GoBills808 Posted December 4, 2018 Posted December 4, 2018 1 minute ago, Boyst62 said: Um... Again, whatever world you live in is not like the US structure, bruh. If you press charges you do not hire an attorney. The state pays for the prosecution of the individual. If this woman pressed charges against Hunt she would have the state represent her in court and Hunt would be able to either represent himself or hire an attorney. Further, if she did and because this is a celebrity she would have someone like Michael Avenatti or Gloria Allred willing to provide representation pro Bono for exposure. But, no, to file charges you do not need an attorney. You do not need anything other than a police report which you sign off on after providing tour statement. At that point the district attorney and prosecutor, etc does it all for free. Oh man. @BringBackFergy please...help me unpack.
boyst Posted December 4, 2018 Posted December 4, 2018 1 minute ago, row_33 said: it's a famous person with $$$, nothing applies to him as it would to non-famous non-rich people That's cute but there is no factual basis for this that couldn't be swayed ridiculously. 2 minutes ago, Hapless Bills Fan said: "Absolutely nothing" is not totally accurate - criminal charges would certainly be considered to impact an employer's conduct policy. Perhaps "no necessary connection" or "no required connection" would be a better choice of words. (Bold used for usual reasons - for emphasis) Employer discipline for violation of their personal conduct policy does not, nor should it, require criminal charges, because it does not necessarily involve conduct which would be subject to criminal charges. Example: my previous employer prohibited employees from talking to the media about anything involving the company. A young IT employee gave a radio interview about an active shooter situation on site vs. the mandated "I can't comment, please contact the PR department" and was fired. A different employee gave a radio interview about an active shooter situation at his home address, not involving the company in any way or mentioning his employer, and was not disciplined. Neither did anything in the least bit illegal. One violated company policy, one did not. Bringing this firmly back to the football relevant discussion at hand, Hunt has been caught on videotape engaging in behavior that would appear to be a pretty straightforward case of violating the NFL's conduct policy. If he's smart, he'll say "yep, did it, made a mistake, compounded mistake by lying about it to team investigation, bad move, want to mend my ways and put this behind me" Which sounds like just what he's doing. "If the individual is smart" they can and will contest employer discipline? The smart course for individuals who mess up and violate their employer's conduct policies is not necessarily to contest them in court. It's to recognize that they screwed up and say so and move on, before they poison the well with every potential employer. First 3 paragraphs: I've seen similar. I've seen someone terminated for driving incorrectly on the way to work. Saw another fired on the clock for using the women's restroom when the men's was full and no Hazzard of having a woman present. Strange things can and do happen. 3rd paragraph Spot on. And he will get a suspension if all holds up like it should and be able to rejoin his pursuit of happiness at a later date. 4th The individual is always smart. It is the group that is dumb. Too much groupthink in these situations has led to bad torte establishment. If one is wrongfully accused and formerly found not guilty than the individual who suffered the injustice generally doesn't take recourse against the employer but could. The smartest seek it out against the alleged victim/wrongful accusor for damages. This happens much more often than pursuing legal action against a former employer. In today's legal system it's cheaper and easier for the prosecutor to overcharge and seek a plea deal than seek out an actual trial or test of the Justice system. Many folks take plea deals to save themselves many things, unfortunately. Thanksfully we have folks like Janus and Masterpiece who stick to their beliefs and create a better world for us all. 1 minute ago, GoBills808 said: Oh man. @BringBackFergy please...help me unpack. Legally you do not need representation to file a charge. Why is that difficult to establish? I've copied 3 more attorneys. 2 left sided. 2 right sided. ?. But all equally skillful in the art of legal stuffs. save for eball, he's a UNC fan and has bad judgement as such. @eball @Koko78 @Coach Tuesday
Hapless Bills Fan Posted December 4, 2018 Posted December 4, 2018 32 minutes ago, Boyst62 said: And further, what proof and burden of proof is used? In those cases where you work at Walmart or your institution the police are involved when not at work in cases and they'll generally wait until there is at least a charge before termination. There hasn't been a charge for Hunt because charges were declined by the "victims," so your point isn't that strong.??♂️. Not necessarily. Depends upon the company and the position you hold. For a stocker or a checker, probably the police would have to be involved. For a position where "moral probity" or the equivalent is required, not at all. If you're the CFO of a company, and allegations surface that you misused your position as a church deacon to misappropriate funds, bet your bippy the company isn't gonna wait around to see if police arrest you or if the church presses charges. 32 minutes ago, Boyst62 said: We are on the same page but I think we need to establish a better society where convictions of guilt matter more than persecutions and allegations. We need to entrust those who are professionally trained to do these things. The NFL most certainly has experts willing to do these tasks but also must protect their interests and weigh the discipline and merits of cause vs. the degradation of quality in their product. I'm not sure if we're on the same page or not. I don't want to see people suffer life-altering consequences based on persecution or allegation, but I also think that community standards extend far further than the law, and that they should do so. I think the NFL is doing a piss-poor job of protecting their image and they need to do better, but adopting a policy to wait upon criminal charges won't improve this. Adopting a more consistent, uniform policy of investigation and consequences would help them. Right now they seem video and publicity driven and that's not right either.
GoBills808 Posted December 4, 2018 Posted December 4, 2018 Just now, Boyst62 said: Legally you do not need representation to file a charge. Why is that difficult to establish? I've copied 3 more attorneys. 2 left sided. 2 right sided. ?. But all equally skillful in the art of legal stuffs. save for eball, he's a UNC fan and has bad judgement as such. @eball @Koko78 @Coach Tuesday Good. We need as many legal eyeballs on this one as possible. I'm putting the o/u on how much she'd need at $15,000...you're obviously taking the under at 0. PS- Not to 'file a charge'. To bring a case against Hunt for damages. Because that's what we were talking about. PPS- North Carolina Berry Seeder Company is a solid outfit. A+ from this side of the pond (the other pond).
boyst Posted December 4, 2018 Posted December 4, 2018 2 minutes ago, GoBills808 said: Good. We need as many legal eyeballs on this one as possible. I'm putting the o/u on how much she'd need at $15,000...you're obviously taking the under at 0. PS- Not to 'file a charge'. To bring a case against Hunt for damages. Because that's what we were talking about. PPS- North Carolina Berry Seeder Company is a solid outfit. A+ from this side of the pond (the other pond). Why would she need to sue for damages? To what? If she needs to sue for damages but not criminal allegations?!? ??? And in her status she could get a pro Bono attorney cheap because the likely windfall and his likelihood to settle out of court is easily 6 figures.
Cripple Creek Posted December 4, 2018 Posted December 4, 2018 2 hours ago, Hapless Bills Fan said: OK, you want the NFLPA destroyed and the CBA challenged because you think unions are "unamerican" and the NFL is hypocritical. Your views, and you have a right to them. But recognize those are very different goals and based on a different premise than the position you appeared to be arguing and some of us were responding to. You've gone from what seemed like asserting that the NFL has no standing to investigate: " the official group [ie law enforcement] that is legally responsible and the only body able to investigate the activity determined to do nothing." or that Hunt was not being afforded a chance to be questioned: " persecution style retaliation style retribution and punishment upon those who have not had a chance to be vetted, questioned and held up to investigation in their events/actions", to acknowledging that the NFL as the employer has legal rights to investigate and take action that Hunt and the NFLPA granted them. You just don't like them or the collective bargaining process that conferred those rights. Again, your right but a different view than you were expressing, and beyond the scope of football discussion to debate here. Your last sentence is a bit incoherent to me, but if you sign an employment contract stating that you can be disciplined for prohibited conduct, including violence, assault, domestic violence etc and you're on film doing one or more of the above....I don't think you'd have grounds for a wrongful termination suit. No one is ever found "innocent of the charges presented" in a court of law. They are found "guilty beyond a reasonable doubt" or "not guilty beyond a reasonable doubt" in criminal court and "more likely than not" in civil court. Or maybe the police didn't fail miserably. Maybe they looked at the victim's injuries and spoke to her and decided she wasn't a credible witness and it didn't rise to a standard of legal proof the prosecutors they work with would press charges on. The point is the police and court systems are not the only organizations with standing here - the NFL, as Hunt's employer, also has standing to investigate and act which Hunt, through his employment contract and the CBA, have granted them. And Hunt apparently lied to his team about his actions that night and is now caught "red footed" as it were, with conduct the CBA specifically calls out as subject to discipline. Apparently Boyst hates unions and the NFLPA and the CBA. Bully for Him, but currently, they are what they are and they grant the NFL standing here and specifically call out assault as conduct subject to discipline, regardless of legal charges. Saying "well it shouldn't be that way" when it is, that's a way different point than arguing that the police/police charges ought to be the only ones investigating and their action/inaction should be accepted by all. Speaking specifically to the point of the local PD. Wouldn’t you expect them to at the least request to view the security footage? They indicated that they did not.
