Your just not getting it."Your honor, I know my client committed assault with a deadly weapon, but it's only because he was really mad at the time."
Your just not getting it."Your honor, I know my client committed assault with a deadly weapon, but it's only because he was really mad at the time."
We are going to have to agree to disagree. Sure, had Pouncy done that to a player with no helmet on I would support your position. Had he done it to a player that was uninvolved at that moment in any altercation or one who had no way of knowing it was coming, I would support your position. For me, and perhaps it is me alone, the act of charging a guy, from behind, a guy away from the fray, a guy without head protection, and knocking him over is worse. Now I acknowledge it is not a head attack, but it is the element of cowardice and victimizing the nonparticipant at that moment, from behind which I find more reprehensible than giving a guy who has something coming more or less what he has coming.Pouncey was punching and kicking a guy in the head even if deserved that's much worse than a shove.
Certainly, there is such a thing as prosecutorial discretion, which without a shadow of a doubt will be invoked to pass on the prosecution of a case of assault where no injuries were sustained, the victim refuses to cooperate, and a multi billion dollar corporation with a major branch in your city wants badly to go away. I believe that is how the law will work in this case, and in any such case outside of Utopia Law School.Huh. I’ve been a lawyer for over 25 years and know how it is decided whether to bring criminal charges. Please explain it to me.
I didnt say there was no reason to prosecute. I said there would be no prosecution. That isnt the same thing.Wait, did you just call him naive then follow that up by saying as long as nobody was hurt there's no reason to prosecute?
The victim's agent is currently threatening civil action, and the NFL has issued a disciplinary action. Neither of those is an indication that the "victim refuses to cooperate" or that the NFL is pressuring anyone not to prosecute.Certainly, there is such a thing as prosecutorial discretion, which without a shadow of a doubt will be invoked to pass on the prosecution of a case of assault where no injuries were sustained, the victim refuses to cooperate, and a multi billion dollar corporation with a major branch in your city wants badly to go away. I believe that is how the law will work in this case, and in any such case outside of Utopia Law School.
).One of us is strictly by the book and one of us uses common sense.One of us isn't, I'll give you that.
So you are suggesting the NFL would welcome a criminal prosecution of something that happened in one of their games based on the fact that they moved quickly to handle to handle it in house? Interesting read.The victim's agent is currently threatening civil action, and the NFL has issued a disciplinary action. Neither of those is an indication that the "victim refuses to cooperate" or that the NFL is pressuring anyone not to prosecute.
They may or may not charge him, but your view of how things actually work is just wrong.
this isnt going to happen regardless of scheduleI'd highly recommend Rudolph not seek criminal prosecution especially given he will be playing against Cleveland again in a couple weeks.
I've been a fan of this game, and have been watching teams play this game for 60 minutes and pummel each other while doing so for decades. I've never seen a player forcibly remove an opposing player's helmet and then use it as a weapon against that player. Garrett not only crossed the line, he took a triple jump over it on his way.I know..."the law is the law"... "mandatory minimums"...Perpetuate the broken criminal justice system. More importantly, lets not use common sense and judge situations on an individual basis. Lets just make more laws to prevent this extremely isolated incident from ever happening again. I'm sure Garrett and all of those involved were contemplating the consequences of their behaviour in the heat of the moment. Lets just put these guys in an arena and let them pummel each other for 60 minutes and then throw the law at them when things get out of hand. Such a stupid society we live in.
THAT IS JUST TOO FUNNY!NFL Memes
@NFL_Memes
BREAKING: NFL has punished Steelers for their role in TNF brawl by not suspending Mason Rudolph
"By the book"=our actual laws. Your version of common sense is that if someone acts in the heat of the moment, they shouldn't be held responsible because they weren't considering the consequences of their actions at the time. Those are your words. That's absolute rubbish. We don't let people commit crimes because they lack impulse control.One of us is strictly by the book and one of us uses common sense.
"by the book"=our actual laws in a broken criminal justice system."By the book"=our actual laws. Your version of common sense is that if someone acts in the heat of the moment, they shouldn't be held responsible because they weren't considering the consequences of their actions at the time. Those are your words. That's absolute rubbish. We don't let people commit crimes because they lack impulse control.
No, that's in the game. Now, if it's purposeful, an argument could be made but I'd personally still be against it. Ripping off another player's helmet and then using it as a weapon is not "part of the game".Should an MLB pitcher be charged with assault for throwing at a batter's head?
I think it’s also fair to mention that it seemed like DeCastro had Myles pinned to the turf when Pouncey’s feet started flying. DeCastro is the one guy that did right during the situation. I applaud him. Too bad one of his other teammates or a Browns defensive player didn’t restrain the QB when he got to his feet and charged.We are going to have to agree to disagree. Sure, had Pouncy done that to a player with no helmet on I would support your position. Had he done it to a player that was uninvolved at that moment in any altercation or one who had no way of knowing it was coming, I would support your position. For me, and perhaps it is me alone, the act of charging a guy, from behind, a guy away from the fray, a guy without head protection, and knocking him over is worse. Now I acknowledge it is not a head attack, but it is the element of cowardice and victimizing the nonparticipant at that moment, from behind which I find more reprehensible than giving a guy who has something coming more or less what he has coming.
Now it does appear the league takes your position over mine, so you have support while I do not. Not the first time my moral compass has had me standing somewhat alone.
Please take your opinions on our justice system to the political sub-forum. I popped in today to read about Garrett, his suspension, and implications regarding the NFL."by the book"=our actual laws in a broken criminal justice system.
Everything I hear about the guy says this was a one-off incident. He sometimes plays hard after the whistle, but no more so than the average player.I realize the guy's an Aggie, but did anyone have any clue that Garrett would do this kind of thing?
I've never heard of that and I've watched the game for forty years. That's worrisome.Not related to the Garrett incident, but giving a little background to the atmosphere of last night - can anyone recall a player getting a helmet to helmet hit so bad that they start BLEEDING FROM THE EAR? Yes, the D Johnson hit earlier in the game. I'd never seen that in an NFL game that I can remember. Perhaps it happens and they just don't show it, but that looked horrible.
Thanks, that was my impression also. He just went off.Everything I hear about the guy says this was a one-off incident. He sometimes plays hard after the whistle, but no more so than the average player.
None of these guys are teddy bears, but from what I can gather Garrett isn't a thuggish player.
How about just move on to the next post like everyone else.Please take your opinions on our justice system to the political sub-forum. I popped in today to read about Garrett, his suspension, and implications regarding the NFL.
I can appreciate that argument, but what if it was purposeful?No, that's in the game. Now, if it's purposeful, an argument could be made but I'd personally still be against it. Ripping off another player's helmet and then using it as a weapon is not "part of the game".
thisPlease take your opinions on our justice system to the political sub-forum. I popped in today to read about Garrett, his suspension, and implications regarding the NFL.
Hes worse than RudolphHopefully the Steelers are sending someone to Atlanta tomorrow to check out that guy that "took a knee" and never attempted to rip someones helmet off during the last seconds of an ###-wippin.
I'm just sayin...![]()
Dr. Chao said it was from the helmet, not from the head injury.I've never heard of that and I've watched the game for forty years. That's worrisome.
All bets are off when you kick somebody in the head.Not a fan of Pouncey's suspension - feels like if he was someone else, might've been 2 or less. Hopefully that is appealed and reduced. Unwritten rule in sports, but if someone takes a cheap shot at the QB, we all know the linemen are coming in... Someone swings a helmet at their bare head, there will be harsh retaliation.
I think it was set at 3 because they’ll end up reducing it to 2 upon appeal. The league probably doesn’t want him on the field in 2 weeks and I think that’s a wise decision if true.Not a fan of Pouncey's suspension - feels like if he was someone else, might've been 2 or less. Hopefully that is appealed and reduced. Unwritten rule in sports, but if someone takes a cheap shot at the QB, we all know the linemen are coming in... Someone swings a helmet at their bare head, there will be harsh retaliation.
If I was in the Browns front office, I wouldn't want Baker Mayfield on the field either.I think it was set at 3 because they’ll end up reducing it to 2 upon appeal. The league probably doesn’t want him on the field in 2 weeks and I think that’s a wise decision if true.
I think the right analogy would be if a batter took his bat and clobbered the pitcher in the head, yes, I think that would be assault.Should an MLB pitcher be charged with assault for throwing at a batter's head?
Unfortunately this has merit for reasons I smartly won’t get into here.If I was in the Browns front office, I wouldn't want Baker Mayfield on the field either.
And what does this comment have to do with Garrett or any of the other's involved? Mayfield was nowhere near this scene, let alone a part of it. Let's keep to the topic please.If I was in the Browns front office, I wouldn't want Baker Mayfield on the field either.
He said the NFL doesn't want Pouncey on the field, something I agree with. I note that Steelers could be looking for retaliation, maybe take some low hits on Mayfield based on Garrett going after Rudolph. Pretty adjacent discussion, imo. Might be smart to just sit him down for the game, not sure why that irks you.And what does this comment have to do with Garrett or any of the other's involved? Mayfield was nowhere near this scene, let alone a part of it. Let's keep to the topic please.
Engelberg said:
I've read most of your comments on this subject and you have to be fishing, you cannot be serious with most of your comments.
If not "in the game" I would be all for legal action being taken. If Suh stomped Rodgers and it caused Rodgers to miss games, I'd be surprised if legal action wasn't taken.I can appreciate that argument, but what if it was purposeful?
What about any purposeful pitch thrown at the batter, not just at the head?
What about Suh stomping on Aaron Rodgers?
Juan Marichal says hi.I think the right analogy would be if a batter took his bat and clobbered the pitcher in the head, yes, I think that would be assault.
One of the most famous sayings in football is it's always the second guy that gets punished.The more I see the replay the more Rudolph comes off as a dink to me, even more so with his postgame presser and now his agent suggesting legal action. The kind of guy you want to punch or, I guess, whack with a helmet.*
* I in no way condone Garrett's actions and think six games is about right.
The sad thing is you probably do believe that. A that being the case, you must be related to Rudolph. Sorry to hurt your feelings LOLHes worse than Rudolph
You're moving the goal posts here.If not "in the game" I would be all for legal action being taken. If Suh stomped Rodgers and it caused Rodgers to miss games, I'd be surprised if legal action wasn't taken.
Also, baseball thrown into batter's shoulder is no where near the same as a full sized NFL helmet being swung into a helmetless player's head.