I just wonder if there is any kind of "statute of limitations" for new video evidence. Suppose that tomorrow somebody discovers a video from 2007 of Michael Vick killing dogs. Does he now get a new punishment because of public outrage?

I'm pretty sure there's something like a Godwin's law for argument via dictionary definition

I think it's pretty clear Krush was using the term "abuser" to refer to the role of Rice in this specific altercation.

 

Pretty sure most everyone already believes Rice fulfills the definition Badger is referring to, but to be fair, that is not how I interpreted Krush to mean it in that instance.

EA Sports going to remove him from their games.

 

I think the way everyone is stumbling over each other to point their finger is as pathetic as the initial 2 game suspension that was "adequate" until some visuals were added into the mix.

Don't they do regular roster updates? If so it makes sense that they'd remove someone who is no longer in the NFL as part of their regular updates, along with any other cuts etc.

I just wonder if there is any kind of "statute of limitations" for new video evidence. Suppose that tomorrow somebody discovers a video from 2007 of Michael Vick killing dogs. Does he now get a new punishment because of public outrage?

No.

 

Notice the District Atty isn't trying to file new charges.

 

But there is nothing saying the League can't revise their punishment. As I said yesterday, I think it is poor precedent, but there is nothing from stopping them from doing this.

I just wonder if there is any kind of "statute of limitations" for new video evidence. Suppose that tomorrow somebody discovers a video from 2007 of Michael Vick killing dogs. Does he now get a new punishment because of public outrage?

Goodell handing out completely arbitrary decisions has been a criticism leveled at him for a while. I don't think anyone is saying that the NFL looks good in all of this.

Whether you consider him as someone who has repeatedly inflicted abuse upon her lies in whether you think she was able to just go back to normal after that night - whether the victim was able to simply move past it.

Whether you consider him as someone who has repeatedly inflicted abuse upon her lies in whether you think she was able to just go back to normal after that night - whether the victim was able to simply move past it.

Why? Victims of abuse move past it somehow all the time...

No.

 

Notice the District Atty isn't trying to file new charges.

 

But there is nothing saying the League can't revise their punishment. As I said yesterday, I think it is poor precedent, but there is nothing from stopping them from doing this.

 

Well, the players' union could stop them from doing this, but they apparently aren't willing to risk the PR damage it would do.

Why? Victims of abuse move past it somehow all the time...

A lot of times they will internalize it and blame themselves for the abuse, at least partially if not fully.

e.g. #WhyIStayed: She saw herself in Ray Rice’s wife, Janay, and tweeted about it. So did thousands of others.

Edited September 9, 201411 yr by StrangeSox

Well, the players' union could stop them from doing this, but they apparently aren't willing to risk the PR damage it would do.

I thought "personal conduct" stuff was entirely at the league's discretion?

Why? Victims of abuse move past it somehow all the time...

 

Sure - the question isn't whether she has or ever will so much as whether his presence and/or the memory of the incident continued to traumatize her

Sure - the question isn't whether she has or ever will so much as whether his presence and/or the memory of the incident continued to traumatize her

something like living with your own PTSD trigger?

Sure - the question isn't whether she has or ever will so much as whether his presence and/or the memory of the incident continued to traumatize her

Well that's why I was pointing out the marriage...one would think she wouldn't marry him if she was still traumatized...but I honestly have learned to not try and understand everyone...it's beyond comprehension in many instances.

Well that's why I was pointing out the marriage...one would think she wouldn't marry him if she was still traumatized...but I honestly have learned to not try and understand everyone...it's beyond comprehension in many instances.

"s/he'll change" "s/he still loves me" "s/he didn't really mean it, s/he just lost their temper" "I know I'm not perfect, I provoked him/her"

 

We don't even have to guess at the potential rationalizations in this case. We have that tweet via the Ravens about Janay apologizing for "the role that she played."

Well, the players' union could stop them from doing this, but they apparently aren't willing to risk the PR damage it would do.

Besides, no team is going to sign him anyway.

Besides, no team is going to sign him anyway.

Just wait...

Just wait...

