Hapless Bills Fan Posted February 16, 2020 Share Posted February 16, 2020 1 minute ago, Call_Of_Ktulu said: Lie detector test on national tv will make Garrett look like a complete moron. My brother in law is a US Marshal and I went with him on a ride along and actually got to test out the lie detector. I was lying just to see if it would pick up on it and it did 100%. cool that it worked for you, but they aren’t admissable in court for good reason 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Augie Posted February 16, 2020 Share Posted February 16, 2020 With one half of a brain you should know this should have just been left alone to be forgotten. The only reason anyone is talking about this is because they are making it happen! What is wrong with these people??? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrDawkinstein Posted February 16, 2020 Share Posted February 16, 2020 5 minutes ago, Augie said: With one half of a brain you should know this should have just been left alone to be forgotten. The only reason anyone is talking about this is because they are making it happen! What is wrong with these people??? See my post on the previous page regarding the Haslams and how nothing will change for the Browns, no matter who they hire as HC or GM, or who they draft, as long as those schmucks are still in charge. It blows my mind that the team allowed Garrett to get in front of the media this week and not only talk about it, but to double-down and expand on it. The only comment should have been "We're on to 2020". 3 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YoloinOhio Posted February 16, 2020 Share Posted February 16, 2020 6 minutes ago, DrDawkinstein said: See my post on the previous page regarding the Haslams and how nothing will change for the Browns, no matter who they hire as HC or GM, or who they draft, as long as those schmucks are still in charge. It blows my mind that the team allowed Garrett to get in front of the media this week and not only talk about it, but to double-down and expand on it. The only comment should have been "We're on to 2020". Everything is fine. Never mind that the face of the franchise, married, is luring young women on snap chat to give him blow jobs behind the Cheesecake Factory of Sadness. stefanski gotta be having second thoughts 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrDawkinstein Posted February 16, 2020 Share Posted February 16, 2020 9 minutes ago, YoloinOhio said: Everything is fine. Never mind that the face of the franchise, married, is luring young women on snap chat to give him blow jobs behind the Cheesecake Factory of Sadness. stefanski gotta be having second thoughts I missed this. What is this??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CommonCents Posted February 16, 2020 Share Posted February 16, 2020 1 minute ago, DrDawkinstein said: I missed this. What is this??? Baker Baker the BJ Maker, Behind the Cheesecake is where he takes her, still in college, famous he’ll make yah. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hapless Bills Fan Posted February 16, 2020 Share Posted February 16, 2020 23 minutes ago, DrDawkinstein said: I missed this. What is this??? Starts here in the “Baker being Baker” thread. TL;DR (at this point) 3 chicks have come forward to say they DM’d Baker and were given a “Burner” Snapchat account with a count of Snaps in the “thousands”; after sexting and stuff they met him behind a Cheesecake Factory and gave him blowjobs in the back seat of his Range Rover. No intimations of anything coerced; everyone above age of consent; nothing criminal except possibly public lewdness or indecency (unsure on local law) It just went down (edit: HA! Didn’t see what I did there at first) while Baker was living with/engaged to/married to his wife Emily ? and it’s not a good look for the “Face of the Franchise” The intimation of the “Snaps in the thousands” things that perhaps they ain’t the only ones 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrDawkinstein Posted February 16, 2020 Share Posted February 16, 2020 2 minutes ago, Hapless Bills Fan said: Starts here in the “Baker being Baker” thread. Oh man. Browns... 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hapless Bills Fan Posted February 16, 2020 Share Posted February 16, 2020 3 minutes ago, DrDawkinstein said: Oh man. Browns... Stefanski: “FML” 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoSaint Posted February 16, 2020 Share Posted February 16, 2020 57 minutes ago, whatdrought said: This article does a good job breaking down the situation, I think: https://www.si.com/nfl/2020/02/15/mason-rudolph-myles-garrett-possible-lawsuit-steelers-browns While it's true that Rudolph has to prove the defamation, he need only do so through a preponderance of evidence. From the Article: As exists right now, (at least in the public record) there is more evidence that suggests Rudolph did not say it, vs evidence that says he did. It is not an open and shut case, but short of any additional revelations, it would be hard, I think, for Garrett to prove that it happened - specifically since he waited multiple days to make it public. frankly if going the legal route Garrett has the advantage of needing only to argue that he thought he heard it, not prove that he said it Also- major aside but fascinating is the tomlin speaking to browns players twist. Can you imagine this being Jerry Hughes and Tom Brady and all of a sudden we get stories of BB speaking to our team and them siding with his version of events? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Augie Posted February 16, 2020 Share Posted February 16, 2020 6 minutes ago, NoSaint said: frankly if going the legal route Garrett has the advantage of needing only to argue that he thought he heard it, not prove that he said it That’s why I asked for actual attorneys, preferably from the correct state. If saying “well I really thought.....” gets you off, that’s one thing. The preponderance of evidence is very different. I know enough to know that I don’t know the answers here. I DO know they should both just STFU and let it become forgotten history. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whatdrought Posted February 16, 2020 Share Posted February 16, 2020 (edited) 12 minutes ago, NoSaint said: frankly if going the legal route Garrett has the advantage of needing only to argue that he thought he heard it, not prove that he said it Also- major aside but fascinating is the tomlin speaking to browns players twist. Can you imagine this being Jerry Hughes and Tom Brady and all of a sudden we get stories of BB speaking to our team and them siding with his version of events? I would tend to disagree because “I thought I heard it” goes out the window when there’s no verification and he’s double downed on it. Legally speaking I’m not sure what the line truly is, but that line “more likely than not” is telling. You can’t be slanderous and then say “well I think he said that.” yeah. It seems damning that he has no verification within his own locker room. As for Tomlin, I think the fact that he’s black is quite telling when he comes out and makes the specific push to release that statement. Edited February 16, 2020 by whatdrought Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil The Thrill Posted February 16, 2020 Share Posted February 16, 2020 (edited) Garrett and his team are incredibly stupid for doubling down on the story. If you are to believe Garrett: 1. Rudolph said the slur in the second that he was going down. 2. Garrett purposely kept didn’t tell anyone about the slur because he wanted to wait until the trial so as not to “justify” his actions. He had the wherewithal to do this as soon as he was suspended and walked off the field that Sunday. 3. The NFL is purposely suppressing the evidence which contains the slur and purposely protecting Rudolph and it’s image. These all seem so incredibly far-fetched. It’s looking more and more like a contrived alibi to garner sympathy for Garrett and it’s clearly not working to anyone that isn’t a Browns fan Edited February 16, 2020 by Phil The Thrill Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Augie Posted February 16, 2020 Share Posted February 16, 2020 4 minutes ago, Phil The Thrill said: Garrett and his team are incredibly stupid for doubling down on the story. If you are to believe Garrett: 1. Rudolph said the slur in the second that he was going down. 2. Garrett purposely kept didn’t tell anyone about the slur because he wanted to wait until the trial so as not to “justify” his actions. He had the wherewithal to do this as soon as he was suspended and walked off the field that Sunday. 3. The NFL is purposely suppressing the evidence which contains the slur and purposely protecting Rudolph and it’s image. These all seem so incredibly far-fetched. It’s looking more and more like a contrived alibi to garner sympathy for Garrett and it’s clearly not working to anyone that isn’t a Browns fan Clearly, it’s time to TRIPLE down! 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
K-9 Posted February 16, 2020 Share Posted February 16, 2020 4 hours ago, Hapless Bills Fan said: I dunno, K-9. I've read up on other "True Crime" type accounts where part of the investigation was driven by perception of how the individual SHOULD have behaved....sometimes that means something, but sometimes it doesn't. The bottom line, though, is it was already brought up by Garrett and denied by Rudolph and the Steelers players who were in the vicinity right after Garrett appealed the suspension and initially made his claim. Unless it's recorded somewhere, it's a he-said he-said thing and I don't know what can be done besides let it go and move on. Maybe @BarleyNY is correct in what (I think he) implied that it's actually recorded and the NFL is suppressing it but Man! they got some high-powered suppression game if so. I truly appreciate that aspect of crime investigation and agree 100%. But not in this case. I don’t buy that the NFL is suppressing the use of the N word on the field as it’s literally an unsportsmanlike penalty of 15 yards. If anything, I think if the NFL truly had a recording of it they’d present it as an explanation for one of the most violent on field actions against a player by another player in the history of the game. I also think the player’s union would be pressing a case against the league to produce it as well. Were there no Browns players or refs in the vicinity to hear it? I would think so. This is just a case of he said by Garrett. It just doesn’t hold water. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Augie Posted February 16, 2020 Share Posted February 16, 2020 (edited) 12 hours ago, K-9 said: I truly appreciate that aspect of crime investigation and agree 100%. But not in this case. I don’t buy that the NFL is suppressing the use of the N word on the field as it’s literally an unsportsmanlike penalty of 15 yards. If anything, I think if the NFL truly had a recording of it they’d present it as an explanation for one of the most violent on field actions against a player by another player in the history of the game. I also think the player’s union would be pressing a case against the league to produce it as well. Were there no Browns players or refs in the vicinity to hear it? I would think so. This is just a case of he said by Garrett. It just doesn’t hold water. They were indeed surrounded by refs and players from both teams, but it was whispered so lightly into his ear hole that it took a weak to be heard. That’s my best guess. . Edited February 16, 2020 by Augie 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil The Thrill Posted February 16, 2020 Share Posted February 16, 2020 10 minutes ago, K-9 said: I truly appreciate that aspect of crime investigation and agree 100%. But not in this case. I don’t buy that the NFL is suppressing the use of the N word on the field as it’s literally an unsportsmanlike penalty of 15 yards. If anything, I think if the NFL truly had a recording of it they’d present it as an explanation for one of the most violent on field actions against a player by another player in the history of the game. I also think the player’s union would be pressing a case against the league to produce it as well. Were there no Browns players or refs in the vicinity to hear it? I would think so. This is just a case of he said by Garrett. It just doesn’t hold water. Don’t you think that suppressing the audio in a situation which had the makings of a court case would have been an incredibly stupid move for the NFL? I love all these people from Cleveland saying “release the audio!” The NFL never does this unless it’s a court case. They don’t take orders from fans or the media. They investigate internally and don’t share ANY evidence to the public. Thats why I don’t buy that the NFL is hiding or destroying evidence. Because if this turns into a court case, their audio is evidence and they’re screwed. 1 minute ago, Augie said: They were indeed surrounded by refs and players from both teams, but it was whispered so lightly into his ear hole that it took a week to be heard. That’s my best guess. Whispered in his earhole in the half second it took for Rudolph to hit the turf Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
/dev/null Posted February 16, 2020 Share Posted February 16, 2020 Release the audio If there is audio of Rudolph using the slur, ban him for the whatever the maximum first offense If the audio exonerates Rudolph, ban Garrett for life. He has had multiple offenses on the field and falsely attacking the character of another player as his excuse is indefensible. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buffalo716 Posted February 16, 2020 Share Posted February 16, 2020 (edited) 2 hours ago, Hapless Bills Fan said: Starts here in the “Baker being Baker” thread. TL;DR (at this point) 3 chicks have come forward to say they DM’d Baker and were given a “Burner” Snapchat account with a count of Snaps in the “thousands”; after sexting and stuff they met him behind a Cheesecake Factory and gave him blowjobs in the back seat of his Range Rover. No intimations of anything coerced; everyone above age of consent; nothing criminal except possibly public lewdness or indecency (unsure on local law) It just went down (edit: HA! Didn’t see what I did there at first) while Baker was living with/engaged to/married to his wife Emily ? and it’s not a good look for the “Face of the Franchise” The intimation of the “Snaps in the thousands” things that perhaps they ain’t the only ones Baker sexts me every nite... Gettin creepy... Idk how he even got my burner snap! And I told him I don't even like cheesecake! Edited February 16, 2020 by Buffalo716 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoSaint Posted February 16, 2020 Share Posted February 16, 2020 (edited) 4 hours ago, whatdrought said: I would tend to disagree because “I thought I heard it” goes out the window when there’s no verification and he’s double downed on it. Legally speaking I’m not sure what the line truly is, but that line “more likely than not” is telling. You can’t be slanderous and then say “well I think he said that.” yeah. It seems damning that he has no verification within his own locker room. As for Tomlin, I think the fact that he’s black is quite telling when he comes out and makes the specific push to release that statement. more likely than not (standard for civil cases) that Garrett intentionally made it up out of thin air... which means a simple explanation of “rewatch the tape. I sacked him and basically ended the game but acted like a crazed idiot because I heard him say it” could be enough even if it’s 100% verifiable that Rudolph did not say it. simple misunderstanding or confusion can be a 100% acceptable defense to this lawsuit as malicious intent is key to the allegation that garret is making it up. Rudolph’s team doesn’t have to prove whether or not he said it, though that helps if he didn’t say it. Edited February 16, 2020 by NoSaint 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts