert Kraft (NE Pats). That these are the guys doing it says quite a bit.

[mrtourette]

Originally Posted by Desnudo

Also when is someone going to sack up and start naming names, unnamed law enforcement official handled video to unnamed secretary to unarmed commissioner. Unbelievable the cowardice.

I dunno, seems pretty brave to go in unarmed.

[mrtourette]

Originally Posted by Blackadar

When it's Mara and Rooney heading the investigation, you can be assured that it will be conducted with integrity. The NFL has no owners more respected than the Mara and Rooney families and Robert Kraft (NE Pats). That these are the guys doing it says quite a bit.

Why is it NFL owners carrying out the investigation? There's still a conflict of interest.

[Blackadar]

Originally Posted by mrtourette

Why is it NFL owners carrying out the investigation? There's still a conflict of interest.

Because the NFL, as a private entity, isn't going to let someone just snoop around their organization in some "fact finding" mission. They're letting the former FBI director head the investigation, so it's not just a self-serving exercise.

That Art Rooney is involved isn't necessarily a good thing for Goodell. They're not exactly happy with him for numerous reasons. The Steeler players were the only group to vote against the latest collective bargaining agreement and the owners know why. Remember the whole "Tomlin on the field" incident last year and how everyone thought the Steelers would lose a draft choice? They didn't, in part because the Rooney family publicly said they would appeal (and it's a bigger deal when it's a team/owner appealing than a player) if they did get penalized, which was a shot across the bow of the USS Goodell. The organization has privately said they felt their players were unfairly targeted for fines for hits. In short, Goodell isn't exactly beloved in Pittsburgh. I'm not saying they're looking to boot him, but they're not close to him like they were with Tagliabue and Rozelle.

In short, the lead is independent and the guy appointed has the backing and reports to two of the most respected owners in pro sports, one of which is not a fan of the current commish. I'm not sure what else you could expect.

[panerd]

Originally Posted by mrtourette

Why is it NFL owners carrying out the investigation? There's still a conflict of interest.

He's a Steeler fan so his guy will definitely be unbiased.

[DaddyTorgo]

Originally Posted by Blackadar

When it's Mara and Rooney heading the investigation, you can be assured that it will be conducted with integrity. The NFL has no owners more respected than the Mara and Rooney families and Robert Kraft (NE Pats). That these are the guys doing it says quite a bit.

It's not an independent investigation when it's overseen by the owners though. They have a financial stake in the league's continued success. Heck - I like Kraft, but I wouldn't want him overseeing it either. Those guys would absolutely do whatever to ensure that nothing damages the league/their handpicked commish.

[cuervo72]

Originally Posted by TroyF

Exactly. This SHOULD be a chance for the groups against domestic violence to start screaming for the laws to change and for prosecutors and judges who sentence like this to be thrown out on their asses.

Pretty sure they've been screaming for a while, but few have cared to pay attention.

[Dutch]

I admit I'm a little confused on the whole, "I don't want to press charges against my spouse/s.o." and the law says, "Cool"...even when there is evidence a crime was committed.

[Logan]

What is the best way the league should handle these "pending" cases? I know the Niners are coming under fire a bit for the McDonald case (the Hardy one carrying a guilty verdict but subject to appeal seems like an entirely different story). I was thinking maybe once charges are filed, half of every game check of that player gets held in escrow, with the other half being money they can live off of, for up to 12 weeks (totaling 6 game checks, or the current punishment for a first offense) or until a verdict is reached, whichever comes first. If they are convicted or take a deal, the money is forfeited and they get suspended actual games; if they're found not guilty, the money is returned.

I would also incorporate this into a larger system where teams lose draft picks of varying degrees for any players who committed violent crimes while on their roster (including if a player is cut immediately). The teams should be accountable as well if they're employing violent criminals.

