Jump to content

Von Miller faces arrest in domestic violence case in Dallas


ArdmoreRyno

Recommended Posts

On 12/7/2023 at 8:40 PM, Malazan said:

I like how many people who have previously defended Bills players to "let the process play out" are now calling for Von's head. It's amazing how opinions change depending on the skill of the player. 

 

True, but It's such an easy out this week for the Bills to leave a clearly unproductive player on the bench this week.  What are they not seeing about his play on the field that every fan is seeing?  He's a non-factor and what's worse, Von gives up on the play when he's easily pushed aside.  Not giving anywhere close to 100% in my opinion. 

  • Agree 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/7/2023 at 8:40 PM, Malazan said:

I like how many people who have previously defended Bills players to "let the process play out" are now calling for Von's head. It's amazing how opinions change depending on the skill of the player. 

 

So if you're going to make accusations like that, name names so they can defend themselves.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I’m failing to see how these Von Millers story is much different than this?

 

On October 23 Ross thought his GF was cheating on him. Broke some stuff. Told her to leave. Shoved her. Released on $2500 bail. 
 

Suspended 6 weeks until his hearing on Dec 4. 

 

https://amp.kansascity.com/sports/nfl/kansas-city-chiefs/article281640478.html

  • Agree 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Mango said:

I’m failing to see how these Von Millers story is much different than this?

 

On October 23 Ross thought his GF was cheating on him. Broke some stuff. Told her to leave. Shoved her. Released on $2500 bail. 
 

Suspended 6 weeks until his hearing on Dec 4. 

 

https://amp.kansascity.com/sports/nfl/kansas-city-chiefs/article281640478.html

No difference at all, except Miller is a star and Ross is JAG. And Miller’s bail was $5,000.

  • Awesome! (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have a question . When something like this happens are those that actually write the contract & those that agree to pay it have a clause in it that if something like this happens (especially being a felony offense) does that give the team a out on the contract & better yet does it take that cap hit away from the team ?

 

I really hate that Von has gotten himself into this mess but it's all on him so if this does work out to where his gal can't recant her statement as far as the assault & the Bills/NFL has to make the call and release him what happens as far as the financial obligations to the Bills ?

 

I for one would think that every contract would have some kind of clause in it that if this kind of thing happens the team that the player has the contract with should be null & void and not have to honor their end of the agreement .

 

Which if it takes Von as long as it normally does to come back from his ACL like it did Tre this could be a blessing of sorts for the Bills because they could actually use that cap space for more young players or to keep the likes of others much younger that are performing at a high level like Leonard Floyd . 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, T master said:

I for one would think that every contract would have some kind of clause in it that if this kind of thing happens the team that the player has the contract with should be null & void and not have to honor their end of the agreement .

 

That used to be Jim Overdorf's responsibility which he rarely executed.  For many years when new GMs were hired they were told Jim Overdorf was a staff member and would have input into team especially contracts.  Brandon Beane was told he had option of consulting Jim Overdorf and his new job title was "Senior advisor to the GM/football operations".   Buffalo Bills staff page has been updated to include Dallass based Legends staff and currently he is not listed, At one point Overdorf was named Interim General Council replacing dismissed Kathryn D’Angelo.

 

Interim GC Overdorf is a longtime football operations advisor, having joined the Bills in 1986. He will stand in while the Bills find a permanent replacement for D’Angelo.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Mango said:

I’m failing to see how these Von Millers story is much different than this?

 

On October 23 Ross thought his GF was cheating on him. Broke some stuff. Told her to leave. Shoved her. Released on $2500 bail. 
 

Suspended 6 weeks until his hearing on Dec 4. 

 

https://amp.kansascity.com/sports/nfl/kansas-city-chiefs/article281640478.html

I think the NFL is aware the Bills would use the suspension to try and get out from the horrendous deal that Miller has, which would cause a huge headache for the league and NLFPA.

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/7/2023 at 7:27 PM, Beck Water said:

 

You are correct and I've commented on this several times upthread.  The league can, and has, but they usually let the legal process play out and complete their own investigation first - all of which takes time.

 

In the Zeke Elliot case you cite, the league "sat on it"/investigated for more than a year before issuing a suspension.

 

The league has never swept in (that I can think of) and suspended a player at the 'accusations' stage.

 

Adrian Peterson missed 15 games in 2015 starting from the same stage that Von Miller is at (being arrested). It looks like the Vikings deactivated him for 1 game, then the league put him on the NFLs exempt list for 9 weeks, then the league suspended him the remainder of the season. 

 

I'm pretty surprised the league hasn't put him on the exempt list. Maybe they are playing chicken with the Bills to see if we sit him on our own.  

 

  • Like (+1) 1
  • Agree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, mannc said:

No difference at all, except Miller is a star and Ross is JAG. And Miller’s bail was $5,000.

