mad sweeney
Footballguy
Yeah, but it figures to reek havoc with Henry's career in the meantime.
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.
Chris Henry accused again. (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter MechEng
- Start date
coolnerd
Footballguy
Even in the criminal world, jumping out a car to beat up innocent people with no motive is strange behavior. There is more to the story i.e. the two kids who got beat up are probably not purely innocent victims. Is it totally beyond what many of think of Henry to think he can involved? No, but there is more to the story than accusers are letting on.
Last edited by a moderator:
sholditch
Footballguy
Since December, Henry has been arrested for allegedly being in possession of marijuana, waving a gun at a crowd of people, driving under the influence, and (his latest charge) providing alcohol to three young ladies under the age of 18.
He's dumb enough to wave a gun at a crowd of people, I wouldn't put unaggravated assault out of his range. Over/Under on his lifetime ban is two weeks from today. I'm taking the under.
He's dumb enough to wave a gun at a crowd of people, I wouldn't put unaggravated assault out of his range. Over/Under on his lifetime ban is two weeks from today. I'm taking the under.
Maybe tke kids were drug dealers who burned henry's friend, or maybe they were just guys who henry thought were drug dealers as far as how an assault would impact henry's NFL career it doesn't matter if the person was mother teresa or some drug dealing criminalcoolnerd said:
coolnerd
Footballguy
True, and if he did not learn from Pacman, Goddell does not want these guys even around trouble, much less committing the crime. BTW, Don't mistake me, I think Henry is a moron for being anywhere that is not like a grocery store or the Bengals facilities. and yes he has a right as adult in America to move around etc, and the NFL has the right as employer to not hire people who don't represent the organization well.
First I don't put nothing pass Henry. However some points I have question about.
1. The kid said a white guy (last I check Henry is black) is the one who beat him up, Henry just pushed him down when he tried to get away.
2. He supposedly knew Henry because he is friends with his brother, picking out his picture proves what. Unless they used a picture lineup that is going to hurt their case.
3. Then when the kids were running away, Henry,McNeal threw beer bottles at them. Sorry if I just got my ### kicked and am running away, I don't turn around to see who is throwing beer bottles. Once again it might be this mysterious white guy.
4. There were 2 guys walking down the street how come only 1 of them got beat up? What did the buddy do, stand there and laugh?
1. The kid said a white guy (last I check Henry is black) is the one who beat him up, Henry just pushed him down when he tried to get away.
2. He supposedly knew Henry because he is friends with his brother, picking out his picture proves what. Unless they used a picture lineup that is going to hurt their case.
3. Then when the kids were running away, Henry,McNeal threw beer bottles at them. Sorry if I just got my ### kicked and am running away, I don't turn around to see who is throwing beer bottles. Once again it might be this mysterious white guy.
4. There were 2 guys walking down the street how come only 1 of them got beat up? What did the buddy do, stand there and laugh?
sholditch
Footballguy
gosh, these are tough, lemme see1. Henry is light-skinned and has been accused of pushing one kid to the ground when he tried to help his friend2. He might know his face because Henry is A) an NFL player and B) constantly in the news. If I got assaulted by anyone who even looked like an NFL WR, I would simply assume it was Henry.3. Not even worth answering4. Let's see, you are a 16 year-old kid and your buddy is getting pummeled by a professional athlete, and when you try to help another PORFESSIONAL ATHLETE pushes you to the ground and tells you not to get up. Since you are Chuck Norris's 1st cousin, you of course would have overpowered Henry with a swift roundhouse to the neck, but unfortunately for this kid he is not a ranking ninja. So yeah, he just laid there.but here's the real question: 1. Will any of the issues you raised have any bearing on Goodell's decision?A. No
Hmmm....question 1, the story was a white guy punched the kid in the face and then Henry got out of car and pushed the kid down.....Henry must of astral projected himself first which is why he is white, then got out of the car and pushed the kid down.As far as question 4 once again it was a white guy that was supposedly pummelling the kid, before Henry got out of the car.
Of course the story has now changed, it was Reggie McNeal who punched the kid in the face and Henry pushed him down. McNeal is the mysterious white guy now.
http://www.fox19.com/Global/story.asp?S=6656474&nav=0zHF
by the way take a look at Henry and McNeal....they aren't that light skinned enough to be confused with being white.
If the story keeps changing the way it has.....you better believe it will have some bearing on Goddell's decision
sholditch
Footballguy
None of these details change the fact that Henry was there. Until he can prove an alibi somewhere else, he's there and participating in yet another violent crime. Basically he will have to prove that both kids are lying to Goodell to stave off punishment. If you were Goodell, who would you believe: Chris Henry or a total stranger?
Wow, after reading that "article" I realize that our local media here in Birmingham isn't half as bad as I thought it was. Somebody try to transform this into an English sentence:
Carson Palmer told FOX 19, "People take advantage of guys who have been through people like Chris Henry people are coming out of the woodwork trying to blame him for everything."
I get what you're saying, that Henry wasn't even there and the kid made everything up. I just wouldn't go broke betting on a thug/loser like Henry. Also, Marvin Lewis needs to learn when to shut the hell up. He says some of the dumbest crap I've ever heard a coach say, and this one goes right to the top:
While Marvin Lewis said the media is partially to blame. "Anybody can say anything about anybody and then it can become news right or wrong true or not and for whatever reason right now it's a bad run of it."
Wow, after reading that "article" I realize that our local media here in Birmingham isn't half as bad as I thought it was. Somebody try to transform this into an English sentence:
Carson Palmer told FOX 19, "People take advantage of guys who have been through people like Chris Henry people are coming out of the woodwork trying to blame him for everything."
I get what you're saying, that Henry wasn't even there and the kid made everything up. I just wouldn't go broke betting on a thug/loser like Henry. Also, Marvin Lewis needs to learn when to shut the hell up. He says some of the dumbest crap I've ever heard a coach say, and this one goes right to the top:
While Marvin Lewis said the media is partially to blame. "Anybody can say anything about anybody and then it can become news right or wrong true or not and for whatever reason right now it's a bad run of it."
Last edited by a moderator:
lions327
Footballguy
Has it been proven that Henry was even there?
faulkfan
Footballguy
I can't help but think that if you took Henry's picture around the country and showed it to every victim of an attack by an unknown african american male he would be implicated in about a thousand crimes. Why the heck were they showing him pictures of chris henry? Is that now their standard criminal photo?I start to have my doubts when I read things like this from the Yahoo article..."Kenton County Attorney Garry Edmondson told the media last month that Henry had failed a court-mandated drug test, but the prosecutor later admitted that he wasn't sure and state officials confirmed the player had not violated his probation with a positive drug test.
Edmondson declined to apologize and told a newspaper reporter Henry was a "lowlife."
If our protectors of the peace and purveyors of justice have this kind of attitude, we could all be in trouble.
Family Matters
Footballguy
You bring up some good points. There seems to be a recent trend to accuse, report and judge at the same time before any real evidence exists to support allegations. Reports like this leave room to question the motives of those so quick to report and judge. Sadly it takes away from real stories and problems that need addressed.The irony here is that those involved with these allegations and others before as you mentioned, leave these peolpe down there with Henry. They've stooped to his level to make a story.
Rhino
Footballguy
First of all, no official statements have confirmed whether Henry was present or involved in this incident at all, so right now it's all speculation.But let's assume for one moment he was there...
Does it really matter that "Henry just pushed him down when he tried to get away." Like that's not a big deal? A teenager is getting beat up by someone - white guy or black, doesn't matter - and Chris Henry pushes the kid down as he tries to escape so the beating can continue. You don't see a problem with that?
Even if Henry did nothing... even if he just stood there and watched while someone else beat these kids up, that's still ridiculous. The only acceptable behavior by Henry in this situation would have been to jump out of the car and try to break up the fight and help the kids. To stand by and watch as a couple professional athelets beat up a couple teenagers still makes him guilty in my book.
sholditch
Footballguy
I really hate repeating myself but since you're too lazy to read posts I guess I have to:I get what you're saying, that the kid is lying and Henry wasn't even there. I just wouldn't go broke betting on a thug/loser like Henry.
I'm pretty sure none of those words have more than two syllables so you should know most of them. But thanks for bringing me up to speed on how things like speculation work. Amazing that I've been able to get through thirty years of life on this planet without "knowing how all that works."
sho nuff
Footballguy
Ummm...seriously man...no need to go off on a lame attempt to insult...when you were the one making a foolish post.You made the claim that it was a fact that Henry was there...not anyone else.
Drunken Cowboy
Footballguy
Nothing about this story made any sense.
When that is the caes, it more likely than not is isn't true.
When that is the caes, it more likely than not is isn't true.
mad sweeney
Footballguy
IIRC, it was a false positive, though that form of test easily produces false positive. When there is an fp, then the sample has to be retested. So techincally he did "fail" a drug test, but it was irresponsible to report it as such at that time. He was right about one thng though, Henry is a lowlife. This incident aside, he's on probabtion in too many states to argue otherwise.
sholditch
Footballguy
Of course the kid's testimony will have to bear out against Henry in court for him to be convicted, but if he wasn't there it should be easy enough to provide an alibi. Has he provided that alibi yet? Was he in fact in Kentucky? Does he dispute being in the state or in the vicinity of the crime? Does he dispute being in a white SUV? Does he dispute Reggie McNeal being in a white SUV?Look, if someone says you beat them up and you weren't even in the vicinity at the time, it should be fairly easy to prove. If Henry proves that, he's fine and he can go about his business. I just find it funny that to date he has not come out with a steadfast alibi for his whereabouts in the press. Given Henry's reputation, I would think that would have already been produced in order to exonerate himself. But it hasn't. If anyone has a reason why it hasn't I'd be glad to hear it.My main point is that to avoid a suspension or ban Henry, since he has proved to be unable of avoiding criminal behavior, needs to prove to Goodell that he wasn't there, since Goodell can make his decision independent of any investigation. For instance, if the Police determine that Henry was at the scene and that the teens were beaten by someone, but they don't have enough evidence to charge Henry, do you honestly think Goodell is just going to sit on his hands, especially given the fact that Henry is already serving a very hefty suspension for multiple past transgressions?Also, I don't think there's anything wrong with answering a post with the same condescending tone in which it was written.
sho nuff
Footballguy
Actually Henry does not need to prove that...the other side needs to prove he was there....hence the presumption of innocence until proven guilty.Im no fan of the guy...but there is too much fishy going on in this case.And yes, there was a condescending tone because you claimed that it was a fact that Henry was there. It most certainly is not a fact at this point.Same as when the club owner from Vegas got on every radio station claiming things that PacMan did. I was one who said don't just take that guy's word for it. Many of the claims he made have shown to be false. The biting that was just proven by DNA not to have been PacMan...and so on.You cannot simply say it was a fact that Henry was there.Why has he not come out with an alibi to the press...because he should do that to the police first. Have they even called him in for questioning yet?
sholditch
Footballguy
There's nothing stating he has to come to the police first, especially being a public figure. If accusations have been made against him in the press, he has every right to exonerate himself in the press, and I find it a bit odd that he hasn't done that yet. As I said, it should be fairly easy to prove. Look at the Duke rape case. That guy proved he wasn't at the house when the supposed assault took place using a call made from a cell phone, an ATM card, and a room key. Our lives are so electronic now that there must be a million ways to prove your whereabouts at a certain time. Since Henry hasn't done that yet, especially given the fact that he's already suspended, has a terrible rep, and needs to show Goodell more than anyone else that he's turned a new leaf, it leads me to think that he can't. Alibis are incredibly easy to produce when you're telling the truth but incredibly hard to come by when you're not. The question everyone should be asking is where was Chris Henry at that time if he wasn't at the scene.
fatness
Footballguy
fatness
Footballguy
No, you do not get what I am saying. I'm saying it's not known at this time whether the kid is lying or not. Period. Statements like "None of these details change the fact that Henry was there" display something, but it isn't knowledge.
mad sweeney
Footballguy
I don't want to get into a debate about that old topic, but I read several articles at the time stating the scenario I wrote about. But no matter what, it was irresponsible to go public with the statement that Henry had failed a drug test.
sholditch
Footballguy
And all I'm saying is Henry has a long record of criminal behavior, does not deserve the benefit of the doubt, and it's very strange that he has issued no public statements alluding to an alibi for his whereabouts. Like I said, if he wasn't there it should be exceedingly easy to prove, but he has made no attempt to do so as far as I can tell.
