lets_go_bills Posted July 28, 2008 Share Posted July 28, 2008 Bottom line is we should all feel elated. The guy is a beast, who is blossoming into a star. The offence is run through him, we need him, and he won't have any disciplinary action agianst him to prevent him from conrtibuting to our very promising season. I know as soon as he breaks his first big run and scores a TD, all will be forgiven and forgotten. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kota Posted July 28, 2008 Share Posted July 28, 2008 I wish people would get off their moral highhorses. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keepthefaith Posted July 28, 2008 Share Posted July 28, 2008 Not true. Goodell is the one who decides whether or not a player violates the Personal Conduct Policy. From the 2008 version: Where the NFL is concerned, Goodell IS the law. Good to see he won't be disciplined by the league. I though he would be based on the conduct policy which states that acts harmful to others can be punished. It really is up to Goodell's interpretation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fingon Posted July 28, 2008 Share Posted July 28, 2008 John Clayton said he wouldn't be punished way back right after his plea. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lori Posted July 29, 2008 Share Posted July 29, 2008 It wasn't his lawyer; it was the DA who was unwilling to deal initially. How could he make a deal when the lawyer didn't even TALK to him for the first week? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VOR Posted July 29, 2008 Share Posted July 29, 2008 How could he make a deal when the lawyer didn't even TALK to him for the first week? Who said anything about the first week, and who makes a deal within a week anyway? You need to spend at least several days investigating things before you know what might have happened versus what the accused is telling you. I'm talking about the first meeting after a week, when most of the facts were known and pointed to Lynch neither being impaired nor knowing he hit her. The DA claimed that Lynch's lawyer demanded a "precondition" that Lynch not be charged with a crime, and that he needed Lynch to admit he was the driver first before offering a deal. And them a month later offers a traffic violation (not a "crime" per se) deal made on the "assumption" that Lynch was the driver. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ish Posted July 29, 2008 Share Posted July 29, 2008 I wish people would get off their moral highhorses. I agree Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts