JohnC

Cugalbanza/eball, Especially when it gets near to the medal rounds Olympic hockey is terrific to watch. There is a constant flow to the game and the skill level is highlighted. You see a lot less interference and more unfettered skating. The skill of the players is on display and not the thuggery that slows down the game. A lot of the designated enforcers are having serious medical problems when their careers are over. You can still have a physical game without the fighting and it be entertaining. Yesterday, Florida thoroughly outplayed the Sabres and handily won the game. Kane gets in three fights and fans act as if their team won. Nonsense.

In this case the paperwork for warrants for an arrest are filed by the police and then go to the district attorney for review. The district attorney's office then makes the determination whether to officially issue the arrest warrant. In this case the paperwork by the police for an arrest warrant was quickly done. That suggests something to me but maybe not to you. The police do know what to charge but that doesn't mean that the district attorney will go by the initial charge/s in the warrant petition. They can raise the charge or lower the charge or dismiss the charge as they deem appropriate. In this case the police do need a warrant to make an arrest because it was a case that needed to be investigated. A misdemeanor offense committed in front of a police officer doesn't require a warrant. But even in that type of arrest the case needs to be papered, which means that the officer takes the paperwork to a prosecuting attorney who will then review the case and determine whether to proceed or not.

Mike Robataille is part of a lawsuit against the league regarding health and safety issues. I know that I am in the minority but I am against fighting. It takes a toll on the combatants, especially the designated fighters. There is no fighting in college hockey and in the olympics. Both are an excellent brand of hockey. http://www.wgrz.com/news/local/former-sabre-takes-action-against-nhl/38677977

The attorneys review the warrants. That is normal. If the police have a flimsy case then the prosecuting attorney's won't sign off on the warrant. It's not unusual for the police to be told they need more evidence or issues need to be clarified. This case has been moving very quickly. Maybe not to your liking but there has been a quick response. If there is a delay that isn't a bad thing. It is a good thing in that the investigation is being carefully done. As I said in the prior posts the fact that the police quickly drew up warrants (not yet reviewed by the prosecutor) indicated to me that they had or felt they had enough evidence to make a case. Let's just wait another day or two and see how it plays out.

IK wasn't charged because the victim (qb Smith) didn't file a complaint. If he did the case would have been investigated by the authorities.

Yes, According to what I read in the paper today he won't be suspended until he is cleared to play. That is not to say that the team won't start the suspension just prior to being ready.

Reports are that it is imminent. In a day or two they should be issued. At least that is what some reports indicate.

Without a doubt this is a high profile case. Odds are that the supervisor in the office is going to assign this to one of the better attorneys in the office.

What's telling is that an arrest warrant was issued so quickly. That lends me to believe that there is plenty of corroborating witness statements. If the case was muddled and there was a lot of conflicting testimony the investigation would take much longer. If almost everyone is giving the same accounts (my speculation) then that would lend me to believe that what happened is clear to the police after they interviewed the parties involved and the witnesses in the establishment, including the employees. Let's look at the scenario. This is a membership club. So for the most part everyone is known by everyone else, at least from a casual acquaintance standpoint. McCoy is a prominent Philly athlete who probably was known by everyone or almost everyone in the club. So when an argument happened that included McCoy almost everyone in the establishment knew that he was involved. I don't believe that this is the type of club situation where an argument happens in one area of the club and others in the other area don't know what is happening. I haven't seen any film regarding the brawl. So I can't comment on that. Let the process run and the facts come out. I'm very comfortable with my inclinations on this case (which I haven't stated). My recommendation to McCoy is to get the best attorney money can buy because he is in a serious legal bind and his career may also be in jeopardy.

I don't agree with you that because the victims took themselves to the hospital that it changed the dynamics of this case. This is going to be a witness driven case. If the victims' claims match the employee and patron witnesses claims then it is a solid case. I think you are over-thinking this case. It should be noted that if a victim instigated the situation that doesn't give the aggrieved party the right to stomp the living daylights out of him. If a neighbor yells at your kid you don't have the right to take a sledge hammer and hit him in the head. A proportional response is very relevant in this case. Very often in a bar brawl no one is totally right but that doesn't mean one isn't more wrong. Let's allow the process to run its course. It should become very evident what happened when the facts come out.

This isn't a NCIS type case where science is going to solve this case. If a person has clean clothes it doesn't prove anything because the clothes weren't given up immediately. You can get clothes cleaned. But it is irrelevant because the authorities weren't asking for the clothes. The police don't have to have possession of the shoes you used to stomp a person with if five witnesses point out that you were doing the stomping. The police may or may not have pictures or need it of your bruised hand in which you punched someone in the face and broke their nose and face if five witnessing give statements indicating you did. The parties involved were identified and were thrown out of the premises. So who was involved is known. I don't see this as a very complicated case. This is a witness driven case and I get the impression that the witnesses are consistent in their reporting. Some people are over-thinking this case. My recommendation is to use common-sense and stop watching the NCIS type shows. Let's wait and see how this turns out. I know what I think and I am comfortable with my premature opinion. .

The difference in this bar brawl from others is that some of the off-duty cops got hurt. This wasn't a case where the opposing combative parties got thrown out and each party went on their own way. One group got hurt to the extent where they took themselves to the hospital. This isn't your everyday type of bar brawl. It involved off-duty police members and a high profile professional football player. So whether the authorities wanted it to be or not be it became a high profile and priority case. It also has to be remembered that the party that got hurt filed police reports. So official action had to follow. This isn't an NCIS type of crime where scientific evidence is the key to the case. This is a case where witnesses are the main factor in solving (sorting out) this case. What do the parties say, what do the employees say and what do the patrons say? I don't want to jump the gun but from what I have read it doesn't seem like it is a very challenging case to solve. Let the facts speak for itself. Use some common sense and the outcome will become apparent to most. According to sources the arrest warrant is imminent and the court case will be way down the line.

Absolutely. Especially if a number of employees make the same claim. If the employee statements are consistent with numerous patron statements then the case gets solidified. It should be noted that employees are usually more sober than the drinking customers! As I said in a prior post the club has a stake in cooperating with the authorities because their liquor license can be suspended and the club can be closed for running an unruly establishment. The club management is not going to play games here and act as if they were blind to what happened. That type of willful ignorance can get their establishment closed, especially a private club.

According to sources an arrest warrant for McCoy is imminent http://www.wgr550.com/Report-Arrest-warrant-expected-for-LeSean-McCoy/22450753 Kirby, I addressed the video issue on post #617. In a case like this where police personnel are involved in an "incident" the last thing the authorities want to do is get the case wrong. Because of the high profile nature of the case it will be considered a high priority case, especially compared to other bar fight cases, and adequate resources will be dedicated to this case. This case moved very quickly. Sometimes the facts of a case are easy to determine and it isn't much of a mystery of what exactly happened. This case seems to fall in that category. With respect to this case being a possible embarrassment to the police that is not its primary concern. It will be a bigger embarrassment to the police if this case is not handled properly. The chips will fall as they may. Making a good case regardless who is involved is what they want to do here.

You bring up a good point. The establishment has a stake in cooperating with the authorities because their liquor license and ability to operate is at stake.

The victims' testimonies are not worthless if they match up with what other witnesses say, such as employees and patrons at the club. If the bartender or server confirms the claim that the off-duty cops were served the champagne before the others that certainly is material if it was taken from them. Witness statements are very often inconclusive and contradictory. But if statements are taken from a number of people who were at the event and for the most part they are consistent with each other then there is certainly a clarity to what happened. Just because there is a video it doesn't always tell you what the full story of the situation of how it started and the verbal exchanges were between the parties. So not having the video isn't necessarily fatal to making a case one way or another.

