Ray Rice Video Released

[larrymcg421]

Originally Posted by DaddyTorgo

She shouldn't have gone through with it and married the guy after what he did. I obviously don't condone her getting beat up, but it was her continued poor decisions in the aftermath of that that yoked her to him voluntarily (and she could always get a divorce).

I understand the psychology behind it, but it's hard to feel a ton of sympathy for someone who goes back to an abuser and even deepens the relationship. Particularly someone in the public eye who has the opportunity to take a meaningful stand.

Um, what? This post is as ignorant and offensive as the "I don't feel sorry for dead drug users" posts. You said you understood the psychology behind it, but then contradicted it with everything else you said in the post. You're one of the last people I'd expect to post this kind of drivel.

[molson]

The emotional control in an abusive relationship can be so much powerful than the fear of losing money or whatever. It's really kind of horrifying when you see it up close, the rationalizations that this abuse creates. I used to meet with domestic violence victims all the time - the county I worked in tried to make it one-stop-shop kind of thing, the victims could receive information and access to available government services, and at the same time, the prosecutor could inform them of their rights as a crime victim, and to ascertain whether this person was going to actually testify for the state in any trial. Usually, they didn't want to. More often than not, they wanted the charges dropped. That stops a lot of coward prosecutors, for sure. It's not so much the fear of losing, it's just that domestic violence prosecutions without a cooperating witness usually means a trial, and trial means lots of work, and prosecutors aren't paid by the hour. Especially when you're facing a Ray Rice legal team that would no doubt file dozens of pre-trial motions. The true believer prosecutor though would prosecute these cases without a cooperating witness (when there was strong evidence, like this case), and often refuse to offer a plea bargain at all.

[PilotMan]

The thing I want to know is how complicit was the NFL in compelling Janay to accept her role in the incident in order to minimize the overall impact? I mean, the Ravens twitter account basically said "hey she said she did some stuff too."

We have a situation here where she probably felt compelled to go along with Rice in order to minimize the damage to him and to the team. How much pressure did she get put under in order to do that? That's not been discussed at all.

It's totally unacceptable that it took this long for her to get some backup here. As for why would she marry him? Ping Hope Solo. Maybe she can help out here. We all knew what happened in the elevator. The end result should have been all the proof that was necessary. To go back now and say that NOW it's a big deal is dumb. It's giving the NFL the opportunity to go back on their admitted mistake and have some reason for it to try and save face.

Fuck them, they had the chance in the beginning and still get no credit from me. This is just an opportunity of convenience.

[DaddyTorgo]

Originally Posted by larrymcg421

Um, what? This post is as ignorant and offensive as the "I don't feel sorry for dead drug users" posts. You said you understood the psychology behind it, but then contradicted it with everything else you said in the post. You're one of the last people I'd expect to post this kind of drivel.

No - I mean I understand it (as much as someone who is a guy and has never been in an abusive relationship can I guess). It's just frustrating when confronted by the reality of it, so I guess my post was more of a venting of the frustration.

[SackAttack]

Originally Posted by cartman

Because they aren't the Federal Government.

Which is why I explicitly used the word 'negotiated,' because I recognize that the Constitutional prohibition against double jeopardy doesn't necessarily apply here; even so, I would expect a player's union to try to protect its players against such.

Originally Posted by DaddyTorgo

Apparently they didn't?

Or there's some "new evidence that changes the severity of the crime" clause or something probably.

But again, everything I've read suggests that Rice told the NFL exactly what he did and didn't - begging your pardon - pull any punches in doing so. If that is true, the video isn't "new evidence" so much as "oh shit embarrassing revelation" that prevents the NFL from sweeping the whole thing under the rug. If he relayed events exactly as they went down, and got suspended for two games, there is nothing in that video that changes the severity of the infraction except for ACTUALLY SEEING HIM HIT HER.

Don't get me wrong. I have no issue with Rice serving an indefinite suspension and I think that should have been the penalty to begin with. But the way the NFL is going about this screams 'double jeopardy' to me and is bullshit. The NFLPA should be protesting or taking this to court not in order to defend an abuser, but to avoid establishing a precedent for future cases of a player getting suspended twice for the same infraction (especially since Goodell is judge, jury, executioner, and appeals panel all in one).

[Lathum]

Originally Posted by chinaski

Who in their right mind sees a woman get knocked out and then says "well damn, this is really going to make it hard on NFL players in the future because now more women will be all crying assault to make some cash"? That did not happen here, so why even bring that up? Its not part of any rational conversation. Its not boring to all agree this is a horrible act, it makes me hopeful for society. Until someone starts talking about Duke lacrosse.

I didn't really read his comment in that context but I think it does belong as part of the conversation about how this effects omens actions in these situations moving forward.

I didn't read his comment as a reaction to the video, more as a reaction to the conversation we were all having.

[ISiddiqui]

Double jeopardy? Did the NFL suspend him more?

[DaddyTorgo]

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

Double jeopardy? Did the NFL suspend him more?

Yes - indefinitely.

[ISiddiqui]

Originally Posted by DaddyTorgo

Yes - indefinitely.

LOL. Sorry, that's just so blatantly cynical by the NFL (no team is going to sign him) its funny.

[DaddyTorgo]

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

LOL. Sorry, that's just so blatantly cynical by the NFL (no team is going to sign him) its funny.

Oh I agree.

[larrymcg421]

[DaddyTorgo]

I don't know what I find most disgusting about that video - the jokes the two guys made or the giggling of the woman sitting between them.

Fucking FOX.

[TroyF]

Everyone keeps stating Rice did not pull any punches and told the Ravens and the league exactly what he did. Despite the reporters statements, I have a tough time believing them. The press conference was nothing but Ray and Janae both taking blame. We could all see a scenario where she goes off the rails clawing, slapping, kicking and he throws a shot to get her off, right? No, I am not saying that would be ok. I am only saying that is where she would acknowledge wrong doing and paint a scenario where they could say Ray waa wrong, nut there is another side.


The video shows there isn't another side. A left hook to the head. My guess is the nfl mor the Ravens had any idea of the real story.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by Lathum

I didn't read his comment as a reaction to the video, more as a reaction to the conversation we were all having.

I would have figured that should have been obvious but apparently it wasn't.

I appreciate you phrasing it succinctly on my behalf.

[path12]

Originally Posted by TroyF

My guess is the nfl mor the Ravens had any idea of the real story.

EDIT: Redacted because I sound like a jerk here because frankly I'm mad at myself for buying the NFL line when this all first went down.

[nol]

Originally Posted by TroyF

Everyone keeps stating Rice did not pull any punches and told the Ravens and the league exactly what he did. Despite the reporters statements, I have a tough time believing them. The press conference was nothing but Ray and Janae both taking blame. We could all see a scenario where she goes off the rails clawing, slapping, kicking and he throws a shot to get her off, right? No, I am not saying that would be ok. I am only saying that is where she would acknowledge wrong doing and paint a scenario where they could say Ray waa wrong, nut there is another side.


The video shows there isn't another side. A left hook to the head. My guess is the nfl mor the Ravens had any idea of the real story.

No, people were aware from the beginning that there was additional footage from inside the elevator.

There is one other thing I did not write or refer to, and that is the other videotape the NFL and some Ravens officials have seen, from the security camera inside the elevator at the time of the physical altercation between Rice and his fiancée. I have heard reports of what is on the video, but because I could not confirm them and because of the sensitivity of the case, I never speculated on the video in my writing, because I don’t think it is fair in an incendiary case like this one to use something I cannot confirm with more than one person. I cannot say any more, because I did not see the tape. I saw only the damning tape of Rice pulling his unconscious fiancée out of the elevator.

This is Peter King back in July, essentially saying "the first video looks really bad, but sources (edit: actually one source) from the NFL/Ravens told me there's something in the second video that makes a two-game suspension a sufficiently strict punishment, and I'll just take their word for it."

[TCY Junkie]

How is this news, he admitted to knocking her out long time ago?

[digamma]

We saw the TMZ video of what happened outside—when he was dragging her out unconscious—but inside, I'm told from those who have seen the video, it wasn't pretty. In fact, she attacks him—we don't know the reason why—and he strikes her, strikes her hard. And her head—according to the sources I've spoken to—struck the rail inside the elevator and she was unconscious.

That is from Chris Mortenson on the Mike & Mike Show on July 23. Aside from the "she attacks him" it is a pretty spot on description of the video.

[Toddzilla]

His story was that he was viciously attacked and he was defending himself. And even after seeing the video we all saw today that totally contradicts that ridiculous assertion, the NFL went light on him and the Ravens supported him, even going so far as to blame his fiancee/wife for the matter.

[molson]

And part of the ambiguity of the whole thing was that BOTH Rice and his fiance were arrested (and the fiance was actually charged, briefly, with misdemeanor assault). So it could be spun as a mutual combat thing.

[Desnudo]

Originally Posted by DaddyTorgo

I don't know what I find most disgusting about that video - the jokes the two guys made or the giggling of the woman sitting between them.

Fucking FOX.

If his wife looked like the woman in the middle they'd be screaming for his head.

[mrtourette]

Originally Posted by TCY Junkie

How is this news, he admitted to knocking her out long time ago?

Because it shows that he lied about the circumstances that lead to him knocking her out, and those circumstances were what kept his punishment at the laughably low level that it was.

[CraigSca]

From what I remember, I thought the story line was that he hit her, but that the impact against the rail (or wall) was the part that knocked her out. The line of thinking therefore, was that his hitting her wasn't that hard, maybe she was off balance, hit her head and was knocked out. Not sure why that should really matter, but seeing the video showed that wasn't true at all. Absolutely vicious and horrific. The guy should be in jail.

Question - was there video of Mike Vick's dogfighting?

[nol]

Originally Posted by mrtourette

Because it shows that he lied about the circumstances that lead to him knocking her out, and those circumstances were what kept his punishment at the laughably low level that it was.

Yes, Ray Rice almost singlehandedly pulled a fast one on all of America. The NFL and the Ravens were in no way complicit in attempting to smear a domestic assault victim. Also, the casino with the elevator security footage and several reporters have all independently come up with the same lie about how the NFL had seen the video before deciding that a two-game suspension was appropriate.

A tough day for the NFL with all these people trying to attack its brand, but now they've dealt with the bad egg and everyone can get back to what matters: Monday Night doubleheader!!

[EagleFan]

Originally Posted by larrymcg421

Does it matter whether the NFL saw the video or not? Here are the scenarios I see:

1) They saw the video and made an absurd judgement based on it.
2) They didn't see the video because they couldn't find it.
3) They didn't see the video because they didn't look for it.

I'm not sure #2 or #3 are any better than #1, especially since I'm hearing that Rice told them everything that was in the video.

4. The asked for the video and the police wouldn't release it. The police were 100% correct to not release this to the employer.

Originally Posted by larrymcg421

Which is why you don't interview a domestic abuse victim when her abuser is present.

For a criminal investigation yes. This was not a criminal investigation, the NFL is not the law, it's the employer.

Originally Posted by TCY Junkie

How is this news, he admitted to knocking her out long time ago?

Sounds like he admitted exactly what happened. Kind of shows that there was a "plea bargain" made at that time with the NFL for full disclosure. It is kind of disingenuous how the NFL backpedaled on this now that the video is out as nothing changed from what they were told/agreed to. It's a marketing hit now as they failed to understand that videos always get leaked eventually.

Originally Posted by mrtourette

Because it shows that he lied about the circumstances that lead to him knocking her out, and those circumstances were what kept his punishment at the laughably low level that it was.

No, it shows that he told them exactly what happened based on everything that I have read.

[TroyF]

Originally Posted by nol

Yes, Ray Rice almost singlehandedly pulled a fast one on all of America. The NFL and the Ravens were in no way complicit in attempting to smear a domestic assault victim. Also, the casino with the elevator security footage and several reporters have all independently come up with the same lie about how the NFL had seen the video before deciding that a two-game suspension was appropriate.

A tough day for the NFL with all these people trying to attack its brand, but now they've dealt with the bad egg and everyone can get back to what matters: Monday Night doubleheader!!

1) Smear a domestic abuse victim - Well, she did a good job of that herself. By all accounts she begged the NFL to not suspend him and told anyone and everyone that she was a part of the problem. HER FATHER WAS AT THE PRESS CONFERENCE AND SUPPORTED RAY RICE. Think about that for a second before we just make this an NFL issue.

2) NFL seen video - As I said above in the thread. anyone who saw that video (not heard second hand accounts, saw the damned thing), and didn't do anything should lose their job. This includes the Ravens leadership, the NFL leadership, the prosecutor who made the decision to plea bargain the case and anyone else involved in any way.

3) I think, long term, this will end up as a good thing for ALL professional sports. We will never take this lightly again. It should have turned with the Chiefs player last year and didn't. It should have always been more than 2 games with Rice. Nobody can go back and change the past, but I think the brutality of this and seeing it will help long term.

4) The NFL is a business and a big one at that. Of course, it's going to try to turn the attention to games quickly. With that said, I think even the six game/lifetime ban thing will be tweaked a little bit. The NFL acted very poorly in this (and had already admitted that long before today) The Ravens organization has been widely bashed for years for how they sort of "overlook" anything so long as they win games. It's long overdue they get the bashing they deserve for those decisions.

[DaddyTorgo]

Originally Posted by Desnudo

If his wife looked like the woman in the middle they'd be screaming for his head.

Of course. I 100% believe that.

[DaddyTorgo]

Someone said they wanted to see what Olberman would have to say?

[cartman]

He can't play in Canada either.

Mark Cohon issues a statement regarding Ray Rice | CFL.ca | Official Site of the Canadian Football League

[ColtCrazy]

I would love to say Ray Rice is banished from the league. Not because of the NFL indefinite suspension, but because of the media nightmare a team would have to endure if they signed him. But this is the league that have Leonard Little a second chance after manslaughter on a DUI. They gave Michael Vick a second chance. Jamal Lewis? Dante Stallworth? This isn't exactly a league that has a consistent track record on discipline.
As much as I hate Bill Simmons, I see his point in a column he wrote before the season started. The NFL is so big and so popular that many have a tendency to look the other way just so we can see football.

[TroyF]

Originally Posted by DaddyTorgo

Someone said they wanted to see what Olberman would have to say?

God help me, I agreed with about 70% of that. The only things I disagreed with:

1) The NFL isn't irrelevant because Ray Rice and Goodall are idiots. Sorry, but it isn't the case. I'd say this if I wasn't a fan.

2) Goodall could not legally interview her by herself. He is an employer. He's not the police, the FBI, or the CIA. You can't hammer someone for doing something they could not legally do. (not that this has stopped this guy previously)

3) Sorry Kieth, but nobody is boycotting games. They don't do it when their college teams have horrific scandals and cover ups, they don't do it with players that kill, they don't do it with DUI's, there hasn't been mass boycotting over concussions. I agree it is a huge issue, but that's a pipe dream and he knows it. (were he on Sports Center now, would he refuse to talk about a Raven game? Of course not)

Other than that, there is a lot right with what he said. I said the same thing about the mass firings. They need to occur and occur quickly.

[DaddyTorgo]

I disagree with you on interviewing her separately. I mean...he couldn't enforce that legally, but he could certainly threaten and say "I want to talk to her alone. If you don't let me then I'm going to take that into account as evidence of you not cooperating."

I suppose we don't know how hard he tried to talk to her alone, but I have to think if I was him I'd say something along those lines, and then if RR didn't cooperate I'd drop the hammer a hell of a lot harder than 2 games.

[bhlloy]

Complete whitewash from Harbaugh, not that I'd expect anything different. Still pushing the company line

[EagleFan]

Originally Posted by DaddyTorgo

I disagree with you on interviewing her separately. I mean...he couldn't enforce that legally, but he could certainly threaten and say "I want to talk to her alone. If you don't let me then I'm going to take that into account as evidence of you not cooperating."

I suppose we don't know how hard he tried to talk to her alone, but I have to think if I was him I'd say something along those lines, and then if RR didn't cooperate I'd drop the hammer a hell of a lot harder than 2 games.

He can't interview her alone. It is not a police investigation, it is an employer. How would you like it if your employer had a discussion with someone accusing you of something without you in the room and based their decision on that?

[chadritt]

Honest question: when you say can't do you mean can't or that you wouldn't prefer?

[DaddyTorgo]

Originally Posted by EagleFan

He can't interview her alone. It is not a police investigation, it is an employer. How would you like it if your employer had a discussion with someone accusing you of something without you in the room and based their decision on that?

Sure he can.

He can ask. He can imply threats.

There's nothing that says he can't do that.

In fact - this sort of thing happens with sexual harassment allegations all the time I'd assume (although I'm no corporate lawyer).

Now RR and/or the woman don't have to agree, but he's not legally prohibited from it.

In fact, as an employee RR definitely doesn't have the upper-hand in this situation (albeit he's got the NFLPA and we don't know what the restrictions contained in the NFLPA's agreement with the league are).

I don't think the word "can't" means what you think it means.

[EagleFan]

You're not thinking with your head here.

It is the NFL deciding what to do about an employee, not the police deciding what to do with a crime. An employer can interview the employee and any employees that are related to the incident.

The 3rd party has no bearing here. The legal ruling has already been made by the police, there is no further investigation for the NFL... THEY ARE NOT THE F*CKING POLICE...

[DaddyTorgo]

Originally Posted by EagleFan

You're not thinking with your head here.

It is the NFL deciding what to do about an employee, not the police deciding what to do with a crime. An employer can interview the employee and any employees that are related to the incident.

The 3rd party has no bearing here. The legal ruling has already been made by the police, there is no further investigation for the NFL... THEY ARE NOT THE F*CKING POLICE...

What??

That's MY point. They're not the police. The only thing they're bound by are any relevant state/federal laws and the NFLPA/NFL contract/bylaws/whatever.

If there's nothing in there saying that they're prohibited from interviewing her alone (which AFAIK none of us know for sure) then by definition he CAN at least ask/pressure/whatever to interview her alone.

So either there is something - in which case you imagine the PR folks would have told him to make that clear, or else he didn't try hard enough/have any brains.

[Matthean]

Originally Posted by EagleFan

He can't interview her alone. It is not a police investigation, it is an employer. How would you like it if your employer had a discussion with someone accusing you of something without you in the room and based their decision on that?

It's happened to me. Granted I got my time to speak alone with my employer, but in the end I got written up for it regardless of how ridiculous the accusation was.

[DaddyTorgo]

Originally Posted by Matthean

It's happened to me. Granted I got my time to speak alone with my employer, but in the end I got written up for it regardless of how ridiculous the accusation was.

Exactly.

[EagleFan]

Originally Posted by DaddyTorgo

What??

It's a matter between the NFL and Rice. The legal ruling was already made. The only thing the NFL needs to find out is Rice's side of it. From there they make their ruling. It is pretty straight forward.

Unless you think that your employer should start their own investigation on you if you ever have charges raised and subsequently dropped against you.


The NFL reached out to the police for the video and were turned down (which is the right move by the police since no charges pressed).

The NFL/Ravens talked to Rice and his fiancé to see what happened. They need to get his side of things to see where is head is at. Does he know the seriousness, is there a chance that this will happen again, was it blown out of proportion, will it cause future issues for the NFL/Ravens...

They were seemingly convinced that this was not a major issue and ruled with a suspension. For something that led to no charges it would be hard to come down too harshly on the issue.

The NFLPA would never allow the NFL to interview only the fiancé and they shouldn't. The only thing the NFL should base their decision on is what the legal outcome was, what issues the situation could cause the league, what they could do as far as the NFLPA was concerned and what their judgment of Rice was (did it seem like something that may happen again).

The NFL was in a rough position there as this video was bound to get leaked, these things always happen. Without that happening it would be hard for them to justify much more than a 2 game suspension to the NFLPA.

With the video leaked they can now come down much more harshly without much pushback from the NFLPA; they will probably make an attempt at appeal for show but doubt they will waste too much effort trying to make the NFL back down but they have to make the stand (to show that they will back their players).


I used to like Rice, from his Rutgers days. Didn't know he was that much of a douche. Hopefully he turns that around and learns/grows from this. He deserves a second chance if he can turn things around.

[EagleFan]

Originally Posted by Matthean

It's happened to me. Granted I got my time to speak alone with my employer, but in the end I got written up for it regardless of how ridiculous the accusation was.

