180 replies to this topic

[Ravens2006]

Yeah, I don't know what he did or didn't do. Just let the process play out. Politicians grandstanding on something they honestly don't care about is stupid. There are probably many domestic incidents reported that trigger a police response every single day in Baltimore county. Nobody is messaging the county executive on any of these other incidents demanding release of all the calls reports or evidence.

[weird-O]

Well, if he has done something bad, we know the Ravens organization will pretend they didn't see what they saw, or hear what they heard. They'll stand by their guy and shower him with accolades. Then in 10 years, they'll invite him back, call him a legend, and celebrate his ability to catch a ball and slap a ho.  

 

It's the NFL

[cprenegade]

I agree that the letter sent to Johnny Olszewki from local reps is probably a degree of political grandstanding.  It is an election year and all of the reps on the letter are republican and Johnny O is a democrat who just happens to be running for the house of representative seat that Dutch Ruppersberger is vacating.  So I get that.

 

But, 911 calls are a matter of public record.  Other requests to the BPD have been honored and aired on news programs.  If the BPD is building a case against Flowers, or any other person involved, and they feel that releasing the tapes would hinder that, then by all means they should reserve the right to hold those tapes back.  For the public, the fanbase, they can wait.  Let the process play out.  But I can understand news organizations wanting to get their hands on them.  The news is always competing to break the story.  And if the tapes are a matter of public record they should be released or a valid reason given why they cannot be released.  

[BaltBird 24]

Does it really matter if the information comes out today, a week from now, a month from now, or 6 months from now?

Politicians need to keep their nose of out active investigations and worry about the f'd up state of the lives of their constituents.

[Ravens2006]

Are 911 calls related to a domestic dispute considered unfettered public record? The "domestic violence" angle specifically. I ask only because I (think I) know that domestic, sexual, and minor related case / incident information is protected more than if 25 year old NFL player John Doe went in to a convenience store and robbed it with a gun. Protecting the identity of the victim (or even minor perpetrator) is taken far more seriously now than it was 20+ years ago it seems.

And yeah... more anger and outrage at the price of everything from a bottle of soda to home insurance doubling in the last 4 years would be nice to see from our elected officials too...

[Mackus]

Are 911 calls related to a domestic dispute considered unfettered public record? The "domestic violence" angle specifically. I ask only because I (think I) know that domestic, sexual, and minor related case / incident information is protected more than if 25 year old NFL player John Doe went in to a convenience store and robbed it with a gun. Protecting the identity of the victim (or even minor perpetrator) is taken far more seriously now than it was 20+ years ago it seems.

 

All 911 calls are public record, but just because something is public record doesn't mean it automatically gets released to the public upon anyone making the request without consideration of things like privacy of the victim.

[Mike in STL]

We've been here, haven't we? Audio of what's on that tape could be as detrimental as video on an Atlantic City elevator. Politicians grandstanding? Maybe. But it sure seems like special treatment is being applied here to protect certain valuable entities, which is BS, yet typical in this country. 

 

The Ravens can explain away anything if the tapes never see the light of day. They were prepared to do it once. 

[Mackus]

But it sure seems like special treatment is being applied here to protect certain valuable entities, which is BS, yet typical in this country.

Or they aren't releasing it because the victim doesn't want them to or they think the victim wouldn't want them to. The public interest to hear the call doesn't automatically outweigh the victim's right to privacy amongst several other rights. Gotta go through a judge for that, not just a standard public information request.

[makoman]

I prefer transparency but I’m not going to assume some sketchy coverup is happening ~3 weeks in. He could be charged today for all we know. If he’s playing in the fall and we never hear anything about it again that will feel suspicious. For now I can assume there’s a reasonable reason to not be completely transparent.

[Mike in STL]

Or they aren't releasing it because the victim doesn't want them to or they think they victim wouldn't want them to.  The public interest to hear the call doesn't automatically outweigh the victim's right to privacy amongst several other rights.  Gotta go through a judge for that, not just a standard public information request.

Would we know if the victim doesn't want the tapes to be released? 

 

It's just weird. Flowers, and all wealthy people for that matter, can kind of get away with this stuff if the victim choses the wealth and all that comes with it over justice against their abusers. Flowers has the benefit of being that victim's golden ticket to a lavish lifestyle, aside from the abuse. If she chooses that, that's her choice, and that's really sad. Or she can come forward, Zay gets dumped from the NFL, does whatever you do with a degree in communications, and the victim is still a victim, but a poor one to boot.

 

The longer it goes on, the more it feels like Zay getting away with something terrible. Like most rich people do at some point.   

 

To me, I don't need to hear the tapes ASAP. I just feel that if Zay Flowers the football player was Zay Flowers the Applebee's waiter, this is already done and there isn't anything to hide. 

 

I don't put anything past those with an interest in making this go away so Zay comes out clean in the end. Whether that means execs in the Ravens FO, Ravens superfans in the PD, Zay's representation, the victim herself, all of the above?

[Slidemaster]

The further and further we get from the apparent date of the incident, and even from the initial rumors, the more likely I think it is that either nothing is going to happen, or there at least is not enough credible evidence for the police to move on anything.