There is no doubt that McCoy is a premier talent but in hindsight was it smart to invest so much money in a back when a good back can be had for a reasonable price? He had a rich contract with the Eagles when he was acquired.. The GM then boosted that contract to make him more amenable to coming to Buffalo. All the facts in the Philly bar altercation haven't come out yet but from what has already come out he looks to be in serious legal and league trouble. This guy has been associated with a string of questionable incidents that paint a picture of a person who not only has bad judgment but has a hostile attitude. I don't want to come off as a revisionist because I was in favor of acquiring such a play making back. But I was troubled when his contract was reworked and I was also very troubled when he called his former coach a racist and then cowardly refused to take his phone call. He has also been associated with a string of troubling incidents. I'm not prejudging.the bar fracas just yet because all the facts haven't come out yet. But if you ask me what my premature opinion is on how this is going to turn out from what I already know I would say that he is in serious legal trouble. In cases such as this regardless who the individual is I say the person should be held accountable for his/her actions.

Simple solution. Artificial turf.

The off-duty cops getting hurt has little bearing on whether they are innocent or not. The question is what exactly happened? Who instigated it and what was the reaction. A person can start a problem such as bumping into someone in a bar or look lasciviously at your babe but that doesn't give the aggrieved party the right to take a bat and beat the person over the head. The off-duty cops certainly can be in trouble from the way they behaved in the bar. Were they drunk? Were they acting loudly and being ill-mannered. Those types of behavior that bring ill-repute to the organization can certainly get them in trouble with their department, even if they have no legal liabilities associated with the brawl.

I know we are not near the cap now but we do have a number of young players who would be going into their next contract in the same vicinity of time.

Neeraj is one of the main contributors on this board under a new name. I'm not saying who it is because I don't know if he wants to be known. The person he would constantly argue with is George Melino. They were constantly going at it. One would say up; the other would say down; one would say yes; the other would say no; one would say stop; the other would say go; one would say it was blue; the other would say it was green; one would say your farts stink; the other would say my farts are aromatic; one would say ying; the other would say yang. The bickering would never end. In other words they were soul-mates.

I understand your position that players fall under the category of "entertainers" and not public servants but I respectfully and strenuously disagree with your stance. The individual players don't only represent themselves by the manner in which they conduct themselves but they also represent the league. If an entertainer endorsed a product and was involved in "incidents" then the company that they are representing certainly don't want someone who is promoting their product to behave in a manner that doesn't represent the values of the company. If a player gets involved in a brawl that he didn't initiate that doesn't mean that the league is going to tolerate that type of conduct in public. Is it unfair that the standard is higher for the player than it is for the public in general? Not in my eyes and not in the eyes of the league. The same type of higher standard applies in the corporate world. It is not unusual for a company to take a dim view of someone who is identified with the company to expect them to behave in a higher standard than what other people are expected to behave. I'm not judging anyone's behavior here because I don't have the facts. But the point I am stressing is that for some public people being involved in an "incident", even in a tangential manner, can get you in trouble with your employer. The concept of a code of conduct is very often applied to employees' behavior outside of the workplace. Is it unfair? That is not the issue. It is a reality of being a professional athlete. Some athletes find it a challenge to stay within the boundaries of good conduct while most athletes don't.

There is an aspect to this incident that can affect McCoy's employment whether he is guilty or not of a criminal offense. It relates to conduct. Even if he didn't initiate the situation or was simply with the people who were more engaged with the fight he still could be punished by the league. As a pro football player the repercussions from such an incident whether directly or indirectly involved is different from the public in general. The same repercussions can happen to the off-duty policemen who were involved in this fracas. Don't doubt that their police departments are not going to review how they conducted themselves whether they were charged or not. This type of incident is routinely investigated by Internal Affairs offices. It is probable that the off-duty policemen's behavior will be scrutinized separate from the official criminal and court proceedings. The conduct rules for public servants and pro athletes are different from the public at large. It's not an issue of fairness or treating people the same. It is an issue of the nature of their jobs that requires a higher standard than what the regular person is expected to live up to.

You are a sly devil. In a very circuitous way you are blaming Rex. This accusatory club has a large membership. I also like Whaley a lot. Yes the cap is tight. But the reason he was willing to spend was to break the ignominious non-playoff drought. I understand his reasoning and stance so on the cap issue I'm not going to be critical.

If that is the case then we need someone to scout the Jets; board for us. I'm always going to be a Fitz fan. He's carved out a lucrative career for himself. It beats the grind of working on Wall Street and being glued to the computer screen.