You were legally charged with something outside of your work? The charges were dropped and no police follow up? Your employer called you in to discuss? Your employer called your accuser in to discuss, someone from outside the company and without you present?

[JonInMiddleGA]

I think the phrase (which I may have used earlier, can't recall & too lazy to search) is probably that the NFL can't compel her to speak to them without whomever she chooses present.

[Coffee Warlord]

My coworker posted this on our fantasy message board. Guess who he had on his roster.

Looking to move an underrated RB. Willing to accept Adrian Peterson or best offer. This RB is being offered at an extreme value. Act now!

Some vitals:
Favorite song: Smack My Bitch Up by The Prodigy
Favorite Athlete: Mike Tyson
Favorite Movie: Sleeping with the Enemy

No relation to Jerry Rice.

[DaddyTorgo]

Originally Posted by EagleFan

It's a matter between the NFL and Rice. The legal ruling was already made. The only thing the NFL needs to find out is Rice's side of it. From there they make their ruling. It is pretty straight forward.

Unless you think that your employer should start their own investigation on you if you ever have charges raised and subsequently dropped against you.

Agree with you on the first part - it's between the NFL and Rice. We just disagree on whether or not them talking to the woman was an important part of finding out the truth of the situation. Because they need to find out more than just "Rice's side of it" in order to get a sense for how it will affect the league. They're not the police - they're not restricted to just the legal opinion.

If there was any sort of "morality" or "conduct" clause in my employment contract (as there is with NFL ones) I'd fully expect my employer would conduct an investigation and discipline me accordingly - and I wouldn't be surprised if the results of their discipline were different from the prosecutor, because there's a different standard of proof and a different reason they're looking.

[DaddyTorgo]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

I think the phrase (which I may have used earlier, can't recall & too lazy to search) is probably that the NFL can't compel her to speak to them without whomever she chooses present.

Exactly. But they can damn sure try, and try to exert leverage to get her to (to the extent they do so legally). There's no legal prohibition against that.

[dubb93]

It would be really dispicable for Roger Goodell to tell a domestic violence victim to come meet with him, alone and in private, or else! Especially when he has no authority over that person.

[Matthean]

Originally Posted by EagleFan

You were legally charged with something outside of your work? The charges were dropped and no police follow up? Your employer called you in to discuss? Your employer called your accuser in to discuss, someone from outside the company and without you present?

No. It was a customer complaint. I don't see why it would need to be legal for both of them to be there when both could be interviewed separately. The Police interview people separately as well. Again, I don't see why in this case they had to be in the same room. If it's two strangers, that's one thing, but we are talking about people who are planning to marry each other. How open do you really expect them to be?

[nol]

Originally Posted by TroyF

stuff

I agree with about half of that stuff, but my statement was only riffing on the idea that Rice's initial suspension was only two games because Rice lied to the Ravens/NFL about the circumstances, and the NFL has been looking to do the right thing, rather than save face and increase profits for all parties involved, every step of the way.

Hell, if the first video hadn't come out (four days after the assault), would there have been any suspension at all? It would have been super easy to throw out the old "Welp, it says she assaulted him too, so it wasn't domestic assault" justification and let the peanut gallery run with it ("Just another golddigging ho trying to ruin an NFL player's reputation SMH").

[TroyF]

OK, for all of you wanting to have the interview, what do you think you will gain? Being the employer, you would have to ask easy questions. You wouldn't exactly be in a position to badger her. This isn't Perry Mason.

This women married him a month after he did this to her. Do you think she would have broken down and said "The piece of human garbage I just married knocked me out, it was unprovoked and I hope the guy I just married loses his job and goes to jail for a long time. My dream is to marry an unemployed prisoner. You can make my wish come true"

I'll say it again, her FATHER supported Ray Rice at the Ravens press conference. She wasn't going to say anything to change the brilliant 2 game suspension they came up with.

Something I was thinking about on the way home: The NFL has said domestic violence is 6 games for a first offense, lifetime ban for the second. This is his first offense. If he really told the truth at the start, how does the NFL suspend him indefinitely? Because they don't like the bad press? I don't see how that flies with any arbitrator in America.