To be clear, that doesn't mean that Zay didn't do anything, but I also don't know how much sense it makes to move forward assuming that he's also guilty of beating his girlfriend.

At some point you just have to trust that the police did their job and what happens is what happens.

[Steve55]

The further and further we get from the apparent date of the incident, and even from the initial rumors, the more likely I think it is that either nothing is going to happen, or there at least is not enough credible evidence for the police to move on anything.

To be clear, that doesn't mean that Zay didn't do anything, but I also don't know how much sense it makes to move forward assuming that he's also guilty of beating his girlfriend.

At some point you just have to trust that the police did their job and what happens is what happens.

 

 

The league could do its own investigation.

[jamesdean]

The fact that there's two separate incidents in different states, there's a lot of smoke in that fire. But if his girlfriend doesn't press charges and there aren't any witnesses coming forward, there's not much police can do about it. In today's world, though, I have a suspicion that there's at least a phone/audio recording of something related to it.

[Mackus]

The fact that there's two separate incidents in different states

Two separate incidents?

[Slidemaster]

The league could do its own investigation.

They could, and maybe they should, but it seems like at worst he might get a few games for conduct rather than being arrested.

[Ravens2006]

Thought I read somewhere that a report made in MA on Jan 21st was regarding an incident in MD on the 16th. Maybe I'm wrong, but if not, then it seems like one incident reported twice to authorities in different states.

Wanna play the hypothetical games? Maybe a friend or family member in MA knew about some conflict in MD and decided to contact local authorities? I have no idea, just throwing out a possibility I guess.

That said, I don't think the NFL should be conducting any sort of official investigation of their own with the goal of doling out punishment until after any legal investigation is concluded. I get they're going to do their due diligence and try to get as much info as they can because... just because. But punishment for an accusation that hasn't even resulted in a CHARGE yet is a dangerous and slippery slope. Been saying that for years.

The Terps lost to Illinois yesterday while Terrance Shannon played despite a open and active RAPE charge. According to some article about his reinstatement by a federal court:

"...SPRINGFIELD, Ill. — A federal judge on Friday reinstated Illinois basketball star Terrence Shannon Jr., who had been suspended from the team since he was charged with rape in Kansas.

U.S. District Court Judge Colleen Lawless found that the university had violated Shannon's civil rights.

The suspension, she ruled, deprived Shannon of “protected property interests” without due process. In the case of Shannon, whom the court noted is supporting several family members, his property interests include retaining his chances to be an NBA lottery pick — among the first 14 players taken in the draft — and to cash in on potential endorsements allowed under the NCAA's name, image and likeness (NIL) policy..."

[Ravens2006]

Been saying it for years... but the league and teams would be wise to defer comment and any thought of disciplinary actions (about off the field, out of the facility issues) until after the legal system has run it's own course. Because "innocent until proven guilty" is still a real legal standard despite social media's own agendas.

I used to be of the mindset that there should be no suspensions until at least offical CHARGES have been filed. I still feel like that's a good line in the sand of sorts. Suspension with pay, as they haven't been found guilty but also won't draw more attention detrimental to the team by not being there. But the federal court decision on the Illinois player sets a precedent that could very well be leveraged by all future "charged but not convicted" athletes. In all sports.

[Mackus]

Been saying it for years... but the league and teams would be wise to defer comment and any thought of disciplinary actions (about off the field, out of the facility issues) until after the legal system has run it's own course. Because "innocent until proven guilty" is still a real legal standard despite social media's own agendas.

 

Innocent until proven guilty is a legal standard, its not an employment standard.  Legal systems move slowly because they have to be correct, as they are taking away liberty when you get convicted of serious charges.  Employers don't have to follow the same burden of proof or judicious timeline.

 

I don't think we have enough information to form any strong opinions about Zay's case.  But if there was that info and I thought he was guilty, I'd cut him immediately, even if law enforcement hasn't completed their handling of the case yet.  Cutting somebody isn't sending them to prison, so from an employers perspective I wouldn't agree at all with the "better to let 100 guilty go free than send 1 innocent to jail" mindset that the court systems have to have.  

[makoman]

I don’t feel like reading the decision but a district court decision isn’t going to be any type of binding precedent, and who knows how applicable it is to a league where the players agree to certain penalties via a CBA. I do agree that caution and letting more info come out is the right approach at this point, especially since it’s the offseason and there is no need to rush in handing down any penalties.

[Pedro Cerrano]

Innocent until proven guilty is a legal standard, its not an employment standard.  Legal systems move slowly because they have to be correct, as they are taking away liberty when you get convicted of serious charges.  Employers don't have to follow the same burden of proof or judicious timeline.

 

I don't think we have enough information to form any strong opinions about Zay's case.  But if there was that info and I thought he was guilty, I'd cut him immediately, even if law enforcement hasn't completed their handling of the case yet.  Cutting somebody isn't sending them to prison, so from an employers perspective I wouldn't agree at all with the "better to let 100 guilty go free than send 1 innocent to jail" mindset that the court systems have to have.  

 

Spot on, as always.