Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
New resources
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Resources
Latest reviews
Search resources
Members
Current visitors
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Open Football Discussion
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
Anthony Hargrove suspended 8 games
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="TJV" data-source="post: 445840" data-attributes="member: 4300"><p><span style="color: #000000"><span style="font-family: 'Tahoma'">I disagree with Florio. Just because Hargrove doesn’t write “there was a bounty program” doesn’t mean his statement doesn’t strongly imply he knew one existed. Florio’s kind of thinking is why juries let the guilty go too often. Here’s an <em>analogy</em>: The jury hears a tape of a mob boss telling one of his underlings to “take care of Tony” and the next day Tony is murdered. In trial when asked what he meant by those words, the mob boss says, I meant he should pay Tony’s rent, you know, <em>take care of him</em>. During deliberation, Mike says, “well, the mob boss never told him to kill Tony”. </span></span></p><p> </p><p><span style="color: #000000"><span style="font-family: 'Tahoma'">IMO the best evidence of the bounty program is the recording of Williams’ locker room speech. But Hargrove’s written statement clearly infers the bounty program existed. Why else would Williams tell him he was going to deny it and Hargrove should deny it too? IMO its common sense that if the program didn’t exist, Williams and Vitt would implore Hargrove to tell the truth, or ask him questions to see if he was aware of something they weren’t. If what Hargrove wrote is true, it’s clear to me all three men in the room knew the bounty program existed. “If we all stay on the same page about this, it will blow over”. That can’t be reconciled with three innocent people in that circumstance. </span></span></p><p> </p><p><em><span style="color: #000000"><span style="font-family: 'Tahoma'">An inference is a reasoning process using evidence to proceed from premise to conclusion: As you walk into a building the sun is blocked by dark clouds and you hear thunder. You spend some time in an interior windowless room but hear the thunder and wind roar. You walk out of the building and everything is soaking wet but it’s not raining. You didn’t see it rain but… </span></span></em></p><p> </p><p><span style="color: #000000"><span style="font-family: 'Tahoma'">Then Hargrove certainly confesses to lying to NFL Security personnel: “… as instructed by Coach Williams and Coach Vitt, I denied all knowledge of a bounty or bounty program”. Hey Mike, use your common sense. Why would someone explain why he told investigators something if that person had told the truth? What was the purpose of the NFLPA providing this statement to the NFL if not to offer mitigating circumstances regarding Hargrove’s lying to investigators? </span></span></p><p> </p><p><span style="color: #000000"><span style="font-family: 'Tahoma'">I found two bits of information in the statement more interesting than the above. First, I didn’t think Williams’ reputation could be damaged more but here he is bribing a player to lie (I’ve got you plugged in…) and then reneging on his bribe. And what about Vitt?! If the league believed this statement how in the world could Hargrove’s suspension be longer than Vitt’s? If the statement is true Vitt, along with Williams, is suborning perjury and thereby participating in the coverup. If Hargrove’s suspension was longer because he lied, how could the suspension of one of the coaches that convinced him to lie be shorter? That’s just nuts IMO. </span></span></p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="TJV, post: 445840, member: 4300"] [COLOR=#000000][FONT=Tahoma]I disagree with Florio. Just because Hargrove doesn’t write “there was a bounty program” doesn’t mean his statement doesn’t strongly imply he knew one existed. Florio’s kind of thinking is why juries let the guilty go too often. Here’s an [I]analogy[/I]: The jury hears a tape of a mob boss telling one of his underlings to “take care of Tony” and the next day Tony is murdered. In trial when asked what he meant by those words, the mob boss says, I meant he should pay Tony’s rent, you know, [I]take care of him[/I]. During deliberation, Mike says, “well, the mob boss never told him to kill Tony”. [/FONT][/COLOR] [COLOR=#000000][FONT=Tahoma]IMO the best evidence of the bounty program is the recording of Williams’ locker room speech. But Hargrove’s written statement clearly infers the bounty program existed. Why else would Williams tell him he was going to deny it and Hargrove should deny it too? IMO its common sense that if the program didn’t exist, Williams and Vitt would implore Hargrove to tell the truth, or ask him questions to see if he was aware of something they weren’t. If what Hargrove wrote is true, it’s clear to me all three men in the room knew the bounty program existed. “If we all stay on the same page about this, it will blow over”. That can’t be reconciled with three innocent people in that circumstance. [/FONT][/COLOR] [I][COLOR=#000000][FONT=Tahoma]An inference is a reasoning process using evidence to proceed from premise to conclusion: As you walk into a building the sun is blocked by dark clouds and you hear thunder. You spend some time in an interior windowless room but hear the thunder and wind roar. You walk out of the building and everything is soaking wet but it’s not raining. You didn’t see it rain but… [/FONT][/COLOR][/I] [COLOR=#000000][FONT=Tahoma]Then Hargrove certainly confesses to lying to NFL Security personnel: “… as instructed by Coach Williams and Coach Vitt, I denied all knowledge of a bounty or bounty program”. Hey Mike, use your common sense. Why would someone explain why he told investigators something if that person had told the truth? What was the purpose of the NFLPA providing this statement to the NFL if not to offer mitigating circumstances regarding Hargrove’s lying to investigators? [/FONT][/COLOR] [COLOR=#000000][FONT=Tahoma]I found two bits of information in the statement more interesting than the above. First, I didn’t think Williams’ reputation could be damaged more but here he is bribing a player to lie (I’ve got you plugged in…) and then reneging on his bribe. And what about Vitt?! If the league believed this statement how in the world could Hargrove’s suspension be longer than Vitt’s? If the statement is true Vitt, along with Williams, is suborning perjury and thereby participating in the coverup. If Hargrove’s suspension was longer because he lied, how could the suspension of one of the coaches that convinced him to lie be shorter? That’s just nuts IMO. [/FONT][/COLOR] [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Members online
gopkrs
Latest posts
2024 draft discussion thread
Latest: Thirteen Below
Today at 12:58 AM
Draft Talk
2024 Packer UDFA Tracker....
Latest: Pokerbrat2000
Yesterday at 10:55 PM
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
2024 3rd round #88 MarShawn Lloyd RB
Latest: Poppa San
Yesterday at 10:38 PM
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
R
2024 2nd Rd pick #58 Javon Bullard S
Latest: RicFlairoftheNFL
Yesterday at 10:05 PM
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
2024 Round 7, pick 245: Michael Pratt, QB
Latest: Thirteen Below
Yesterday at 10:04 PM
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
Forums
Open Football Discussion
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
Anthony Hargrove suspended 8 games
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn more…
Top