Keep Texans Talk Google Ad Free!
Venmo Tip Jar | Paypal Tip Jar
Thanks for your support! 🍺😎👍

I'm liking the Eagles in the NFC East

TexasCowboy said:
I said the 2 clowns talking trash at a distance would be the bitches he assaulted learn to read



Rotflmao you create more bullshit to spew than the media themselves lmao
and all this because he went to Dallas, but if he went to anyone else he'd be
perfectly fine and it would all be forgotten right, quick and in a hurry

thanks for the laugh I look forward to the next comment
Click to expand...
Honestly ? aren't you personally embarrassed about jerry Jones and his decision to sign sign this person ?
 
I'd be more embarrassed if Hardy wasn't as good as he is and Jones
just threw money at his feet to get him in anyways...other than that
his character off the field is not an issue for me
 
TexasCowboy said:
I'd be more embarrassed if Hardy wasn't as good as he is and Jones
just threw money at his feet to get him in anyways...other than that
his character off the field is not an issue for me
Click to expand...

So you don't care if he's an abusive and terrible person, as long as he makes plays for your football team?

At least you're honest. Rather sad, but honest.

And really, is that giant pic necessary? Did your words fail you and you needed to express what was in your head in pictures?
 
Nope what he does off the field is his business not mine, I'm not in
his immediate family, not a friend, colleague, neighbor or even a
stranger he threw change at my feet

I am a football fan, no better than anyone else in life!! judge and ye
shall be judged, the plank is in my eye, he still has the speck in his
he can't control me, I can't control him...all I can hope? is that he
comes to play on Sunday support him like I support the team and
that is it

outside of that there is nothing else that can be done
 
Forgive and be forgiven, forgive not?? so yea I'll chose to forgive
you keep harboring that jealous grudge it's doing wonders for
you
 
IDEXAN said:
Honestly ? aren't you personally embarrassed about jerry Jones and his decision to sign sign this person ?
Click to expand...
Many Cowboys fans are not even openly embarrassed about losing, always tending to make excuses or pointing out their antiquated SB days.......so would you really expect them to be embarrassed about the pathological decision-making of their owner or the psychotic makeup of any of their players?
 
TexasCowboy said:
Forgive and be forgiven, forgive not?? so yea I'll chose to forgive
you keep harboring that jealous grudge it's doing wonders for
you
Click to expand...

Good to know that if I beat the snot out of your mom, sister, or daughter and showed absolutely no remorse you'd be perfectly ok with it and forgive, just as long as I can rush the passer for your football team. Top quality individual here.

And believe me, I'm not jealous whatsoever of being able to manhandle a woman. But hey man, we all have our bars we set.
 
bah007 said:
Charges were dismissed because Holder refused to testify against Hardy after he paid her off. Doesn't change what he did or what he is.
Click to expand...
I'm not justifying him or the such. I was just stating that I thought if a man of his stature did do it, I thought the damage would be worse
 
PHILLYTEXANFAN said:
I'm not justifying him or the such. I was just stating that I thought if a man of his stature did do it, I thought the damage would be worse
Click to expand...

Hope I didn't come across as calling you out. I was only addressing the comment that the charges were dismissed. It's true that they were, but...rumor is their civil settlement is nearly $10M.

That's a lot of money. Based on that, I have to think that her testimony would have guaranteed that charges were not dismissed.
 
PHILLYTEXANFAN said:
Never did I say that... AT ALL... I said, and if you re read my post, I just thought there would be more damage from a man his size
Click to expand...

So you know he could deliver intermediate levels of damage, and you don't necessarily think he had to have given her all he had, and ... wait why would there need to be more damage just because of his size?
 
Mollywhopper said:
So you know he could deliver intermediate levels of damage, and you don't necessarily think he had to have given her all he had, and ... wait why would there need to be more damage just because of his size?
Click to expand...
It's all guessing from my end, I just figured a man his size would have more strength and cause more damage. Normally bigger people deliver more power than someone say 5'9 160
 
TexasCowboy said:
"supposedly" was his "girlfriend" but then again I find it funny
that now pictures surfaced..out of nowhere, so how do we know
those bruises came from Hardy?? she is currently dating some
one else, the details regarding that relationship are unknown
I like giving the benefit of the doubt, while playing devil's
advocate at the same time

but the 2 I was talking about?? were the 2 morons talking trash
from a distance..real easy to say **** to someone when you are
at a distance..talking trash behind their back, it's another when
you confront him like a man which obviously they don't have the
guts to do knowing what Hardy would do to them if they did
Click to expand...