boyst Posted December 4, 2018 Posted December 4, 2018 5 minutes ago, Hapless Bills Fan said: Not necessarily. Depends upon the company and the position you hold. For a stocker or a checker, probably the police would have to be involved. For a position where "moral probity" or the equivalent is required, not at all. If you're the CFO of a company, and allegations surface that you misused your position as a church deacon to misappropriate funds, bet your bippy the company isn't gonna wait around to see if police arrest you or if the church presses charges. I'm not sure if we're on the same page or not. I don't want to see people suffer life-altering consequences based on persecution or allegation, but I also think that community standards extend far further than the law, and that they should do so. I think the NFL is doing a piss-poor job of protecting their image and they need to do better, but adopting a policy to wait upon criminal charges won't improve this. Adopting a more consistent, uniform policy of investigation and consequences would help them. Right now they seem video and publicity driven and that's not right either. Splitting a lot of hairs with the first part and I agree with what you say. Seocnd part we are on the same page. I just see it unpossible for the NFL to administer such a system with the current state of the NFL. These guys are preyed upon by anyone and everyone looking to better their life. The image of the NFL is piss poor for good reason. It's mismanagement and until they can figure out a way to establish a basis to punish these situations they will be lost.
GoBills808 Posted December 4, 2018 Posted December 4, 2018 5 minutes ago, Boyst62 said: Why would she need to sue for damages? To what? If she needs to sue for damages but not criminal allegations?!? ??? And in her status she could get a pro Bono attorney cheap because the likely windfall and his likelihood to settle out of court is easily 6 figures. Just stop talking for a minute. This is getting ugly.
boyst Posted December 4, 2018 Posted December 4, 2018 Just now, Cripple Creek said: Speaking specifically to the point of the local PD. Wouldn’t you expect them to at the least request to view the security footage? They indicated that they did not. You'd think they could and maybe should but they don't have to and there were other factors that came in to this: likely the woman not wanting to press charges, for example. Still, the prosecutor could have issued a summons/affidavit for arrsst without the police support Just now, GoBills808 said: Just stop talking for a minute. This is getting ugly. ...why? It's not ugly. You're just not making any lick of sense. The woman doesn't need an attorney to press criminal charges.
Gugny Posted December 4, 2018 Posted December 4, 2018 Just now, Boyst62 said: So present to me empirical facts that support that's what happened and happens in every case as you implied. And present to me facts that one cannot legally contest wrongful termination for wrongful termination. 0-4 Can? Of course they can try to contest it. If the policy is written the way the two examples of code of conduct policies (one being the NFL's) are written, an employee who loses his/her job after violating said policy would not have a leg to stand on. It's real life. Rich people pay off people with less money to not press charges. Every time? No. But, of course, that's not what I implied, either. And take that empirical fact garbage to PPP :-)
Hapless Bills Fan Posted December 4, 2018 Posted December 4, 2018 34 minutes ago, GoBills808 said: Attorney's fees, bruh. They don't work for free. As far as I know, you don't need an attorney to file charges. Boyst is correct there. However, the police can impact the decision - improper, but it happens. So you may have more of a correct point than he thinks you do. Let's say you're a young woman who just got her side kicked by an NFL star. The police were called. You ask them to press charges. You don't need an attorney either to ask the police, or to press them yourself. You can call a 'legal aid' and they'll tell you what to do, if you don't know. On the other hand...suppose the police are talking to you and say things like "Were you a guest in the hotel? oh, you were visiting a guest. did the guest ask you to leave? he did. So you were trespassing. That would be a violation of city code blahblah and could subject you to criminal charges for trespass if Mr Hunt chose to pursue them, are you aware of that?" "Sure, we can watch the film. If we watch the film, will we see evidence that you appear to be drunk? Public intoxication is a violation of blueblue, are you aware of that? Especially since you're under drinking age." Two or three rounds of this and the young lady starts feeling like "dang, I press charges and the next thing I know my ass will be in trouble and I'll need a lawyer." So if she can't afford a lawyer, she may well decide to go home and sleep it off. Then next day, hypothetically, someone from Hunt's agent contacts her and suggests that she sign an agreement to not press charges and not talk to the press, in exchange for "good and valuable considerations". That's how it's done. 4 minutes ago, Cripple Creek said: Speaking specifically to the point of the local PD. Wouldn’t you expect them to at the least request to view the security footage? They indicated that they did not. I would, yes. I don't understand the whole "we review video for felonies only" comment from the Cleveland PD, because it seems to me that reviewing the video would be part of the investigation that should determine what kind of charges are warranted. But it IS Cleveland.
RoyBatty is alive Posted December 4, 2018 Posted December 4, 2018 On 12/2/2018 at 4:47 PM, Tsaikotic said: I'm not on Hunt's side, but some ppl seem to think that NFL and FBI are the same initials...it has already been said that the hotel refused to show the NFL the tape because they weren't law enforcement...has already been said they tried to talk to the women and any friends, they all refused to talk...they can't interview ppl that won't talk to them. It is a lot more fun to immediately demonize the NFL.
GoBills808 Posted December 4, 2018 Posted December 4, 2018 Just now, Hapless Bills Fan said: As far as I know, you don't need an attorney to file charges. Boyst is correct there. However, the police can impact the decision - improper, but it happens. So you may have more of a correct point than he thinks you do. Let's say you're a young woman who just got her side kicked by an NFL star. The police were called. You ask them to press charges. You don't need an attorney either to ask the police, or to press them yourself. You can call a 'legal aid' and they'll tell you what to do, if you don't know. On the other hand...suppose the police are talking to you and say things like "Were you a guest in the hotel? oh, you were visiting a guest. did the guest ask you to leave? he did. So you were trespassing. That would be a violation of city code blahblah and could subject you to criminal charges for trespass if Mr Hunt chose to pursue them, are you aware of that?" "Sure, we can watch the film. If we watch the film, will we see evidence that you appear to be drunk? Public intoxication is a violation of blueblue, are you aware of that? Especially since you're under drinking age." Two or three rounds of this and the young lady starts feeling like "dang, I press charges and the next thing I know my ass will be in trouble and I'll need a lawyer." So if she can't afford a lawyer, she may well decide to go home and sleep it off. Then next day, hypothetically, someone from Hunt's agent contacts her and suggests that she sign an agreement to not press charges and not talk to the press, in exchange for "good and valuable considerations". That's how it's done. OK. You don't need an lawyer to 'file charges' like you don't need a real estate agent to list your house. That's true. But if you're a 19 year old girl who got drunk and then roughed up by an NFL player in a hotel and you want to turn it into a payday, my legal advice would be to hire an attorney. That's what we were talking about, I'm pretty sure. And that'll be $500 for the advice.