I dunno, he''ll be getting pretty old for a RB by the time he's allowed back in the league, even if it's next year. RB's are replaceable commodities these days.

I dunno, he''ll be getting pretty old for a RB by the time he's allowed back in the league, even if it's next year. RB's are replaceable commodities these days.

I agree, but I still think he will get a chance, even if a small one.

"s/he'll change" "s/he still loves me" "s/he didn't really mean it, s/he just lost their temper" "I know I'm not perfect, I provoked him/her"

 

We don't even have to guess at the potential rationalizations in this case. We have that tweet via the Ravens about Janay apologizing for "the role that she played."

 

"There goes my money train..."

Just wait...

 

no one will sign him this season

he'll do stuff to show that he's a change man.. and somebody will give him a shot next season most likely

 

This is not a case of a married couple headed for divorce at the time of the interview/hearing...this is not the case of a couple on the outs...this is a couple that was just married...if there is still not enough trust between the two of them for her to accurately recount the events, without fear of retribution, than her testimony is not credible in the first place.

Psychological Effects

 

One hallmark of an abusive partner is that he convinces the woman she is worthless or undesirable and that no one else would ever want her. The abuser often convinces the woman that the abuse is her fault, claiming that her behavior caused the abuser to react violently. Many abused women also feel ashamed of their situation. They fear the social stigma of the “battered wife” image and try to maintain a façade of normalcy, even if this means staying with the abuser.

 

"s/he'll change" "s/he still loves me" "s/he didn't really mean it, s/he just lost their temper" "I know I'm not perfect, I provoked him/her"

 

We don't even have to guess at the potential rationalizations in this case. We have that tweet via the Ravens about Janay apologizing for "the role that she played."

 

You have no evidence of what happened or why she said that.

 

The definition of abuser doesnt matter, what matters is the fact that people seem to always believe that they know best for everyone else.

 

Last I checked Rice and Turner were adults. At this point Rice does not seem to be a current threat to her life. If she wants to forgive him for what he did, thats her choice. Just like if someone forgives a spouse for cheating, etc. Their life, not mine.

 

(edit)

 

Does anyone have a shred of evidence of prior abuse by Rice? Cause in my experience usually there are more signs than just 1 sudden outburst in public.

Edited September 9, 201411 yr by Soxbadger

You have no evidence of what happened or why she said that.

 

The definition of abuser doesnt matter, what matters is the fact that people seem to always believe that they know best for everyone else.

 

Last I checked Rice and Turner were adults. At this point Rice does not seem to be a current threat to her life. If she wants to forgive him for what he did, thats her choice. Just like if someone forgives a spouse for cheating, etc. Their life, not mine.

 

(edit)

 

Does anyone have a shred of evidence of prior abuse by Rice? Cause in my experience usually there are more signs than just 1 sudden outburst in public.

I wonder if she were your sister or daughter or friend if you would feel the same way.

You have no evidence of what happened or why she said that.

 

The definition of abuser doesnt matter, what matters is the fact that people seem to always believe that they know best for everyone else.

 

Last I checked Rice and Turner were adults. At this point Rice does not seem to be a current threat to her life. If she wants to forgive him for what he did, thats her choice. Just like if someone forgives a spouse for cheating, etc. Their life, not mine.

 

(edit)

 

Does anyone have a shred of evidence of prior abuse by Rice? Cause in my experience usually there are more signs than just 1 sudden outburst in public.

 

It is her choice, but it seems intentionally naive to ignore how DV frequently works to make the victim blame themselves and rationalize their abuser's behavior.

Psychological Effects

 

One hallmark of an abusive partner is that he convinces the woman she is worthless or undesirable and that no one else would ever want her. The abuser often convinces the woman that the abuse is her fault, claiming that her behavior caused the abuser to react violently. Many abused women also feel ashamed of their situation. They fear the social stigma of the “battered wife” image and try to maintain a façade of normalcy, even if this means staying with the abuser.

They were not married yet. That is the whole point I am making.

 

But I certainly concede he may have somehow convinced her to marry him despite continuing trauma. And if that is the case, then she's not going to tell the truth, whether he is in the room or not. That's all I am trying to get across.