QuizGuy66
Footballguy
Didn't know he was supposed to report to you.And yep, reasonable doubt still applies to him too for that matter.-QG
faulkfan
Footballguy
Dude...everyone deserves the benefit of the doubt. Without that I can make false claims against every criminal on the face of the planet and they can just be convicted or have to pay me money to drop charges. Looking at the person's history is part of the process of sentencing, but it has less weight in determining guilt. The system would break down worse than it already is if we took the approach it sounds like you are suggesting.You have any speeding tickets? How about if I tell a cop you sped past me on the highway and he pulls you over and gives you another ticket. I mean, you must have been speeding since you have speeding tickets, right?
sholditch
Footballguy
The only person who has a responsibility of giving someone the benefit of the doubt is a judge in a courtroom. In the real world, people are judged by their behavior and past actions. I didn't make the world that way, that's just the way it is. And I never said Henry has a duty to report to me. The only people he owes anything to in this matter is himself and the team that has invested millions in him. IMO, if I were him, I would come out with some sort of an alibi if I wasn't there, to clear my name regardless of the police proceedings.
You think everyone deserves the benefit of the doubt, I don't. Simple difference of opinion. It doesn't mean that I think people should be convicted in a court of law on mere supposition and I don't think it means that you shouldn't be innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. But if a story surfaces that Lindsey Lohan got wasted and puked all over a bouncer at some LA Club, am I obligated to believe her side of the story when I know that such an action is completely consistent with her character? No. I can believe whatever I want because my opinion of her doesn't affect her life. Same thing with Henry. When I hear a story that he has beat up some kid or waved a gun around in a club, or gotten caught in coitus with a hooker driving 100 mph with a dashboard full of cocaine, I am inclined to believe it because it is consistent with Henry's character and his past actions. Simple as that. I fail to see how judging people based on their behavior and forming opinions about them is wrong. Everyone does it every second of every day.
You think everyone deserves the benefit of the doubt, I don't. Simple difference of opinion. It doesn't mean that I think people should be convicted in a court of law on mere supposition and I don't think it means that you shouldn't be innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. But if a story surfaces that Lindsey Lohan got wasted and puked all over a bouncer at some LA Club, am I obligated to believe her side of the story when I know that such an action is completely consistent with her character? No. I can believe whatever I want because my opinion of her doesn't affect her life. Same thing with Henry. When I hear a story that he has beat up some kid or waved a gun around in a club, or gotten caught in coitus with a hooker driving 100 mph with a dashboard full of cocaine, I am inclined to believe it because it is consistent with Henry's character and his past actions. Simple as that. I fail to see how judging people based on their behavior and forming opinions about them is wrong. Everyone does it every second of every day.
mad sweeney
Footballguy
We don't know what Henry and the team have discussed. It could very well be that Marvin Lewis has talked to him and told him to keep his mouth shut while this thing plays out. I would imagine that Henry and the team have talked. We are not privvy to all the communication that goes on.
sholditch
Footballguy
Sweeney, don't you think that the team would want him to come out with any exonerating evidence if he had it? Especially given the team's reputation, I know if I were coach or GM I would want henry to say, "no I was in my condo and the timestamp from my keycard proves it" if he could. You could very well be right and it would stand to reason that the team might want to just wait and see if it blows over, but it still seems strange.