 

The difference is right in the headline of the linked article in the post. 
"Charge against Chiefs receiver Justyn Ross upgraded to felony in domestic violence case"

 

See the key word "charge"?  Ross was charged.  That's why he went on the "exempt" list.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Beck Water said:

 

The difference is right in the headline of the linked article in the post. 
"Charge against Chiefs receiver Justyn Ross upgraded to felony in domestic violence case"

 

See the key word "charge"?  Ross was charged.  That's why he went on the "exempt" list.

 


See post just above yours.  How can someone be arrested but not charged?  

Edited by BillsfaninSB
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, DabillsDaBillsDaBills said:

 

Adrian Peterson missed 15 games in 2015 starting from the same stage that Von Miller is at (being arrested). It looks like the Vikings deactivated him for 1 game, then the league put him on the NFLs exempt list for 9 weeks, then the league suspended him the remainder of the season. 

 

I'm pretty surprised the league hasn't put him on the exempt list. Maybe they are playing chicken with the Bills to see if we sit him on our own.  

 

 

No, Peterson was not at the "same stage Von Miller is at" (being arrested.

 

Peterson was indicted by a grand jury Sept 12 and placed on the exempt list 5 days later.

 

The league has said they will wait to act until/unless there are charges.  That's apparently their standard for "exempt list"

2 minutes ago, BillsfaninSB said:


See post just above yours.  How can someone be arrested but not charged?  

 

This has been explained multiple times up thread.

 

The bottom line TL;DR is:

Police can arrest someone they have 'probable cause' to determine to have committed a crime. 

This is different than charges, which are filed by a prosecutor or by a Grand Jury.

 

A person can be indicted or charged without being arrested

A person can be arrested without being charged (anyone who is arrested can plea for bail)

 

Don't believe me?  ==> Google

Edited by Beck Water
Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, Beck Water said:

 

The difference is right in the headline of the linked article in the post. 
"Charge against Chiefs receiver Justyn Ross upgraded to felony in domestic violence case"

 

See the key word "charge"?  Ross was charged.  That's why he went on the "exempt" list.

 

Are we really going to do this again?  Von Miller has been charged with a third degree felony assault.  (A quick google search will confirm this.)  Miller was arrested on this charge and then released on bail.  The charges are pending. So, no different than Ross. 

 

From CBS News:  "The 34-year-old Miller faces a charge of third-degree felony assault of a pregnant woman, which is punishable by 2 to 10 years in prison and a $10,000 fine. He is free after posting a $5,000 bond."

 

Edited by mannc
  • Thank you (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, mannc said:

Are we really going to do this again?  Von Miller has been charged with a third degree felony assault.  (A quick google search will confirm this.)  Miller was arrested on this charge and then released on bail.  The charges are pending. So, no different than Ross. 

 

From CBS News:  "The 34-year-old Miller faces a charge of third-degree felony assault of a pregnant woman, which is punishable by 2 to 10 years in prison and a $10,000 fine. He is free after posting a $5,000 bond."

 

Arrested on suspicion of third degree felony assault.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, mannc said:

Are we really going to do this again?  Von Miller has been charged with a third degree felony assault.  (A quick google search will confirm this.)  Miller was arrested on this charge and then released on bail.  The charges are pending. So, no different than Ross. 

 

From CBS News:  "The 34-year-old Miller faces a charge of third-degree felony assault of a pregnant woman, which is punishable by 2 to 10 years in prison and a $10,000 fine. He is free after posting a $5,000 bond."

 

 

We'll apparently do it as many times as necessary. 

 

I grant you that the media is not writing in a way that clarifies the distinction but "facing" a charge, means to the media, "according to what you're said to have done, these are the charges that could be filed against you." not "you have been charged with these crimes".  It's kind of an unclear way of writing about it.

 

But Miller has not (as far as I know still) been formally charged with a crime

 

https://www.nbcsports.com/nfl/profootballtalk/rumor-mill/news/von-miller-has-no-comment-on-felony-assault-charge

Quote

Bills edge rusher Von Miller, who is facing a third-degree felony assault of a pregnant woman charge, had no comment when reporters approached him at his locker after Thursday’s practice, Alaina Getzenberg of ESPN reports.

same article

Quote

The woman since has said no assault took place, and the NFL will not put Miller on the Commissioner Exempt list unless he is “formally charged” with a crime.

See the distinction they're making "facing" vs. not "formally charged"?

 

It's the same one the NFL is making, like it or don't (and there are things to like about it)

 

I'm not sure what CBS news item you're looking at but some of the ones I've seen are even worse for blurring the distinction

 

3 minutes ago, realtruelove said:

Arrested on suspicion of third degree felony assault.

 

Again:

Arrested on suspicion does not equal charged

Police can arrest you when they believe (and get a judge to agree)  they have 'probable cause' that you committed a crime (arrested on suspicion)

 

Charges have to be filed by a prosecutor or a Grand Jury

 

If he were being arrested and charged it would be "arrested on charges of...."

He can also be charged without being arrested, and issued a summons to appear in court to answer for the charges

 

At which point we are going way over my paygrade.

 

But that's the distinction the NFL is making

Edited by Beck Water
  • Thank you (+1) 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Beck Water said:

 

We'll apparently do it as many times as necessary. 

 

I grant you that the media is not writing in a way that clarifies the distinction but "facing" a charge, means to the media, "according to what you're said to have done, these are the charges that could be filed against you." not "you have been charged with these crimes".  It's kind of an unclear way of writing about it.

 

But Miller has not (as far as I know still) been formally charged with a crime

 

https://www.nbcsports.com/nfl/profootballtalk/rumor-mill/news/von-miller-has-no-comment-on-felony-assault-charge

same article

See the distinction they're making "facing" vs. not "formally charged"?

 

It's the same one the NFL is making, like it or don't (and there are things to like about it)

 

I'm not sure what CBS news item you're looking at but some of the ones I've seen are even worse.

Admittedly, criminal law is not my specialty, but I have no idea how one can be arrested, taken into custody, and forced to post bond without actually being charged with a crime.   

  • Agree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Beck Water said:

 

We'll apparently do it as many times as necessary. 

 

I grant you that the media is not writing in a way that clarifies the distinction but "facing" a charge, means to the media, "according to what you're said to have done, these are the charges that could be filed against you." not "you have been charged with these crimes".  It's kind of an unclear way of writing about it.

 

But Miller has not (as far as I know still) been formally charged with a crime

 

https://www.nbcsports.com/nfl/profootballtalk/rumor-mill/news/von-miller-has-no-comment-on-felony-assault-charge

same article

See the distinction they're making "facing" vs. not "formally charged"?

 

It's the same one the NFL is making, like it or don't (and there are things to like about it)

 

I'm not sure what CBS news item you're looking at but some of the ones I've seen are even worse for blurring the distinction

 

 

Again:

Arrested on suspicion does not equal charged

Police can arrest you when they believe (and get a judge to agree)  they have 'probable cause' that you committed a crime (arrested on suspicion)

 

Charges have to be filed by a prosecutor or a Grand Jury

 

If he were being arrested and charged it would be "arrested on charges of...."

He can also be charged without being arrested, and issued a summons to appear in court to answer for the charges

 

At which point we are going way over my paygrade.

 

But that's the distinction the NFL is making

I was agreeing with you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/7/2023 at 8:40 PM, Malazan said:

I like how many people who have previously defended Bills players to "let the process play out" are now calling for Von's head. It's amazing how opinions change depending on the skill of the player. 

Felony assault on a pregnant woman is uncharted territory for Bills and you can’t just levy that charge out of thin air

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, Beck Water said:

 

We'll apparently do it as many times as necessary. 

 

I grant you that the media is not writing in a way that clarifies the distinction but "facing" a charge, means to the media, "according to what you're said to have done, these are the charges that could be filed against you." not "you have been charged with these crimes".  It's kind of an unclear way of writing about it.

 

But Miller has not (as far as I know still) been formally charged with a crime

 

https://www.nbcsports.com/nfl/profootballtalk/rumor-mill/news/von-miller-has-no-comment-on-felony-assault-charge

same article

See the distinction they're making "facing" vs. not "formally charged"?

 

It's the same one the NFL is making, like it or don't (and there are things to like about it)

 

I'm not sure what CBS news item you're looking at but some of the ones I've seen are even worse for blurring the distinction

 

 

Again:

Arrested on suspicion does not equal charged

Police can arrest you when they believe (and get a judge to agree)  they have 'probable cause' that you committed a crime (arrested on suspicion)

 

Charges have to be filed by a prosecutor or a Grand Jury

 

If he were being arrested and charged it would be "arrested on charges of...."

He can also be charged without being arrested, and issued a summons to appear in court to answer for the charges

 

At which point we are going way over my paygrade.

 

But that's the distinction the NFL is making


FWIW #1- I spoke to a friend in the DA’s office today and basically simplified it to. “If you have a warrant and you’re released on bail you have a charge. If prosecution wants to go sit in front of a judge and trial is a different story”.

 

FWIW #2 - I jumped into a legal subreddit to ask this question and somebody responded that in Texas penal procedure authorizes bail in two situations.

- Someone is charged with a crime

- Someone who was arrested without a warrant.


Von had a warrant, was not arrested at the scene of the crime. So a charge would need to be present. 
 

I the league is purposely muddling the situation so they don’t have to act. If the Bills do have an out in his contract like some have rumored, voiding $17M will be a historical move and likely trigger further litigation for the league. Add in it being for a first ballot HOF’er, and it is beneficial for the league to be intentionally pedantic. 

Edited by Mango
Words
  • Thank you (+1) 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...