TexasCowboy said:
seen the pics but let's not bullshit anymore, Dallas fans know what this is really all about!!
Hardy is a stand out athlete, he makes defenses better when he plays for them, the last
thing you want to see is Dallas win or get better on any level

And so!!! you drum up the drama and BS, you paint Hardy as the bad guy
cause he hit a women, then you turn around, and pat Ray Carruth and Ray
Lewis on the back for murder

not fooling anyone here
Click to expand...


TexasCowboy said:
Nope what he does off the field is his business not mine, I'm not in
his immediate family, not a friend, colleague, neighbor or even a
stranger he threw change at my feet

I am a football fan, no better than anyone else in life!! judge and ye
shall be judged, the plank is in my eye, he still has the speck in his
he can't control me, I can't control him...all I can hope? is that he
comes to play on Sunday support him like I support the team and
that is it

outside of that there is nothing else that can be done
Click to expand...



Arrogance and stupidity all in the same package.

How efficient of you.
 
Mollywhopper said:
Good to know that if I beat the snot out of your mom, sister, or daughter and showed absolutely no remorse you'd be perfectly ok with it and forgive, just as long as I can rush the passer for your football team. Top quality individual here.

And believe me, I'm not jealous whatsoever of being able to manhandle a woman. But hey man, we all have our bars we set.
Click to expand...

Yep forgive and be forgiven and then let the prison system do with you as they please

WolverineFan said:
Arrogance and stupidity all in the same package.

How efficient of you.
Click to expand...

none of the above actually
 
Marshall said:
Let's trade draft picks then...
Click to expand...

Your 1st rd pick for??? a second and 5th

Marshall said:
Like THAT makes you a man? THAT'S the problem.
Click to expand...


the point here is? if you got something to say to someone say it to them man to man
don't be a punk coward, shouting it from a distance, Hardy would have had some
choice words I am sure but nothing would have came out of it besides words
but at least have the guts to say it to his face
 
The Greg Hardy case is one that I find puzzling as well as dismaying with the legal system. It appears that the state where the alleged assault took place doesn't prosecute if the defendent refuses to testify. I recall the domestic abuse charges filed on Warren Moon when he was in Houston was taken to court even though his former wife did not file charges against him. He was then acquitted in court, but had his day in court.

If Hardy's former girlfriend opted for a cash settlement instead of filing charges, then it appears that money trumps injury. Isn't it possible the charges could stick, then a civil case could follow? At least that way he would be held accountable in court for the assault and battery (criminal) and assault and battery (civil). If the court system would have been used, then it wouldn't be left to the NFL or any franchise in particular to decide on the merits of Hardy's employment present or future.

I do know that the contract is incentive based and there is a big challenge to Hardy if he is a repentive person and will do what every necessary overcome his bad reputation, after all it is possible. However, I don't believe for a moment that the Cowboys organization isn't keeping close tabs on what's going on in his public and private life and they will have no problem with releasing him (Quincy Carter, Adam Jones, Joseph Randle).

Where was the source of the released photos? If court related, why wasn't this enough evidence to take to court? Did NFL see photos? If not, how were they available to Deadspin, but not the NFL? If NFL did see them, why was he initally suspended for only 10 games? Are the 10 games all that NFL could do regardless of the severity because of the Players association? I think anything done now is reactive to a botched investigation in the first place. If this situation doesn't turn his life a 180, we will know soon enough, and we can probably get someone just as good with this excellent draft pick we seem destined to get.
 
StarStruck said:
The Greg Hardy case is one that I find puzzling as well as dismaying with the legal system. It appears that the state where the alleged assault took place doesn't prosecute if the defendent refuses to testify. I recall the domestic abuse charges filed on Warren Moon when he was in Houston was taken to court even though his former wife did not file charges against him. He was then acquitted in court, but had his day in court.

If Hardy's former girlfriend opted for a cash settlement instead of filing charges, then it appears that money trumps injury. Isn't it possible the charges could stick, then a civil case could follow? At least that way he would be held accountable in court for the assault and battery (criminal) and assault and battery (civil). If the court system would have been used, then it wouldn't be left to the NFL or any franchise in particular to decide on the merits of Hardy's employment present or future.

