Jump to content

Philadelphia Inquirer staff writer says Shady struggles with resolving conflicts civilly


Recommended Posts

Back when "The Sopranos" was current and a huge TV success, show creator David Chase was doing some type of promo interview on HBO.

 

He was discussing how the show tries to demonstrate that Tony Soprano struggles to resolve conflict through any means other than violence.  It was an interesting conversation at the time.

 

I was thinking of that when this thread was created and this story from The Philadelphia Inquirer broke.

 

McCoy is like Tony, a mafioso.  Seems about right.

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, whatdrought said:

 

Assante Samuel. It was when Shady was in Philly. 

 

Well, Iwas going more along the lines of “Club Hand Gilmore” who couldn’t tackle a toddler without embarrassing himself there for a while.   Why he was out there........is beyond me......

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/11/2018 at 4:43 PM, Fadingpain said:

Is it a surprise that a guy like McCoy would attempt to resolve conflict through violence?

 

Around here, they call it "Occam's Shaver" [sic] folks! 

 

If it smells like a duck and quacks like a duck, it's a duck.

 

If it seems obvious Shady was stupid enough to pay thugs to commit crimes in furtherance of fetching personal belongings from a woman, and they committed additional crimes in so doing, he probably did it.  And assuming the appropriate people do their jobs correctly, Shady is 1) gone from the league, 2) facing tons of civil liability, and 3) maybe about to do some jail time.  

 

Much less likely that the victim punched herself in the face a few dozen times and faked the whole thing.


Shady is a bit "gangsta". 

He has bodyguards/hangers on who follow him around and are willing to get physical to move people Shady wants moved, who are in his immediate space.

 

But Shady also loves his career. 

A year ago, Shady chose to file court proceedings against this woman, including (as I understand it) asking for the return of the jewelry and for her to move out.

 

So why would he, with the court date finally fast approaching, now choose to pay thugs to commit crimes on his behalf?  There's a difference between having a bodyguard put a woman off his bus, first on the side of the road then at a rest stop, or your friend, without being asked, holding a reporter by the arm to keep him from walking away while you're talking, vs sending thugs to pistol-whip a woman in your house.

 

I don't think the victim punched herself in the face a few dozen times. 

But then looking at her face, I don't think she was punched in the face a few dozen times.

 

I think we need some facts to come out.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, PromoTheRobot said:

The more I think about this article, the more I ask myself what is the reporter's point other than to throw shade on Shady for being dickish to him?

 

The reporter is trying to make a link between a Shady being salty about press criticism, having bodyguards who put a woman off a party bus, and being a poor tipper VS. sending thugs to beat a woman up and collect jewelry/truth in the woman's friends Instagram allegations. 

 

I don't see the clear link.  A lot of people are d*cks in a minor way without being criminals.

 

Keep in mind that the woman has been living rent-free in Shady's house for >18 months with herself and her two kids (neither of them Shady's), and a court date was approaching.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

The reporter is trying to make a link between a Shady being salty about press criticism, having bodyguards who put a woman off a party bus, and being a poor tipper VS. sending thugs to beat a woman up and collect jewelry/truth in the woman's friends Instagram allegations. 

 

I don't see the clear link.  A lot of people are d*cks in a minor way without being criminals.

 

Keep in mind that the woman has been living rent-free in Shady's house for >18 months with herself and her two kids (neither of them Shady's), and a court date was approaching.

 

It still feels like an attempt to color opinion on McCoy at a time he's being implicated in a grievous offense..

Edited by PromoTheRobot
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/11/2018 at 6:24 PM, Lfod said:

Shady is gangster. 

a P.O.S.

JMO, even before he got here. Asking for pics and a signed release for a party he was throwing for "fine" women, waiting for the guys/cops to get beat down, before his punk-ass gets involved. Plus, you don't need a posse unless you have people after you for some reason. I obviously have no proof, but would not be surprised at all if info comes out that he was involved. From his statement:

"Furthermore, I have not had any direct contact with any of the people involved in months."

 

 I thought that statement was curious. Anything INDIRECT, Shady?!?!

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/12/2018 at 9:02 AM, row_33 said:

you don't have a right to play in the NFL, your contract is probably laden with stuff that lets the team release you without compensation

for players past their prime a team is quite ready to invoke and inflict it when it can suit them

 

If the Bills were to release Shady, they would take $5.25M dead cap hit.  He has no guaranteed money remaining in his 2018 salary.

 

I doubt that Shady's current contract has any language that would let them recover it beyond the pro-rated  per-game relief granted by the NFL when a player is suspended by them; Dareus contract did not have such language.

 

 

34 minutes ago, Dopey said:

a P.O.S.

JMO, even before he got here. Asking for pics and a signed release for a party he was throwing for "fine" women, waiting for the guys/cops to get beat down, before his punk-ass gets involved. Plus, you don't need a posse unless you have people after you for some reason. I obviously have no proof, but would not be surprised at all if info comes out that he was involved. From his statement:

"Furthermore, I have not had any direct contact with any of the people involved in months."

 

 I thought that statement was curious. Anything INDIRECT, Shady?!?!

 

He has known indirect contact in the last couple months.

 

He sent his mom and a firm of movers to collect clothing, shoes, personal items (successful) and furniture from the house.

He sent someone (probably a process server) to serve notice of eviction proceedings

Then he sent an alarm company to remove the security cameras by which Cordon learned Shady's movers were there, and sent a different alarm company to install a security system to which he did not provide Cordon access. 

 

This is all out there, and I'm sure Shady's statement was crafted by a lawyer to be legally correct given the above, so it's not particularly curious.

 

2 hours ago, PromoTheRobot said:

It still feels like an attempt to color opinion on McCoy at a time he's being implicated in a grievous offense..

 

Absolutely I see it the same way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/11/2018 at 10:09 PM, Shotgunner said:

Call me crazy, but...

 

Innocent until proven guilty.

 

If guilty, then I will start talking about what a piece of **** he is, but until that moment he gets the benefit of the doubt.

Actually. That’s for the courts to decide. On a personal level, From someone that has nothing to do with the situation; he was accused by someone of committing an act. It should actually be he is guilty until he can prove he had nothing to do with it. 

 

And for the record, I’m just curious if you believe OJ killed 2 people? Because the courts decided he was innocent, however the majority of the public believe a murderer got away. 

Edited by mrags
Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, mrags said:

Actually. That’s for the courts to decide. On a personal level, From someone that has nothing to do with the situation; he was accused by someone of committing an act. It should actually be he is guilty until he can prove he had nothing to do with it.

 

And for the record, I’m just curious if you believe OJ killed 2 people? Because the courts decided he was innocent, however the majority of the public believe a murderer got away. 

You have an odd and perverse notion of fairness and justice. To say that he should be assumed guilty because of an accusation is ludicrous. I don't know if he is guilty or not. There is nothing wrong with not knowing at this stage of the investigation. 

 

With respect to your question on whether I believe OJ killed two people? I would say yes. However, I can base my judgment on the overwhelming evidence presented in that case. That doesn't come close to this McCoy situation. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, JohnC said:

You have an odd and perverse notion of fairness and justice. To say that he should be assumed guilty because of an accusation is ludicrous. I don't know if he is guilty or not. There is nothing wrong with not knowing at this stage of the investigation. 

 

With respect to your question on whether I believe OJ killed two people? I would say yes. However, I can base my judgment on the overwhelming evidence presented in that case. That doesn't come close to this McCoy situation. 

So someone accusing someone of beating them or having them beaten. Along with beating a child. Abusing a dog. And using multiple drugs isn’t good enough for you to believe that someone could be a real POS that did everything she said he did. Got ya 

 

but the jury released OJ proving he was innocent wasn’t good enough for your own opinions of him. Makes sense. It sounds like you believe what you want to believe.

 

which is completely fine, however you have an issue with me believing what I want to believe about Shady. He has don’t absolutely nothing to make me believe he is or could be innocent up to this point. In fact the stories and facts of him seem to make me believe the opposite. This is a guy that’s been involved in bar fights with police (off duty). Known to be a punk off the field out in the public. And on the field doesn’t have the decency to stand up for his opinions. Like the time he refused to stand for the national anthem and then had the lack of a sack to say that’s what he was really doing. Instead claiming he always stretches during the anthem. Which is absolute BS. 

 

It’s funny how people think sometimes. To each his own I guess. 

Edited by mrags
Link to comment
Share on other sites

59 minutes ago, mrags said:

So someone accusing someone of beating them or having them beaten. Along with beating a child. Abusing a dog. And using multiple drugs isn’t good enough for you to believe that someone could be a real POS that did everything she said he did. Got ya 

 

but the jury released OJ proving he was innocent wasn’t good enough for your own opinions of him. Makes sense. It sounds like you believe what you want to believe.

 

which is completely fine, however you have an issue with me believing what I want to believe about Shady. He has don’t absolutely nothing to make me believe he is or could be innocent up to this point. In fact the stories and facts of him seem to make me believe the opposite. This is a guy that’s been involved in bar fights with police (off duty). Known to be a punk off the field out in the public. And on the field doesn’t have the decency to stand up for his opinions. Like the time he refused to stand for the national anthem and then had the lack of a sack to say that’s what he was really doing. Instead claiming he always stretches during the anthem. Which is absolute BS. 

 

It’s funny how people think sometimes. To each his own I guess. 

You think what you want to think. I'll wait for more of the facts to come in. Someone making accusations doesn't automatically make those accusations factual. Again, I'll wait for more facts to come in before making a conclusive judgment. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, JohnC said:

You think what you want to think. I'll wait for more of the facts to come in. Someone making accusations doesn't automatically make those accusations factual. Again, I'll wait for more facts to come in before making a conclusive judgment. 

What’s the difference between your thought process and mine? There is none whatsoever. From the seats that we sit in, there is absolutely zero difference. 

 

And just curious, like the OJ verdict, if he is proven guilty, but YOUR evidence proves that he’s innocent, does that make it so? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...