[Desnudo]

Originally Posted by DaddyTorgo

It's not an independent investigation when it's overseen by the owners though. They have a financial stake in the league's continued success. Heck - I like Kraft, but I wouldn't want him overseeing it either. Those guys would absolutely do whatever to ensure that nothing damages the league/their handpicked commish.

If they'd just said investigation...

[mrtourette]

Originally Posted by Blackadar

Because the NFL, as a private entity, isn't going to let someone just snoop around their organization in some "fact finding" mission. They're letting the former FBI director head the investigation, so it's not just a self-serving exercise.

That Art Rooney is involved isn't necessarily a good thing for Goodell. They're not exactly happy with him for numerous reasons. The Steeler players were the only group to vote against the latest collective bargaining agreement and the owners know why. Remember the whole "Tomlin on the field" incident last year and how everyone thought the Steelers would lose a draft choice? They didn't, in part because the Rooney family publicly said they would appeal (and it's a bigger deal when it's a team/owner appealing than a player) if they did get penalized, which was a shot across the bow of the USS Goodell. The organization has privately said they felt their players were unfairly targeted for fines for hits. In short, Goodell isn't exactly beloved in Pittsburgh. I'm not saying they're looking to boot him, but they're not close to him like they were with Tagliabue and Rozelle.

In short, the lead is independent and the guy appointed has the backing and reports to two of the most respected owners in pro sports, one of which is not a fan of the current commish. I'm not sure what else you could expect.

An independent enquiry/investigation. If it isn't going to be independent, and you're right that it's unrealistic to expect it to be, the don't call it independent.

[mrtourette]

Originally Posted by Logan

What is the best way the league should handle these "pending" cases? I know the Niners are coming under fire a bit for the McDonald case (the Hardy one carrying a guilty verdict but subject to appeal seems like an entirely different story). I was thinking maybe once charges are filed, half of every game check of that player gets held in escrow, with the other half being money they can live off of, for up to 12 weeks (totaling 6 game checks, or the current punishment for a first offense) or until a verdict is reached, whichever comes first. If they are convicted or take a deal, the money is forfeited and they get suspended actual games; if they're found not guilty, the money is returned.

I would also incorporate this into a larger system where teams lose draft picks of varying degrees for any players who committed violent crimes while on their roster (including if a player is cut immediately). The teams should be accountable as well if they're employing violent criminals.

Yeah it certainly is a tough one. You can't just go around suspending every player accused of a crime, but if you wait for that player of to be charged by the authorities or to be found accountable by an internal investigation then potentially you're letting them continue playing throughout a public trial just because the beaucratic cogs don't turn fast enough.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by DaddyTorgo

It's not an independent investigation when it's overseen by the owners though.

But by that same logic, is there really any such thing as an "independent investigation"?

Had a discussion prompted by a totally unrelated subject earlier this week, about how notions such as "neutrality" or "unbiased" are really near impossibilities. An arbitrator or mediator (the point of that discussion) come to the table with the biases of their life experiences, similar to an independent investigator. They too are being paid by someone, effectively creating someone/some entity they are beholden to in some respect.

Typically, if someone has the requisite skill making them proficient in a subject, they can't be truly impartial, neutral or independent. They are tainted, to some degree, by everything they've learned previously.

The best that can be hoped for is "as close to impartial" as can be achieved. You're welcome to question whether Mueller satisfies that description adequately but let's not forget that the same doubts could be applied to an investigator chosen by NOW or by DOJ or by a jury of twelve randomly selected people off the street.

[DaddyTorgo]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

But by that same logic, is there really any such thing as an "independent investigation"?

Had a discussion prompted by a totally unrelated subject earlier this week, about how notions such as "neutrality" or "unbiased" are really near impossibilities. An arbitrator or mediator (the point of that discussion) come to the table with the biases of their life experiences, similar to an independent investigator. They too are being paid by someone, effectively creating someone/some entity they are beholden to in some respect.

Typically, if someone has the requisite skill making them proficient in a subject, they can't be truly impartial, neutral or independent. They are tainted, to some degree, by everything they've learned previously.

The best that can be hoped for is "as close to impartial" as can be achieved. You're welcome to question whether Mueller satisfies that description adequately but let's not forget that the same doubts could be applied to an investigator chosen by NOW or by DOJ or by a jury of twelve randomly selected people off the street.

It's not Mueller I take issue with, it's the "oversight" by two of the "good ole boys" network.

[Logan]

There are also a lot of connections between Mueller's firm and the NFL, in terms of already working with NFL teams, former partners being employed by teams and the league, etc. That doesn't mean they can't conduct an investigation - after all, you'll probably find connections with any large firm - but those are typically disclosed prior to the investigation being launched. And maybe they are and we just don't see it in the media.

[Logan]

Originally Posted by DaddyTorgo

It's not Mueller I take issue with, it's the "oversight" by two of the "good ole boys" network.

Especially when Mara has already said he doesn't think Goodell's job should be in jeopardy.

[Desnudo]

Originally Posted by Logan

Especially when Mara has already said he doesn't think Goodell's job should be in jeopardy.

I'm sure the "independent" consultant won't consider that opinion as a guiding factor.

[molson]

I can understand why the NFL would want to hire someone to let them know how and what they fucked up here from a PR standpoint. But I don't quite get why it's otherwise necessary, or why we all should have some stake and demand a more "neutral" investigation. What is this all about? That the NFL didn't suspend Ray Rice for enough games at first? That's the big harm? I hope this all doesn't distract from the real villain here, Ray Rice. I'm just hoping he doesn't make his triumphant return to the NFL next year, doing heartfelt interviews about second chances.

People say the video shouldn't have made a difference, but the public outcry wasn't the same until that video came out, and we all had the information about what Rice did. Rice got standing ovations in Baltimore, was drafted in fantasy leagues, was going to play this year. Sure, most people thought the suspension was light, but there wasn't this level of anger. If he were suspended 8 games, I think that would have been viewed as a strong response. If it were a year, there would be vocal opinion that the NFL over-reacted, and the usual player complaints about Goodell ("how can they suspend somebody for a year when the court is dismissing the charges!!!") The video changed things for the public, just like it changed things for the NFL. (and the fact that it changed things for the public is WHY it changed things for the NFL) A lot of these incidents involving NFL players are going to earn a much more emotional reaction from the public if we had video of them doing it.

It looks like somebody in the NFL saw the video, that doesn't mean they all did. But even if they did, I'm not sure what difference that should make (except the lying about it now part). Like everybody says, it didn't provide any new information. They just utterly botched the suspension length and the public reaction. If they made it 8, they would have been fine. I'm just glad that one way or another, Rice is out of the league for the moment.

[Logan]

I think this investigation is much more about the video that was allegedly received, who got it, where it went, who knew about it, etc. All the things that the NFL has denied having/knowing about, so the investigation is to "clear" them if you will.

[miami_fan]

Originally Posted by Logan

What is the best way the league should handle these "pending" cases? I know the Niners are coming under fire a bit for the McDonald case (the Hardy one carrying a guilty verdict but subject to appeal seems like an entirely different story). I was thinking maybe once charges are filed, half of every game check of that player gets held in escrow, with the other half being money they can live off of, for up to 12 weeks (totaling 6 game checks, or the current punishment for a first offense) or until a verdict is reached, whichever comes first. If they are convicted or take a deal, the money is forfeited and they get suspended actual games; if they're found not guilty, the money is returned.

I would also incorporate this into a larger system where teams lose draft picks of varying degrees for any players who committed violent crimes while on their roster (including if a player is cut immediately). The teams should be accountable as well if they're employing violent criminals.

I thought this provision was already in the personal conduct policy?

[Thomkal]

The NBA's Paul George not helping the situation:

Paul George Tweeted Some Controversial Comments On Ray Rice Case