Saints Gallete fighting on video

[jr1]

this doesn't happen when you roll with chess nerds

[NoSaint]

Top lawyers backtrack and say completely contradictory things like that every day.

 

Plus he can simply say that he hadn't seen the Instagram pick and just looking at the video you couldn't tell it was him, which is basically true.

 

He's in a world of trouble regardless but I doubt the foolish but predictable attempt by the lawyer to say it wasn't him will play any role whatsoever.

well, im saying in how itll play publicly, and with goodell. clearly if they roll into his office saying "it was all self defense!" rog is going to ask "really, i thought it wasnt even you - whats up with that?"

 

this isnt a legal case at this point where a jury may not ever hear the silliness said prior.

 

 

(also, they deleted galletes instagram after the video went public but prior to the news getting the photo which makes the "we didnt know the pic was there" angle even more amusing if they take it - they clearly tried to bury the picture before anyone would find it, and failed)

Edited June 22, 2015 by NoSaint

[Kelly the Dog]

well, im saying in how itll play publicly, and with goodell. clearly if they roll into his office saying "it was all self defense!" rog is going to ask "really, i thought it wasnt even you - whats up with that?"

this isnt a legal case at this point where a jury may not ever hear the silliness said prior.

It's no different than the nonsense that Brady* and Belichick and Kraft said in public before. I doubt that had any affect at all on Goodell or Vincent or anyone in the league offices.

 

Of course now the pic is out they aren't going to seriously deny it was him, but they will say self defense. I just doubt the first nonsense will affect the second nonsense.

[NoSaint]

It's no different than the nonsense that Brady* and Belichick and Kraft said in public before. I doubt that had any affect at all on Goodell or Vincent or anyone in the league offices.

 

Of course now the pic is out they aren't going to seriously deny it was him, but they will say self defense. I just doubt the first nonsense will affect the second nonsense.

not a good apples to apples in my book. if brady changed his story drastically after proof came out and said "well yea you guys caught me, but it wasnt me it was some other guys fault...." i dont think that the league absent proof will be happy with that explanation. and do you think they would consider him lying the first go around to be an issue?

 

that, and im not 100% sure you argued it but many commented that the nfl DID care about his statements in how this was handled.

Edited June 22, 2015 by NoSaint

[stevestojan]

Can people PLEASE invest is some optical image stabilization before filming these???

Edited June 22, 2015 by stevestojan

[Kelly the Dog]

not a good apples to apples in my book. if brady changed his story drastically after proof came out and said "well yea you guys caught me, but it wasnt me it was some other guys fault...." i dont think that the league absent proof will be happy with that explanation. and do you think they would consider him lying the first go around to be an issue?

that, and im not 100% sure you argued it but many commented that the nfl DID care about his statements in how this was handled.

I think thinking people realize the world we live in. That when something like this comes out a lawyer will immediately deny it regardless of any facts. I think thinking people all know this and all take it for what it is, and they really don't care what a player's agent or lawyer says right off the bat. Galette will be brought in and asked to explain, and even if the league uses the statements against him, saying what about when your lawyer said this and that, it has no affect on the ruling. It's all posturing.

 

As far as Brady* goes, I'm not positive what you mean. I don't think the league cared what he said right off the bat in his initial press conference about not knowing anything. I do think they cared what he said in his interview with Wells.

 

It's different when someone is asked a question by a representative of the league. Like I'm sure that the league cared what McNally said to NFL investigators right after the game and before the investigation started. That's something altogether different than just a player or agent telling the media I am completely innocent.

[hondo in seattle]

I've been in more than my share of fights, almost always for good reason, so I can make a "simple" list for you of instances where walking away can't work. Not won't, can't:

 

1. For whatever reason, right, wrong, neutral, the bell has rung, and there isn't time to walk away now. You just walked into a mess. Somehow...you're in it, and now, it's best that you win it. You're not a sociopath, so you won't keep beating somebody who is down(ahem, unlike MMA, I note). Can you guarantee that about the opposition? No. Therefore, winning/ending the fight is the safest for all involved(A Ranger lock or an eagle claw serve well here, and you will never see these in MMA, because they end fights immediately and without punishment). Also, most people don't fight a lot. They have no idea where the "fight" line is. They don't know it when they've crossed it, or that they should have walked away 5 minutes ago. Thus, while it's good that most people don't fight a lot, it's also bad: their ignorance is a catalyst for many fights. Regardless of how, once it's on, walking away can get you hurt or even killed. If you're not a fighter, the best thing to do is get your arms up, don't go down no matter what, wait it out/tire the opposition out, and hope somebody arrives with a plan.

 

2. The oppostion has been looking for a fight all night. It's rare for most people to spot this. They can't walk away from what they don't see. So, #1 takes over. If you can spot it(because you're a fighter), walking away merely dumps this bad actor onto the next unsuspecting person(who isn't). Tell somebody? What are you supposed to say to the cops/bouncer, exactly? That you can predict the future? Whatever the case, everything you might do to avoid #2 person is exceedingly difficult to execute once they have started coming at you. Or, you can stand your ground, give the idiot what they want...and a whole lot more of what they don't. Or perhaps, do, as there are sick kids out there who want to get beat/prove how tough they are. Thus, you either don't know to walk away, or you do, and you shouldn't walk away, because you know what the bad actor is up to, and you can stop it before it starts.

 

3. The opposition have been rejected by 1(or 5) people, and now it's #2 time. You arrived a short time ago, didn't see any of that, and are now hitting on the person(s) who did the rejecting...and winning. You have no idea what's coming, and all of a sudden it's #1 and #2 combined. Walking away only leaves the rejector(s) hanging out to dry, for the bad actor(s) to go after. Now that you've walked away, they feel empowered. Walking away now won't make you "smart" or "mature" or "moral". It makes you a coward. You might be able to walk away with the rejector, before #3 person(s) gets their nerve up, but rejector has to clue you in. And, be warned: the rejector can be a sick person...who wants to see you fight for them(often known as "From South Philly").

 

4. Or, even worse, the rejector can be the supposed significant other of the bad actor...who as it turns out, isn't so bad after all . What would you do if somebody started hitting on your partner, and your partner started encouraging them, or you think they are? Are you going to walk away? Most wouldn't. Most would fight for what is theirs. Then we add false/messy perceptions all around, and it's #1 time. Meanwhile, if you have no idea you are hitting on somebody's partner, saying that usually doesn't matter much, because #1. You might be able to talk it down...but be prepared for 2 hours of couples counseling and a ruined night. Either case, fighting, or Dr. Phil, means: no walking away.

 

5. Some people are just F'ing nuts. In this case, running away is best. If you can't run, walking away is definitely not going to work, unless there's another dude on crutches or something . But seriously, you aren't leaving him. If you can't get away, the options here are informed by "crazy can be fought with crazy". Crazy doesn't expect you to play along, or be even more crazy. I once diffused a nut(off his meds) by dumping drinks over my head and yelling "The Bills make me want to shout!"(this was in Oklahoma City, so, I was doing WTF for everyone there). The guy, who had been threatening people with a bar stool, was boggled by my behavior, and distracted enough...to not see my left hook coming. The regulars/owner thanked me...but...I was "that weird dude" for the rest of my time there.

 

Notice how I've kept this entire thing gender neutral? That's because I've been to many Tejano bars. And these rules, and many more, apply to the women there, NOT the men. There are plenty more situations where walking away isn't a choice: somebody slaps your kid.

 

The Rocky movies have been by far the worst influence on this issue. They have supported the notion, amongst far too many short Italians, that they can win fights they cannot. The very worst thing that can happen? An undersized Italian winning in MMA. Every bar in the US will need to hire 2 more bouncers.

 

 

OC, this is crazy!

 

I'm not exactly a wus who has spent his life in a protective cocoon. I've led soldiers into combat, hung out in bad neighborhoods on three different continents, and have broken up more than my share of drunken bar room scuffles in my time. But I've never been in a fist-fight since my freshman year of college because the bandit is right. Fights are avoidable.

 

P.S. Actually, I am a wus now - a middle-aged, family-oriented one. And very happy about it.

Edited June 22, 2015 by hondo in seattle

[NoSaint]

I think thinking people realize the world we live in. That when something like this comes out a lawyer will immediately deny it regardless of any facts. I think thinking people all know this and all take it for what it is, and they really don't care what a player's agent or lawyer says right off the bat. Galette will be brought in and asked to explain, and even if the league uses the statements against him, saying what about when your lawyer said this and that, it has no affect on the ruling. It's all posturing.

 

im going to leave the brady sidetrack out, as im not sure this board as a whole is a good place to use it as a rational comparison point.

 

if you are the league doing an investigation here, you lend zero credence to the attorney telling one story and deleting proof of the truth, getting caught in a lie, and then doing a complete 180 and manufacturing a new defense and you look at that (undocumented) claim of self defense with a totally clean slate?

 

im sorry but im calling BS on you saying you would do that if given the job to review this, and i dont think you seriously see roger doing that either. if he shows up with a video of the previous 5 minutes, sure you would review that but if it turns into a "youve got to trust me here, this is what really happened....." of course denying that you were ever involved (and preemptively deleting your instagram to hide that you were) hurts your credibility in offering the new story.

[John from Riverside]

I think thinking people realize the world we live in. That when something like this comes out a lawyer will immediately deny it regardless of any facts. I think thinking people all know this and all take it for what it is, and they really don't care what a player's agent or lawyer says right off the bat. Galette will be brought in and asked to explain, and even if the league uses the statements against him, saying what about when your lawyer said this and that, it has no affect on the ruling. It's all posturing.

 

As far as Brady* goes, I'm not positive what you mean. I don't think the league cared what he said right off the bat in his initial press conference about not knowing anything. I do think they cared what he said in his interview with Wells.

 

It's different when someone is asked a question by a representative of the league. Like I'm sure that the league cared what McNally said to NFL investigators right after the game and before the investigation started. That's something altogether different than just a player or agent telling the media I am completely innocent.

Does anybody else but me think that

 

- Athletes that come forward and say "Yes I did it.....and I am sorry for it.....I will personally apologize for what I did" rather then go through all this lawyer speak when they are PLAINLY guilty should be rewarded for that to encourage more honesty out of players......

 

I dont mean letting ax murdering nfl players getting off scott free or anything.....but if we are going to encourage positive player conduct policy....lets encourage them to also admit mistakes and lessen whatever the punishment was going to be.......

 

Adversely

 

When a player does something wrong.....and they and their lawyer...agent....whatever continue to try to work the legal process....and not just show "respective personal conduct" then actually PUNISH them for doing that and increase the punishment instead of allowing them to appeal and try to get a lesser punishment.

 

This is just my opinion.....but I feel like some of this stuff is PROMOTING bad personal player conduct.

[Over 29 years of fanhood]

Mo money mo problems

[NoSaint]

Does anybody else but me think that

 

- Athletes that come forward and say "Yes I did it.....and I am sorry for it.....I will personally apologize for what I did" rather then go through all this lawyer speak when they are PLAINLY guilty should be rewarded for that to encourage more honesty out of players......

 

I dont mean letting ax murdering nfl players getting off scott free or anything.....but if we are going to encourage positive player conduct policy....lets encourage them to also admit mistakes and lessen whatever the punishment was going to be.......

 

Adversely

 

When a player does something wrong.....and they and their lawyer...agent....whatever continue to try to work the legal process....and not just show "respective personal conduct" then actually PUNISH them for doing that and increase the punishment instead of allowing them to appeal and try to get a lesser punishment.

 

This is just my opinion.....but I feel like some of this stuff is PROMOTING bad personal player conduct.

i think thats always a fair question. its tough when the guy that steps up and takes responsibility gets hammered harder than the one that weasels out on every angle of possible doubt or technicality they can find. or the idea that the guy that flees the scene of a drunken accident gets less punishment than the one that stays to help the victims oftentimes as a similar example of dis-incentivizing the morally correct behavior.

[truth on hold]

Does anybody else but me think that

 

- Athletes that come forward and say "Yes I did it.....and I am sorry for it.....I will personally apologize for what I did" rather then go through all this lawyer speak when they are PLAINLY guilty should be rewarded for that to encourage more honesty out of players......

 

I dont mean letting ax murdering nfl players getting off scott free or anything.....but if we are going to encourage positive player conduct policy....lets encourage them to also admit mistakes and lessen whatever the punishment was going to be.......

 

Adversely

 

When a player does something wrong.....and they and their lawyer...agent....whatever continue to try to work the legal process....and not just show "respective personal conduct" then actually PUNISH them for doing that and increase the punishment instead of allowing them to appeal and try to get a lesser punishment.

 

This is just my opinion.....but I feel like some of this stuff is PROMOTING bad personal player conduct.

I think the current environment of "guilt until proven innocent" and the extreme penalties applied in a lot of cases, encourages NFL athletes in particular to be evasive and their lawyers obstructive regardless of their degree of guilt. Not to mention the loss of wages in relatively short careers as another strong incentive Edited June 22, 2015 by JTSP

[Kelly the Dog]

im going to leave the brady sidetrack out, as im not sure this board as a whole is a good place to use it as a rational comparison point.

if you are the league doing an investigation here, you lend zero credence to the attorney telling one story and deleting proof of the truth, getting caught in a lie, and then doing a complete 180 and manufacturing a new defense and you look at that (undocumented) claim of self defense with a totally clean slate?

im sorry but im calling BS on you saying you would do that if given the job to review this, and i dont think you seriously see roger doing that either. if he shows up with a video of the previous 5 minutes, sure you would review that but if it turns into a "youve got to trust me here, this is what really happened....." of course denying that you were ever involved (and preemptively deleting your instagram to hide that you were) hurts your credibility in offering the new story.

