Lynch to meet Goodell tomorrow

[Lori]

Well, he can do what he wants, but the NFLPA will fight him and he knows this. And reportedly the new NFLPA director is going to try to stop Goodell's one-man show when it comes to suspending players.

Good luck with that. The union didn't have to agree to the suspension procedure in the CBA, but they did ...

[VOR]

Good luck with that. The union didn't have to agree to the suspension procedure in the CBA, but they did ...

Given what the players got in return, i.e. 5% more in total revenue, it wasn't a hard thing to accept. But in the next round of talks...

[Lori]

Next round of talks is going to be nasty, there's no doubt. I fully expect to see a work stoppage at some point.

[Kelly the Dog]

Good luck with that. The union didn't have to agree to the suspension procedure in the CBA, but they did ...

I think that the point is, fans act like Goodell has every right to say, "I believe Trent Edwards smoked pot and I am suspending him for one game." because Goodell has supreme power. The answer is he CAN, sure, but it instantly will backfire and the union will sue and Goodell will lose. So he really CAN'T do stuff like that.

 

And he can't just assume Lynch was smoking pot in that car and suspend him for it, because the union would go crazy and rightfully so, and they would sue and Goodell would lose. Simply because there wasn't any proof whatsoever.

 

What he can do without getting backlash is say that Lynch should not have put himself in that car with people breaking the law and being around marijuana and I am putting him in step one of the program.

[The Dean]

I don't think there is a chance of just a fine but I do think he misses only one game, and at most two.

 

I know you have defended him a lot, and at times I have, too. But if you had to guess, you do think he was smoking pot, don't you? Which is illegal and which is against his contract and NFL rules. I know there isn't going to be, and there shouldn't be, any kind of penalty from the NFL at all about that, outside of a decent chance that they will give him random tests now. But you don't really believe that he was sitting there watching two guys smoke.

 

 

I don't assume he was smoking, or not smoking. I agree he will likely be subject to random tests, now.

 

I only say that because, although I have done these things, I have also been in the room when drugs were being used, and I wasn't a user, at that time. Also, I have friends who don't smoke, or snort, or whatever, who are sometimes in the room, when that stuff goes down.

[VOR]

Next round of talks is going to be nasty, there's no doubt. I fully expect to see a work stoppage at some point.

It wouldn't surprise me. The owners (well, most of them ) really screwed the pooch with the last CBA.

[Lori]

I think that the point is, fans act like Goodell has every right to say, "I believe Trent Edwards smoked pot and I am suspending him for one game." because Goodell has supreme power. The answer is he CAN, sure, but it instantly will backfire and the union will sue and Goodell will lose. So he really CAN'T do stuff like that.

 

And he can't just assume Lynch was smoking pot in that car and suspend him for it, because the union would go crazy and rightfully so, and they would sue and Goodell would lose. Simply because there wasn't any proof whatsoever.

 

What he can do without getting backlash is say that Lynch should not have put himself in that car with people breaking the law and being around marijuana and I am putting him in step one of the program.

Which is exactly what he will do, I'm sure. My comment was in response to the NFLPA's desire to change the disciplinary system, not the specifics of Lynch's case.

[Kelly the Dog]

I don't assume he was smoking, or not smoking. I agree he will likely be subject to random tests, now.

 

I only say that because, although I have done these things, I have also been in the room when drugs were being used, and I wasn't a user, at that time. Also, I have friends who don't smoke, or snort, or whatever, who are sometimes in the room, when that stuff goes down.

Oh sure. I have, too. And I know what you mean. My point is even if Goodell spoke to the cop who made the arrest, which he may very well do, and the cop said, "Well, we smelled it on him, and I'm pretty sure he was smoking, but we really couldn't arrest them for it, and I couldn't prove it in court", I think that Goodell still couldn't really lay the hammer down because there just wasn't enough to go on.

[Mr. WEO]

It's not semantics. Lynch was never charged with felony gun possession, period. He was arrested and booked on suspicion of felony gun charges, but was never formally charged with a felony. And you're right that they don't offer 2 plea deals. It was just the three misdemeanors down to one, as Lori just pointed-out to me.

 

 

When profootballtalk broke the story, they described him as having been arrested on a charge of felony gun possession. In the LA County Sheriff's Department website, the record of the arrest describes "Charge Level: F (Felony)".

 

Anyway, why do you keep bringing up the fact that he never tested positive for drugs? It has nothing to do with this case's adjudication. And since you can't articulate out why Lynch took a deal (on trumped up charges) instead of is day in court, tell us why Lynch would agree to go into "Step One" of the league's substance abuse program.

[The Dean]

When profootballtalk broke the story, they described him as having been arrested on a charge of felony gun possession. In the LA County Sheriff's Department website, the record of the arrest describes "Charge Level: F (Felony)".

 

 

The problem, as I see it here, is one of semantics. What the police write on the arresting report is often different than what the DA decides is the proper charge for the offense (BEFORE plea bargaining).

 

According to the info I see, Lynch was never charged with a felony (not even before a plea). It sounds more like the DA's office decided the correct charge (and the charge they could prosecute successfully) was a misdemeanor.

 

Other points:

 

As far as the pot goes, who the fuc# cares? They were never charged, so why does it matter?

 

The local constables have been known to "smell marijuana" when they have no other probable cause to do a search.

 

Arrest reports are only as honest as the men who write them. I was arrested once, and the report was half fiction. (Given the fact that it was dismissed the next day, suggests the fiction was fairly obvious.)

[VOR]

The problem, as I see it here, is one of semantics. What the police write on the arresting report is often different than what the DA decides is the proper charge for the offense (BEFORE plea bargaining).

 

According to the info I see, Lynch was never charged with a felony (not even before a plea). It sounds more like the DA's office decided the correct charge (and the charge they could prosecute successfully) was a misdemeanor.

 

Other points:

 

As far as the pot goes, who the fuc# cares? They were never charged, so why does it matter?

 

The local constables have been known to "smell marijuana" when they have no other probable cause to do a search.

 

Arrest reports are only as honest as the men who write them. I was arrested once, and the report was half fiction. (Given the fact that it was dismissed the next day, suggests the fiction was fairly obvious.)

Thank you. The idea that cops are beyond reproach is naivety at best.

 

And Lynch has no say in whether he's entered into the substance abuse program, any more than he has a say in whether he's suspended or not. He can plead his case, but the ultimate decision rests with the Commish.

[Kelly the Dog]

Arrest reports are only as honest as the men who write them. I was arrested once, and the report was half fiction. (Given the fact that it was dismissed the next day, suggests the fiction was fairly obvious.)

I think you did it.

[The Dean]

I think you did it.

 

 

Well, it's true, I did it many times...but, not the time I was arrested for it.

[Mr. WEO]

The problem, as I see it here, is one of semantics. What the police write on the arresting report is often different than what the DA decides is the proper charge for the offense (BEFORE plea bargaining).

 

According to the info I see, Lynch was never charged with a felony (not even before a plea). It sounds more like the DA's office decided the correct charge (and the charge they could prosecute successfully) was a misdemeanor.

 

Other points:

 

As far as the pot goes, who the fuc# cares? They were never charged, so why does it matter?

 

The local constables have been known to "smell marijuana" when they have no other probable cause to do a search.

 

Arrest reports are only as honest as the men who write them. I was arrested once, and the report was half fiction. (Given the fact that it was dismissed the next day, suggests the fiction was fairly obvious.)

 

This case was not dismissed. NO ONE is challenging the police report in this case. If it was a dirty search, Lynch would have walked. He's not some poor kid from the hood anymore who has to rely on the overworked, underpaid Public Defender to challege the search--he's a millionaire with the most expensive representation at his call. They reviewed the report, his case, and gladly took the plea deal. Case closed, OJ.

 

The notion that the weed was fabricated is itself pure fabrication. There is simply no reason, in THIS case (NOT the ones you watch on TV shows), to believe otherwise. Unless you can back that up?

[The Dean]

This case was not dismissed. NO ONE is challenging the police report in this case. If it was a dirty search, Lynch would have walked. He's not some poor kid from the hood anymore who has to rely on the overworked, underpaid Public Defender to challege the search--he's a millionaire with the most expensive representation at his call. They reviewed the report, his case, and gladly took the plea deal. Case closed, OJ.

 

The notion that the weed was fabricated is itself pure fabrication. There is simply no reason, in THIS case (NOT the ones you watch on TV shows), to believe otherwise. Unless you can back that up?

 

 

The very fact that he was never charged with a felony suggests the evidence didn't support a felony charge. Police reports are what they are. But, they don't constitute a formal charge.

 

I never said the search WAS dirty, or the charges fabricated. I suggested that happens. None of us here KNOWS what happened that night. If you are putting all of your beliefs in a police report, that's your issue, not mine.

 

I think the plea deal represents the DA didn't have enough to proceed with a felony charge (and the search would certainly be questioned if it ever went to trial), and Lynch and his attorneys decided a misdemeanor was something they could live with, to move on and avoid more publicity. Nothing here suggests a felony charge was looming.

[Mr. WEO]

The very fact that he was never charged with a felony suggests the evidence didn't support a felony charge. Police reports are what they are. But, they don't constitute a formal charge.

 

I never said the search WAS dirty, or the charges fabricated. I suggested that happens. None of us here KNOWS what happened that night. If you are putting all of your beliefs in a police report, that's your issue, not mine.

 

I think the plea deal represents the DA didn't have enough to proceed with a felony charge (and the search would certainly be questioned if it ever went to trial), and Lynch and his attorneys decided a misdemeanor was something they could live with, to move on and avoid more publicity. Nothing here suggests a felony charge was looming.

 

I understand that the report is not a charge. The charge entered at his booking was a felony class. The DA probably handles hundreds of these cases a week. Looking at Lynch's sad gangsta wannabe case, he made the deal because it was probably the only non-actual gangster with a gun posession charge on the docket that day. AND the fact that the guy is a harmless celeb.

 

As for "putting all my beliefs in a police report"--I did nothing of the sort. I put my belief in the fact that a report made public was never disputed or contested by anyone with a direct stake in its veracity.

 

Certain people here simply tossing out there that evidence was fabricated and the report falsified are the ones stretching credibility in order to preserve their support for whatever trouble ML wishes to find himself in. It is the only way for them to justify their position. It's pathetic.