boyst Posted December 4, 2018 Posted December 4, 2018 5 minutes ago, Hapless Bills Fan said: As far as I know, you don't need an attorney to file charges. Boyst is correct there. However, the police can impact the decision - improper, but it happens. So you may have more of a correct point than he thinks you do. Let's say you're a young woman who just got her side kicked by an NFL star. The police were called. You ask them to press charges. You don't need an attorney either to ask the police, or to press them yourself. You can call a 'legal aid' and they'll tell you what to do, if you don't know. On the other hand...suppose the police are talking to you and say things like "Were you a guest in the hotel? oh, you were visiting a guest. did the guest ask you to leave? he did. So you were trespassing. That would be a violation of city code blahblah and could subject you to criminal charges for trespass if Mr Hunt chose to pursue them, are you aware of that?" "Sure, we can watch the film. If we watch the film, will we see evidence that you appear to be drunk? Public intoxication is a violation of blueblue, are you aware of that? Especially since you're under drinking age." Two or three rounds of this and the young lady starts feeling like "dang, I press charges and the next thing I know my ass will be in trouble and I'll need a lawyer." So if she can't afford a lawyer, she may well decide to go home and sleep it off. Then next day, hypothetically, someone from Hunt's agent contacts her and suggests that she sign an agreement to not press charges and not talk to the press, in exchange for "good and valuable considerations". That's how it's done. I would, yes. I don't understand the whole "we review video for felonies only" comment from the Cleveland PD, because it seems to me that reviewing the video would be part of the investigation that should determine what kind of charges are warranted. But it IS Cleveland. I gotta get back to work but on the part of going to the hotel: they sign waivers of all sorts the girls call "rapey waivers." That basically make anything they do their fault to begin with and allow the host to remove them at any time with force if desired. They'll have phones and all things taken, too. 1 minute ago, GoBills808 said: OK. You don't need an lawyer to 'file charges' like you don't need a real estate agent to list your house. That's true. But if you're a 19 year old girl who got drunk and then roughed up by an NFL player in a hotel and you want to turn it into a payday, my legal advice would be to hire an attorney. That's what we were talking about, I'm pretty sure. And that'll be $500 for the advice. Um. Again. You don't need an attorney. They work on different practices at this rate. They will do a no down payment type and get around 30% to 70% of the winnings if you win and some will even say no cost if you lose. So, she could literally spend no money and have him arrested on charges and sue civilly without any expense Lrn2law
Pine Barrens Mafia Posted December 4, 2018 Posted December 4, 2018 3 minutes ago, GoBills808 said: But if you're a 19 year old girl Wait, you mean @Boyst62 isn't a 19 year-old girl? Well THAT'S disappointing. 1
GoBills808 Posted December 4, 2018 Posted December 4, 2018 4 minutes ago, Boyst62 said: Um. Again. You don't need an attorney. They work on different practices at this rate. They will do a no down payment type and get around 30% to 70% of the winnings if you win and some will even say no cost if you lose. So, she could literally spend no money and have him arrested on charges and sue civilly without any expense Lrn2law Retainer. Filing fees. Hourly rates. Repeat: not only does she need a lawyer, she needs money to pay for one if she wants to sue. Whether it be him or the hotel or the cab service that brought her to the hotel or the Cleveland PD. It's not free. 4 minutes ago, Joe in Winslow said: Wait, you mean @Boyst62 isn't a 19 year-old girl? Well THAT'S disappointing. Hey I said IF
Hapless Bills Fan Posted December 4, 2018 Posted December 4, 2018 9 minutes ago, GoBills808 said: OK. You don't need an lawyer to 'file charges' like you don't need a real estate agent to list your house. That's true. But if you're a 19 year old girl who got drunk and then roughed up by an NFL player in a hotel and you want to turn it into a payday, my legal advice would be to hire an attorney. That's what we were talking about, I'm pretty sure. And that'll be $500 for the advice. Ok, I missed the part where you were talking about the woman wanting to turn it into a payday. I agree, if she wants to file some civil damages suit, yep she needs a lawyer. Although she can probably get one to take it on contingency if she has a good story.
boyst Posted December 4, 2018 Posted December 4, 2018 1 minute ago, GoBills808 said: Retainer. Filing fees. Hourly rates. Repeat: not only does she need a lawyer, she needs money to pay for one if she wants to sue. Whether it be him or the hotel or the cab service that brought her to the hotel or the Cleveland PD. It's not free. Hey I said IF I sued the freaking state of North Carolina and didn't pay a fee or any money up front and won hundreds of thousands in a settlement only paying a small fee to the attorney afterward. Civil court is a nightmare. And I'm a 63 yr old woman. I was 19 once.
GoBills808 Posted December 4, 2018 Posted December 4, 2018 1 minute ago, Hapless Bills Fan said: Ok, I missed the part where you were talking about the woman wanting to turn it into a payday. I agree, if she wants to file some civil damages suit, yep she needs a lawyer. Although she can probably get one to take it on contingency if she has a good story. 'Hi, I'm a 19 y/o party girl with no money who wants to bring a questionable assault case with video evidence for free...sure, I'll hold'
Gugny Posted December 4, 2018 Posted December 4, 2018 1 minute ago, Boyst62 said: I sued the freaking state of North Carolina and didn't pay a fee or any money up front and won hundreds of thousands in a settlement only paying a small fee to the attorney afterward. Civil court is a nightmare. And I'm a 63 yr old woman. I was 19 once. Rules are different in the deep south.
Recommended Posts