I 100% believe that. Although perhaps I don't know the whole story. I thought the agent came out immediately and said "I don't think it was Junior. There is nothing in the video that proves it was Junior and that's him." That is what I am under the impression is what we are talking about and I think it means nothing to Goodell in the end.

 

It would mean absolutely nothing to me if I were Goodell because it's exactly what I would expect every single agent to say, even if some of them wouldn't. That's what agents and lawyers do. I think it means zero. Goodell will simply say it's him, we can see now that it's him. Tell me what happened, and all punishment will come from what they say from then on.

[NoSaint]

I 100% believe that. Although perhaps I don't know the whole story. I thought the agent came out immediately and said "I don't think it was Junior. There is nothing in the video that proves it was Junior and that's him." That is what I am under the impression is what we are talking about and I think it means nothing to Goodell in the end.

 

It would mean absolutely nothing to me if I were Goodell because it's exactly what I would expect every single agent to say, even if some of them wouldn't. That's what agents and lawyers do. I think it means zero. Goodell will simply say it's him, we can see now that it's him. Tell me what happened, and all punishment will come from what they say from then on.

well, the saints had already submitted it to the league and all.... and then presumably his lawyer had him (or i guess maybe JG acted alone) delete his instagram that had the photo on it. And then when it finally made it back to the media they denied it was him.

 

i think you are painting with an incredibly broad brush to say that everyone would deny it was him at that point. if he was blindsided outside his offices by a reporter that brought an unknown video to him - "i dont know who that is" would be a reasonably expected comment. in this situation i think you are stretching far to hold on to the point. the dude was well aware of the video, had time to come up with his angle and chose one that hurts his credibility.

Edited June 22, 2015 by NoSaint

[John from Riverside]

 

 

OC, this is crazy!

 

I'm not exactly a wus who has spent his life in a protective cocoon (well, I am a middle-aged wus now!). I've led soldiers into combat, hung out in bad neighborhoods on 3 different continents, and have broken up more than my share of drunken bar room scuffles in my time. But I've never been in a fist-fight since my freshman year of college because the bandit is right. Fights are avoidable.

Agreed

 

Some of us have been in harms way from much more then a person to person fight (I personally have been shot at and been very close to explosives meant to take my life in foreign countries and compared to that sign me up for the simple drunkin brawl.

 

But fist to fist confrontations for me have been few and far between.......and most of them I could have easily walked away from but chose to dive in head first because they were usually defending someone else. The first ones I have ever had were just like that.

 

When stationed at Norton Air Force base a couple of Camp Pendleton Marines had come down to see their girlfriends (one of them being a friend of mine from my squadron....and we lived in co ed dorms on base) a group of Air Force drunken morons decided they didnt like it and proceeded to beat the crap out of them and try to throw them off the emergency sidestairs on the 3rd floor. My female friend was about to lose her mind and I arrived right about the time she got struck in the face trying to save her boyfriend (rule number one with me......hitting a women in front of me will cause me to see red in a heartbeat).......me and my two large friends.......put an end to this after a pretty good slobberknocker on the 3rd floor of this dormatory.......security police arrived late as usual as they had been passified by the time they got there.

 

Many years later I was at a family reunion with my wife (my wife is hispanic.....and her side of the family has a lot of members in and associated to biker gangs. Now.....I consider myself to be a fairly peaceful guy.....and to be honest I get along great with these guys. But when the drinking starts it never fails somebody who should just be enjoying themselves and having a good time HAS to start talking crap to someone they shouldnt who was just minding THEIR own business and having a good time.......next thing you know we multiple biker gangs in the wrong place at the wrong time and someone instigating something they were def not going to be able to finish.....next thing you know my wifes sister is in the wrong place at the wrong time and gets struck........here I am playing hero ball.....not to fight the world but mostly just to pull her out of the uglyless to safety........and all hell breaks lose. Now.....the one thing i have found interesting over my life......when I go into protective mode it is amazing how much help I actually get from people fighting rather then seeing me as a opponent and actually HELP me. I nearly get shanked because I am covering up my sister and dragging her out.......I see a blade flash behind me and immedately put them down with a well placed kick.......and 2 of their own start beating the crap out of their own bike gang member........

 

I personally enjoy peace.....nobody ever really wins a fight.

[Kelly the Dog]

well, the saints had already submitted it to the league and all.... and then presumably his lawyer had him (or i guess maybe JG acted alone) delete his instagram that had the photo on it. And then when it finally made it back to the media they denied it was him.

i think you are painting with an incredibly broad brush to say that everyone would deny it was him at that point. if he was blindsided outside his offices by a reporter that brought an unknown video to him - "i dont know who that is" would be a reasonably expected comment. in this situation i think you are stretching far to hold on to the point. the dude was well aware of the video, had time to come up with his angle and chose one that hurts his credibility.

That makes it a little different and a little worse but doesn't change my thinking one bit. Maybe living in LA and working in the entertainment business has me jaded to some degree because I work with agents all the time and almost everything they say is a lie. It's just expected and is considered the equivalent of bluffing in poker, just part of the game.

 

But again, even with that said and even with you explaining what happened which told me a lot more, I still don't think Goodell ultimately cares. He's going to come down just as hard on JG for how he perceives to be the actions in the fight and the lead up to the fight and not the denials of the lawyer. I do think he and the NFL may say something about what they did, and use that against him in conversations but as I said earlier I just think that is posturing and because they don't want to promote players lying to them.

 

I don't, at all, one iota, think that Goodell would decide Junior was guilty of extreme violence on that beach, worthy of a three game suspension and then give him four because of what he and his lawyer did and said about it not being him. I don't think that enters his equation.

[NoSaint]

That makes it a little different and a little worse but doesn't change my thinking one bit. Maybe living in LA and working in the entertainment business has me jaded to some degree because I work with agents all the time and almost everything they say is a lie. It's just expected and is considered the equivalent of bluffing in poker, just part of the game.

 

But again, even with that said and even with you explaining what happened which told me a lot more, I still don't think Goodell ultimately cares. He's going to come down just as hard on JG for how he perceives to be the actions in the fight and the lead up to the fight and not the denials of the lawyer. I do think he and the NFL may say something about what they did, and use that against him in conversations but as I said earlier I just think that is posturing and because they don't want to promote players lying to them.

 

I don't, at all, one iota, think that Goodell would decide Junior was guilty of extreme violence on that beach, worthy of a three game suspension and then give him four because of what he and his lawyer did and said about it not being him. I don't think that enters his equation.

well it seems we were arguing two different points that neighbor each other but arent identical.

 

im not saying they will tack a game on based on the comment. or harshen it for the lie.

 

im arguing that now its harder to come in with other defenses that amount to "ok, we stretched it there but trust us on this reason that it wasnt as bad as it looked." if from the get go he said "i was there, this happened and i was only involved in order to defend myself and my friend from an incident that involved x, y and z" they may be slightly more apt to say "that makes sense, maybe the violence we are seeing doesnt actually warrant the 3 games because your story makes sense." Now they might say, "really? why didnt you just say that if its the truth and what really happened? we are going to stick to our 3 games based on our evaluation of the video"(to use your 3 game example)

Edited June 22, 2015 by NoSaint

[Kelly the Dog]

OC, this is crazy!

 

I'm not exactly a wus who has spent his life in a protective cocoon. I've led soldiers into combat, hung out in bad neighborhoods on three different continents, and have broken up more than my share of drunken bar room scuffles in my time. But I've never been in a fist-fight since my freshman year of college because the bandit is right. Fights are avoidable.

 

P.S. Actually, I am a wus now - a middle-aged, family-oriented one. And very happy about it.

It was total nonsense. Virtually every fight like that is escapable.

[Pete]

I myself always walk away. But if I am walking away and struck, its game on

[Kelly the Dog]

well it seems we were arguing two different points that neighbor each other but arent identical.

im not saying they will tack a game on based on the comment. or harshen it for the lie.

im arguing that now its harder to come in with other defenses that amount to "ok, we stretched it there but trust us on this reason that it wasnt as bad as it looked." if from the get go he said "i was there, this happened and i was only involved in order to defend myself and my friend" they may be slightly more apt to say "that makes sense, maybe the violence we are seeing doesnt actually warrant the 3 games." (to use your 3 game example)

You make good points as always, I just disagree with this one entirely. I just don't think Goodell cares. If JG comes in and says what you just did now, about defending himself, I think Goodell will have the exact same reaction to it as he would if they said that right off the bat. He would probably think they are lying to some extent, investigate it further from more eye witnesses, and then evaluate how much he believes JG about self defense. I don't think he will change his thinking based on good or bad behavior before the investigation started.