Quote:
Originally Posted by NC_Skins
It was a bench trial, not a trial by peers. The thing about judges making these types of judgements, none of them want to be known as the guy who let's off some woman beater in case he goes and kills her after he's let go. I've sit in court and watched a judge let go a woman in a assault with another woman (and this woman had serious proof of an assault), and turn around and drop the guilty verdict on the next case where there really was no evidence. The difference is, one involved a man, the other a woman. I'm not saying that's the case here because I don't know the details, it's just saying I don't fully trust judgements made in these cases.
We've had situations in NC where judges were lenient on some DV cases and the man goes back and kills the wife. The judge took heat as well as the district attorney. Now, the DA won't even drop a DV case without charging the woman for filing a false report. Truthfully, Hardy should have asked for a trial by peers from the get go.
I agree though. He should be deactivated until his name is(or if) cleared in a trial by jury, since he's been found guilty in the first round.
|
I agree with your point, but that should be irrelevant with what the NFL does.
The NFL shouldn't be in the business of choosing which convictions to uphold. That is up to the Judicial System. So I agree with you about deactivating him until he receives a new trail.