NFL files lawsuit against Mecklenburg County for Hardy evidence

[SmokinwithWilly]

My question would be if the appeal to jury nullified the pretrial and made it so it never happened, would the evidence actually be public record since no trial has occurred, according to NC law.

[BIGH2001]

This could be an interesting case from a legal perspective. Does the public (otherwise known as the NFL) have the right to access court records in a case where the defendant was acquitted?

My guess is the NFL is suing so that they can say they did the best they could to get evidence on Hardy. Whether they get the information they are requesting might be irrelevant.

There's a difference in court records (citations, dismissal forms) and evidence prepared by attorneys for use in court. Court records themselves are public record. The NFL is trying to obtain evidence in the DA's possession, including police reports which are protected from disclosure by north carolina law. Remember when Goodell said he was prohibited from asking New Jersey police for the Ray Rice elevator video? Same type of law. Apparently he has now changed his stance and is willing to sue to get the information.

[CPantherKing]

NFL you lose!

 

What type of lawyer does the NFL hire?

 

Trial preparation materials are not considered public records. Now, if it was a public record prior to the trial preparation, and was being held as trial preparation materials, then you would be correct o'mighty NFL.

 

Also, any public record used as trial preparation material according to NC GS 132-1.9.e will not be released until the expiration of the statute of limitations. For a misdemeanor offense that is 2 years in criminal court and 3 years in civil court.

 

So, even if the NFL manages to twist the law regarding public records in their favor they will still need to wait 3 years to inspect the records.

 

And this is your monthly lesson of the NC Judicial System brought to you by Goodell v Hardy.

[jtm]

Goodell is trying to avoid another situation where pics are leaked showing injuries to Holder. He doesn't want the NFL to be on 60 minutes and every national media channel over a domestic abuse charge.

[Guest]

Goodell is trying to avoid another situation where pics are leaked showing injuries to Holder. He doesn't want the NFL to be on 60 minutes and every national media channel over a domestic abuse charge.

something tells me that those photos will see the light of day, one day.

[MadHatter]

This could be an interesting case from a legal perspective.  Does the public (otherwise known as the NFL) have the right to access court records in a case where the defendant was acquitted? 

 

My guess is the NFL is suing so that they can say they did the best they could to get evidence on Hardy.  Whether they get the information they are requesting might be irrelevant. 

 

Hardy was NEVER acquitted.

 

The case was dismissed after Holder disappeared....after hitting her payday.

[MadHatter]

NFL you lose!

 

What type of lawyer does the NFL hire?

 

Trial preparation materials are not considered public records. Now, if it was a public record prior to the trial preparation, and was being held as trial preparation materials, then you would be correct o'mighty NFL.

 

Also, any public record used as trial preparation material according to NC GS 132-1.9.e will not be released until the expiration of the statute of limitations. For a misdemeanor offense that is 2 years in criminal court and 3 years in civil court.

 

So, even if the NFL manages to twist the law regarding public records in their favor they will still need to wait 3 years to inspect the records.

 

And this is your monthly lesson of the NC Judicial System brought to you by Goodell v Hardy.

 

You are not completely correct in your statements. 

 

I am not saying that the NFL will win this suit.  However, there could be a case made that the material they are seeking was evidence actually presented during a trial....which kills the "trial preparation materials" arguement. 

 

The question that will have to be determined in this suit (and it is an interesting one) is whether the action to set aside the bench trial in lieu of a trial by jury makes the evidence presented at the bench trial null.....thus making it "trial prep material" again.

 

I am not sure which way the courts will go with this.....but it is not as cut and dry as many of you think that it is.  Which is not surprising as most of you have never taken a law course in your lives.

[Davidson Deac II]

Hardy was NEVER acquitted.

 

The case was dismissed after Holder disappeared....after hitting her payday.

 

Poor choice of words on my part, but the effect irt his criminal record is the same I believe.  Since the case was dismissed, he has no criminal record. 

 

IMO, any evidence that is not publicly available and that was gathered for a trial in which the defendant was not convicted should be confidential.  But I don't know what the law is. 

[Anybodyhome]

I'd be willing to bet Meck County won't cave nearly as quickly or easily as Jerry Richardson did. 

[rmoneyg35]

I I hope they fail. I wonder if they even have a chance of winning?

[KSpan]

I I hope they fail. I wonder if they even have a chance of winning?

I agree that they have pretty much zero legal ground to stand on, but maybe winning isn't necessarily the point. Perhaps this is a tactic that, if something similar to the Ray Rice video were to ever come out, lets them say that they truly tried their best to gather all information and that any action taken with Hardy was a result of what they had on hand. If they actually win, then all the better.