I do know that the contract is incentive based and there is a big challenge to Hardy if he is a repentive person and will do what every necessary overcome his bad reputation, after all it is possible. However, I don't believe for a moment that the Cowboys organization isn't keeping close tabs on what's going on in his public and private life and they will have no problem with releasing him (Quincy Carter, Adam Jones, Joseph Randle).

Where was the source of the released photos? If court related, why wasn't this enough evidence to take to court? Did NFL see photos? If not, how were they available to Deadspin, but not the NFL? If NFL did see them, why was he initally suspended for only 10 games? Are the 10 games all that NFL could do regardless of the severity because of the Players association? I think anything done now is reactive to a botched investigation in the first place. If this situation doesn't turn his life a 180, we will know soon enough, and we can probably get someone just as good with this excellent draft pick we seem destined to get.
Click to expand...

One of the problems with domestic abuse is the historic treatment as a civil matter rather than a criminal matter. Thus the policy of non prosecution without the assistance of the "victim."

This was once a matter of standing when treated a a civil matter, but has been extended, even when there is sufficient evidence without the cooperation of the "victim."

Now, we have swung the other way a bit too much and PRESUME guilt upon accusation. While understandable based on emotions, it makes bad law.

Sometimes thing are as they appear at first glance, but sometimes they aren't. Imagine being attacked by a girl on PCP and leaving bruises as you fight to defend yourself. Would you want to be presumed guilty simply because she had bruises?

This would probably happen infrequently, but the law should be designed to require proof of intent beyond a reasonable doubt. Some would never see reasonable doubt because they KNOW what they think they know. It's always the guys fault.
 
Last edited:
Marshall said:
One of the problems with domestic abuse is the historic treatment as a civil matter rather than a criminal matter. Thus the policy of non prosecution without the assistance of the "victim."

This was once a matter of standing when treated a a civil matter, but has been extended, even when there is sufficient evidence without the cooperation of the "victim."

Now, we have swung the other way a bit too much and PRESUME guilt upon accusation. While understandable based on emotions, it makes bad law.

Sometimes thing are as they appear at first glance, but sometimes they aren't. Imagine being attacked by a girl on PCP and leaving bruises as you fight to defend yourself. Would you want to be presumed guilty simply because she had bruises?

This would probably happen infrequently, but the law should be designed to require proof of intent beyond a reasonable doubt. Some would never see reasonable doubt because they KNOW what they think they know. It's always the guys fault.
Click to expand...

I found this explanation of the difficulties of criminally prosecuting domestic abuse with the victim's cooperation quite interesting.

Why is domestic abuse prosecution so challenging?
While domestic abuse is similar to other violent crimes, prosecutors find that these cases differ in a number of respects which make them especially challenging. Anticipating the difficulties can reduce the frustration of handling this case load.

  1. Battered women may not behave like victims of other violent crimes.

    Many attorneys are drawn to prosecution as a "helping profession." Vigorously prosecuting violent crime usually coincides with what the victims want -- justice, vindication, and restitution. While some battered women will also want prosecution to the fullest extent of the law, many do not. Because of the existing or past relationship, the victim knows that the batterer will see the prosecution as a hostile act by the victim ; he will retaliate against her in some fashion. And despite the best intentions of police and prosecutors, in the battered woman's eyes, the system will not be able to protect her from this retaliation. Prosecution may also threaten the battered woman's financial security if she is dependent on the batterer. Therefore, many battered women are unwilling to participate in the prosecution, and may even take steps to obstruct it.



    Various steps in the criminal process can generate victim hostility. Arrest of a batterer is not necessarily what the victim wants; she may simply want the police to remove her batterer from the home for the night. Mandatory arrest is the appropriate societal response , but it may create a class of unwilling or absent victim/witnesses. This is why knowing how to successfully prosecute a case without the victim's testimony is so important.



    The slow pace of the criminal process exacerbates the problem. By the time the case gets to pre-trial conference, usually months after the arrest, the battered woman likely has put the arrest behind her and has gone on with her life. A trial and possible imprisonment of the batterer seems to the battered woman to risk her personal resolution of the incident, however fragile or temporary.



    The differences between a criminal domestic violence prosecution and the process of obtaining a protection order in civil court further illustrates how the justice system itself can affect a victim's attitude toward the case. Victims often have less trouble testifying about an abusive incident in civil court than in criminal court for two reasons. First, the victim, not the state, decides whether or not to file for a civil protection order and the best time to do so. Second, her testimony about the abuse is heard within days of her filing for the civil protection order, while in criminal court it may be months later.



    The different purposes of criminal prosecution and civil protection orders can cause battered women to view each very differently. Criminal court looks to punish for a prior incident, but civil protection orders, by contrast, focus more on preventing further abuse, with jail only if the batterer abuses again . The victim most likely does not want the abuser to be punished; she just wants the abuse to stop. The civil protection order warns him that there will be consequences if he does not end the abuse.



  2. Prosecutors often feel thwarted in their goal to hold the batterer accountable for his actions when the battered woman is unavailable as a witness.

    One goal of prosecution is to make the defendant accountable to the community for his crime; getting a conviction and administering punishment accomplish this goal. Most violent crime victims are eager to cooperate with the prosecution of the case, and prosecutors come to expect the same of battered women. A battered woman's reluctance is often misunderstood by prosecutors, judges, and juries who come to believe that the victim doesn't care and that they shouldn't bother to proceed or convict. (Ironically, battered women who are eager witnesses are sometimes disbelieved and suspected of being vindictive or of seeking an edge in a divorce or custody battle.) When a battered woman does not want the case to go forward, for reasons discussed above, the prosecutor feels that the main (or sole) proof of the case is lost. No prosecutor likes to dismiss cases, yet they may feel that is their only option.



    Three measures can be taken to avoid problems related to victim unavailability. First, although prosecutors must always anticipate that a victim will become unavailable, some victims will cooperate with prosecution, and prosecutors should try to gain victim's support of the process. One key to battered women's participation is early contact with victim advocates who provide her with information and support about domestic abuse, the criminal court process, and her role in it.



    Second, it is important for all system personnel to understand victim reluctance; it is not intuitive. To accomplish this, system personnel (police, prosecutors, and judges) can receive training. Similarly, expert witnesses can explain victim reluctance for juries when the battered woman does not testify or recants. The prosecution manuals from Iowa and California each contain a good discussion of how prosecutors can use expert witnesses to explain why victims recant or are reluctant to testify, and the Schroeder article is an excellent collection of case law on the subject and contains a careful analysis of the limits on the prosecution's use of such experts.



    Thirdly, working together, police and prosecutors can develop proof of the cases so that they can proceed to conviction without the witness's testimony. Other serious crime is regularly prosecuted without eyewitness testimony: murder and burglary cases, for example. Law enforcement's investigative protocol should require that officers take statements from the defendant and the victim. Both may be admissible over hearsay objections. Emergency communications, such as 911 tapes, are effective pieces of evidence, as are photos of the victim, the defendant, and the scene of the crime. (The Gwinn and O'Dell article explains how police and prosecutors can work together to get convictions without the victim's testimony; and the article by Asmus, et al, discusses other evidentiary issues which are likely to arise in domestic abuse prosecutions.)



  3. Prosecutors must be more sophisticated in their work with domestic violence victims.

    Understandably, prosecutors get frustrated when their good intentions are rebuffed by battered women. Through experience and understanding, prosecutors can learn to expect such a reaction and make accommodations for it. Prosecutors should be prepared to take a variety of approaches in their dealings with victims, and all of these actions should be taken for the purposes of helping to restore some of what she has lost by being battered, and letting her know that prosecution can help to end the battering. Three such approaches are:



    Approach 1 . Try to establish a "partnership" with the battered woman. For example, it is not uncommon for battered women to appear in court the morning after the assault, asking that the charge be dropped. Rather than be annoyed, the prosecutor can view this as an excellent opportunity to make early contact with the battered woman and to establish a good rapport. We know from our experience that meeting with a battered woman early in the criminal court process can result in more women participating in the process. (The Kerry Wangberg article in Prosecutor , included with this packet, suggests this approach as a way to reduce case attrition.) The "unwilling witness" problem can be avoided by taking the time to explain the steps of the criminal system process to her. She should also be provided with information about community resources which can provide her with support or protection: such as shelter, public assistance, or seeing a victim advocate; and the office should facilitate her contact and use of these services. The prosecutor, ideally with a victim advocate, should always work to find common ground with the victim at this early stage of the proceedings. A battered woman may think that the prosecutor expects her to "leave the batterer," as so many others have probably expected of her. The prosecutor can make it clear that the decision about the relationship is her business, not the prosecutor's. The message to convey is that both she and the prosecutor share the goal of ending the violence in her life. The criminal process gives the batterer the opportunity to admit his guilt. The court can assume the responsibility that she has shouldered alone of holding him accountable for changing his behavior. Court-ordered programs for batterers can provide him the opportunity for "counseling" which she likely has hoped he would pursue. As the battered woman and prosecutor explore common ground, the goal should be to "agree to disagree" when necessary. For instance, if a prosecutor believes that jail time is appropriate and the battered woman disagrees, the prosecutor can tell the victim that she can provide independent input about case disposition to the judge at time of sentencing by means of victim allocution or a victim impact statement.



    Approach 2 . Subpoena the victim to testify in every domestic abuse case. Subpoenas are useful because they shield the victim from pressure from the batterer; she can tell him that it is not her decision to testify. Some battered women will testify truthfully after they get a subpoena and receive support and information that it is the state, not they, who "press charges." Subpoenas absolve her of the burden of deciding whether or not the case should proceed. Many battered women express relief when told that they cannot have the charges dropped and that the decision to testify is not theirs to make. But not all battered women will testify; many decide that it is best for their safety or situation not to testify, or to lie under oath. These women would rather face contempt of court or a perjury charge than the wrath of their batterer. For this reason, forcing a battered women to comply with a subpoena is not advisable as a general rule. When she is sanctioned for disobeying a subpoena, the prosecutor fails to meet the purpose of criminal justice intervention in three respects. First, the batterer will likely not be held accountable because the prosecutor's actions foreclose future arrest or conviction. Second, battered women are neither protected nor is their sense of power and control over their lives strengthened. Lastly, no situation is as ironic as when a batterer is freed because the victim refuses to testify, and the victim ends up in jail for disobeying a subpoena. The public response to this "justice" only results in ridicule and greater disrespect for the system.



    Approach 3 . Proceed with the case without the victim's testimony if she becomes an unavailable or hostile witness. Many battered women will testify when they have information and support throughout the process. However, since not all do, the prosecutor must be prepared to proceed with every case without victim testimony. If the police and prosecutor know the reasons why victims do not testify, they should be prepared -- in every case -- for the eventuality that she may become absent or hostile at any time. Therefore, police and prosecutors should build their cases so that they can be proved without the testimony of the battered woman. When necessary, expert testimony can be used to explain the victim's absence or hostility. (The Gwinn and O'Dell article is an excellent resource for police and prosecutors who wish to develop this approach. The Iowa Prosecution Manual , chapter 5, contains an in-depth discussion of the complexity of victim issues in domestic violence cases.)



  4. Prosecutors must use new measures of "success."

    If prosecutors cling to conviction or dismissal rates, or the gratitude of a cooperative witness as measures of success in domestic abuse work, they may set themselves up for failure. Prosecutors can get convictions in these cases if they use special techniques for working with victims or investigating and developing evidence. But another measure is more indicative of the success of prosecutorial intervention into domestic violence -- that battered women feel that the criminal justice system is available to them if and when they need to use it in the future. This is accomplished, whether or not there is a conviction, when battered women receive support and information throughout the process and when they are not punished for being absent from the process or for being hostile toward it.
Click to expand...
 
I support PEOPLE, both men and women, who are truly victims. But passion about ending abuse should go hand in hand with passion for those wrongly or falsely accused by vindictive and malicious manipulators. Both can and do ruin lives.
 
Eagles season looks over. KELLY rolled his Chips all on Bradford, giving us a reminder just how important it is to have a QB capable of staying on the field to run an offense. Sanchez is horrible making Stafford look great in comparison. If Stafford is made available he would be worth it!
 
beerlover said:
Eagles season looks over. KELLY rolled his Chips all on Bradford, giving us a reminder just how important it is to have a QB capable of staying on the field to run an offense. Sanchez is horrible making Stafford look great in comparison. If Stafford is made available he would be worth it!
Click to expand...
No way Stafford becomes available but if he was I would take him every day of the week and twice on Sunday.
 
NFC East leading Philly Eagles have a big game tonight vs Dallas. Fly Eagles, fly high !
 
thunderkyss said:
Philly beat the Patriots yesterday.

Dallas plays the Redskins tonight.
Click to expand...

lol. I support my Boys forever and tonight either a win and still a ray of hope in a weak division or first time in years a very high draft pick. At this point, I'm cool with either.
 
thunderkyss said:
Philly beat the Patriots yesterday.

Dallas plays the Redskins tonight.
Click to expand...
True Dat, and for sure confusion on my part. Dunno why but I've confused the Eagles with the Redskins before, though the Eagles are my goto NFC team ?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top