Until found guilty by a jury of your peers.

[heelinfine]

You are presumed innocent. Gregg Hardy deserves that right, and nothing the Charlotte Observer, ESPN, Sports Illustrated, or any other network or Huddler says or believes, changes his constitutional rights.

[KillerKat]

Unfortunately it's the way society is now. You're guilty until proven innocent.

[cbully]

[greghardy'sAK-47]

Unfortunately it's the way society is now. You're guilty until proven innocent.

especially in DV cases and a special especially when ray rice video comes out.  

 

also, goodell needs to go.  dude has fuged the whole league.  

[CRA]

Yes, Greg Hardy the person has that right to appeal and let it play out

People blur that with therefore there is no way he should face suspension. Which is false. The NFL can suspend you. They don't need a court of law to convict you of anything to do so

[Davidson Deac II]

I don't think that is quite the way it works.  He was found guilty, but he has the right to appeal and have a jury trial.  Although I am not sure the guilty verdict has actually been recorded yet.  It doesn't show up in the NC offender database. 

[heelinfine]

Yes, Greg Hardy the person has that right.

People blur that with therefore there is no way he should face suspension. Which is false. The NFL can suspend you. They don't need a court of lapw to convict you of anything to do so

But don't you think, that as America's new favorite pastime, They should hold dear to those

tenants.

The only reason for rush to judgement, is the new media witch hunt. And myself for one, find that a little scary, and a lot sad.

[CRA]

But don't you think, that as America's new favorite pastime, They should hold dear to those

tenants.

The only reason for rush to judgement, is the new media witch hunt. And myself for one find that a little scary and a lot sad.

People get suspended all the time. Doctors, lawyers, teachers, whoever. They don't have to be convicted in a court of law either for it to happen.

If it was gonna happen it should of happened....but the news initially broke Jerry Richardson had every right to suspend Hardy if he saw fit. I thought he would have at the time

You see, one of the biggest issues in all of this mess this week is our society is trying to create different rules for guys that are good with a ball that are greatly different than the norm. I haven't got in that soapbox here but it is one of mine....we are seeing it trickle down to other levels of ball

[raleigh-panther]

What is sadder is a football player cold cocking the person he says he loves.

He is quite lucky that the woman didn't hit her head on that elevator railing or he would be looking at murder charge

Saddest of all is the woman married him which indicates to me that she does not think enough of herself to walk away

If history plays out the way it normally does, one day she won't walk away.

Take a real good look at her body language in their joint news conference, and if atter seeing that, you think this the first time it has happened, I'll sell you ocean front in Arizona

[fieryprophet]

I find the entire aspect of allowing judges to rule on cases before they go to a jury quite disturbing. There's a reason the Constitution specifies for jury trials: judges cannot be trusted to be impartial.

[Diehardpanther02]

You are presumed innocent. Gregg Hardy deserves that right, and nothing the Charlotte Observer, ESPN, Sports Illustrated, or any other network or Huddler says or believes, changes his constitutional rights.

Well hate to say it he has been proven guilty, and is now in the appeals process

[heelinfine]

Ok CRA, I respect you enough as a long time huddler as not to address you as D- Los biggest fan.

Suppose you were pulled over tonight, and law enforcement thought you were under the influence, but you knew that you were only sleepy , the breathalyzer was negative, but they still believe you were under the influence of something, so they took you in anyway. How would you feel if your employer, on that information alone suspended you for 6 weeks without pay?

[UpstatePanther]

it makes me very sad that things are this way in America right now. you dont punish someone until you know they are guilty. this is NOT like police brutality where the officer is suspended pending investigation. police officers are responsible for the protection of society, and to accuse one of assault is MUCH more serious than some crazy woman accusing an NFL player of roughing her up. The officer SHOULD be suspended for the safety of the community. The NFL player has no such responsibility to the community and therefore, ought not be punished until found guilty by a court of law according to a jury of his peers. Greg Hardy has not had the chance to exercise that right as of yet, so therefore, no action whatsoever should be taken against him until he is proven guilty by that jury of peers. 

 

its a closed case for me until the jury trial. i will be highly critical of the NFL if they suspend him and he is found innocent in the end. that would be unjust jeopardization of Hardy's livelihood and i would fully support him suing the NFL for as much as he could fuggin get. 

 

all that being said, domestic violence is a horrible terrible thing and i support the no-tolerance policy going forward. i am talking indefinite suspension immediately following the full due process of law, or following an admission of guilt (as in the Ray Rice case)

[Davidson Deac II]

Yes, Greg Hardy the person has that right.

People blur that with therefore there is no way he should face suspension. Which is false. The NFL can suspend you. They don't need a court of law to convict you of anything to do so

 

They don't need it to suspend, however in cases like this, they usually wait and with good reason.  Unless there is clear cut guilt or some other circumstance, they usually wait.   If Hardy is found not guilty, he could have solid grounds for a lawsuit, especially if the suspension cost him money.  The NFL usually wins these lawsuits because they are smart about the suspensions.  But suspending a player who might be found not guilty is a little more risky.