faulkfan
Footballguy
I agree that it is your right to make a judgment call and I may have misunderstood your post as I took it to mean that in general Henry, or someone with a negative history, didn't deserve the benefit of the doubt. I can agree that you have the right to judge him.My concern is the notion, which I thought you were proposing, that Henry doesn't deserve the benefit of the doubt at any level. I also get concerned with the highlighted comment from your post. There is something wrong with making these judgments if you are in a position where you can affect the outcome of the investigation as with the case I mentioned earlier where the county attorney called Henry a "lowlife" and refused to apologize. Personal opinion has ABSOLUTELY NO PLACE in legal proceedings. Like him don't like I don't care, but do the job your paid to do and earn the trust that is placed in you when you represent the people as a law enforcment official. Judging someone based on past behavior is what Edmondson did and his judgment was wrong. That is where my problem with that theory arises.
mad sweeney
Footballguy
No. Until charges are filed, wy defend yourself? I'm sure he's given an alibi to the police and to the team. If you go public with an alibi you are substantiating the situation. Right now he's only accused and the story seems to be in question. Best to be silent and be thought a fool than to speak and remove all doubt. If this was Palmer then sure, come on out and say this is silly I was at home with my wife. But with Henry's rep if he came out and said no it wasn't me through Bengal media outlets, implying the team was behind him, and then it turned out it was him then there is double egg on their face. Until they charge him with something, keep his face out of the press. If I'm the Bengals and he tells me he didn't do it, woulod I trust his word? Nope
Last edited by a moderator:
sho nuff
Footballguy
And how long did it take for the Duke thing to play out?And there are a million ways to be somewhere that you cannot prove where you were.Since there are no charges at this point and I dont think he has really been questioned...he does not need to show Goodell a damn thing.
mad sweeney
Footballguy
Someone ought to tell Henry that
sholditch
Footballguy
I agree 100%. I even think a defending cousel should defend a persoin he knows to be guilty to the best of his ability so that the integrity of the legal system remain intact.
sholditch
Footballguy
Holy Crap:
Bengals WR Henry turns self in on new charges
my bad, this is about the minors/prostitutes case, but found this which backs up what Sweeney said:
The Bengals declined comment.
"We don't comment on something when it's just in the stages of charges," Bengals public relations director Jack Brennan told the Cincinnati Enquirer.
Ha, I bet not, otherwise they would do nothing else. Article also says that he was arrested for drunk driving earlier this month, which is after suspension, correct?
http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=2484220
also found this on MSNBC from an older story:
As part of that suspension, if he is found to be involved in any further bad behavior, Goodell could ban Henry from the NFL for life.
wouldn't the drunk driving alone constitute "further bad behavior"? Can anyone confirm this is a part of his suspension? I figured that was the deal but this makes it sound like an explicit condition.
Bengals WR Henry turns self in on new charges
my bad, this is about the minors/prostitutes case, but found this which backs up what Sweeney said:
The Bengals declined comment.
"We don't comment on something when it's just in the stages of charges," Bengals public relations director Jack Brennan told the Cincinnati Enquirer.
Ha, I bet not, otherwise they would do nothing else. Article also says that he was arrested for drunk driving earlier this month, which is after suspension, correct?
http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=2484220
also found this on MSNBC from an older story:
As part of that suspension, if he is found to be involved in any further bad behavior, Goodell could ban Henry from the NFL for life.
wouldn't the drunk driving alone constitute "further bad behavior"? Can anyone confirm this is a part of his suspension? I figured that was the deal but this makes it sound like an explicit condition.
Last edited by a moderator:
Family Matters
Footballguy
Well considering your stated opinion of Henry, I doubt you'd believe him even if he did publicly provide an alibi. Point is and has been, let the process play itself out before he's condemned. Believe me when I say, it's not Henry's innocence I'm concerned with. It's the process and that applies to all equally.Defining a personal opinion is one thing, but when you make it public then you have made it a record of such and that's a bit different. Now you are in the position of influencing others. Doing so without any evidence is the part that creates this media frenzy that I have find distasteful and unjust. Media hounds are in it to be first with the story and opin, rather than reporting the news. They've injected themselves into the story which is classless IMO. Doing so makes them no better than those they judge.
Family Matters
Footballguy
Waiving a gun in public while threatening harm....3 game suspension.Taking advantage of under age girls and getting DUI's....6 game suspension.
Being wrongfulyaccused by CWT, assummed quilty by the press and wronfully judged by all.....priceless.
There are a few posters that look pretty silly right now.
