Ben gets The Deep 6 and then probably the 4 Game Suspension

[commavegarage]

listen so-called lawyers... everyone knows that a school of higher education has to have an engineering school to call itself a rape. if there's no engineering school, its just a sexual assault.

somebody check, does miami (ohio) have an engineering school?

*Welcome back though

[apbc12]

he probably raped her. when she presses charges and they examine Ben's DNA and compare it to the DNA found in her vagina, then we will all know for sure and he goes to jail if it is a match

IF she was raped (and I agree with you that she probably was) then the "media hounding" shouldn't mean a damn thing. She has a case, is a victim, and she was violated. Or she wasn't and there is no crime. There is no third way. She dropped charges, well then there is no crime. A victim should never let a violater off the hook because of the "media hounding." Do that, and the public will start to DOUBT your story (the way I am starting to doubt it now.) That is exactly what happened to Katlyn Faber when she decided to drop the criminal charges against Kobe Bryant. People started to doubt that she was ever raped (that it was consentual sex and she was just looking for money from a millionaire bonehead, which she later got, fancy that.)

She was drunk which means she can't LEGALLY give consent to sex. So you can charge him for that. Lets say she wasn't drunk. Even if it WAS consentual (and she was sober), the DA STILL has Ben on statitory rape if she is underage. But she has to press charges. Don't let a criminal get away!

You may be able to get into the mind of a rapist, but your understanding of criminal law could use some work.

Oh really? Educate me.

A) Statutory rape does not apply to 20-year-olds. In Georgia, where this incident took place, the age of consent is 16.

B) Different jurisdictions handle consent in different ways, but being drunk doesn't necessarily equate lack of consent. Date rape is one thing; drunken sex is another. I don't feel like looking up how Georgia handles consent.

C) It's not the victim's choice whether to pursue charges. The police give their recommendation to the DA, who makes the choice. Yes, in a case like this it would be damn near impossible to get a conviction without the victim's participation, but the DA can do what he wants. Unfortunately, it's not terribly uncommon for victims of crimes, especially in cases like this, to bail on the prosecution.

[commavegarage]

listen so-called lawyers... everyone knows that a school of higher education has to have an engineering school to call itself a rape. if there's no engineering school, its just a sexual assault.

somebody check, does miami (ohio) have an engineering school?

*Welcome back though

i give this a 4.5 out of 10.

if someone can impress me with a good "fake retirement" picture i will gladly make it my signature

Oh come on, coming out of the dark tunnel back to the old stomping grounds? That's at least a 7.

[apbc12]

if someone can impress me with a good "fake retirement" picture i will gladly make it my signature

tears are needed to make this a 7. tears or racist rants

I would post a picture of 74's 30-second retirement when the 300 posters he doesn't like weren't banned, but I don't want to rocket car anyone.

[angrychicken]

[b0mberMan]

[BCFAN94]

She was drunk which means she can't LEGALLY give consent to sex. So you can charge him for that. Lets say she wasn't drunk. Even if it WAS consentual (and she was sober), the DA STILL has Ben on statitory rape if she is underage. But she has to press charges. Don't let a criminal get away!

If this were true, I would say most guys could probably have been accused and convicted of rape. Can drunk guys consent to sex or are they being abused also?

well in all seriousness, that depends on the gender of the person "abusing" the man.

assume it is a woman he is having sex with, drunk or sober, (for a man) consenting to sex is only halfway there.

if a guy is truly "drunk" he is going to have a hard time getting "hard". thus, no sex, thus no rape (on her part) unless she is giving him the ole "ralphie treatment"

i suppose there are some sexual supermen out there who are "hard and drunk" at the same time, but I envy those guys so (as a juror) I will never side on their favor in criminal proceedings against the cougar that mounted them. Of course if she "ralphie's" him, then I could see finding in his favor, send the bitch to women's jail

You truly have a twisted view on life and the law.

it isn't that my view is twisted AC. it is just that I have no time for bullshit. when people ask bullshit questions (like what about men giving consent to sex while drunk), they get a bullshit answer

It's kind of ironic that you claim not to have time for bullshit when you have done nothing but bullshit in this thread. The question is legit. Just because you have two beers and can't get an erection doesn't mean that real MEN who aren't impotent have the same condition. You should see a doctor for your problem.

You clearly are not qualified to comment on legal issues or erections since you have no knowledge on how either should work.

[innocentbystander]

he probably raped her. when she presses charges and they examine Ben's DNA and compare it to the DNA found in her vagina, then we will all know for sure and he goes to jail if it is a match

IF she was raped (and I agree with you that she probably was) then the "media hounding" shouldn't mean a damn thing. She has a case, is a victim, and she was violated. Or she wasn't and there is no crime. There is no third way. She dropped charges, well then there is no crime. A victim should never let a violater off the hook because of the "media hounding." Do that, and the public will start to DOUBT your story (the way I am starting to doubt it now.) That is exactly what happened to Katlyn Faber when she decided to drop the criminal charges against Kobe Bryant. People started to doubt that she was ever raped (that it was consentual sex and she was just looking for money from a millionaire bonehead, which she later got, fancy that.)

She was drunk which means she can't LEGALLY give consent to sex. So you can charge him for that. Lets say she wasn't drunk. Even if it WAS consentual (and she was sober), the DA STILL has Ben on statitory rape if she is underage. But she has to press charges. Don't let a criminal get away!

You may be able to get into the mind of a rapist, but your understanding of criminal law could use some work.

Oh really? Educate me.

A) Statutory rape does not apply to 20-year-olds. In Georgia, where this incident took place, the age of consent is 16.

granted. i know nothing about the victim, least of all her age. i only mentioned statutory rape because someone else on this thread (incorrectly) mentioned she was under-age. i assumed that THEY knew what they were talking about, apparently they didn't. but you don't have to be under the age of 16 in Georgia to be raped (legally.) that is my point. i know things are back-woods there, but this isn't the 1840s.

B) Different jurisdictions handle consent in different ways, but being drunk doesn't necessarily equate lack of consent. Date rape is one thing; drunken sex is another. I don't feel like looking up how Georgia handles consent.

okay so now YOU are further dismantling her case, not me. i don't know what the laws are in Georgia regarding intoxication and "contracting" with another party. giving consent to sex is a verbal contract (much that it is.) in most states, you can not legally contract while drunk (unless both parties are married, in which case, sexual consent is implied by marriage.) but if you are drunk, you are typically not bound by what you say to a third party, legally. that is why the judge threw out the marriage of Dennis Rodman to Carmen Electra in the state of Nevada, he was drunk, he couldn't legally marry her at the time (sorry Carmen, no money for you.)

lets say that in Georgia she COULD give consent to sex. okay, so now that is two strikes against her in legal proceedings, explaining (more and more) why she dropped the criminal charges. moving on

C) It's not the victim's choice whether to pursue charges. The police give their recommendation to the DA, who makes the choice. Yes, in a case like this it would be damn near impossible to get a conviction without the victim's participation, but the DA can do what he wants. Unfortunately, it's not terribly uncommon for victims of crimes, especially in cases like this, to bail on the prosecution.

in cases like this? are you sure there was a crime here? with what you have said in A & B I'm beginning to think that even YOU doubt that she was raped. i still contend she was, Ben's a sleeze bag. but saying to the DA in one breath "I will not testify" and in the next breath, the family is discussing their own civil matters vs Ben, does not make her look very good at all. it makes her look like Katlyn Faber.

either she was raped or she wasn't. either she said no and he violated her, or she didn't. if she was raped, testify. give the DA something, that is the only way you will really heal. the DA will press charges (provided you are more credible than Crystal Gail Magnum) and they will lock the fucker up. if you do NOT testify (out of "fear" of being cross examined, or what-not), that leads the public to start to think that your original accusations were bullshit, that YOU have something to hide, like the truth.

go all one way, or go the other. that is all I'm saying

[innocentbystander]

She was drunk which means she can't LEGALLY give consent to sex. So you can charge him for that. Lets say she wasn't drunk. Even if it WAS consentual (and she was sober), the DA STILL has Ben on statitory rape if she is underage. But she has to press charges. Don't let a criminal get away!

If this were true, I would say most guys could probably have been accused and convicted of rape. Can drunk guys consent to sex or are they being abused also?

well in all seriousness, that depends on the gender of the person "abusing" the man.

assume it is a woman he is having sex with, drunk or sober, (for a man) consenting to sex is only halfway there.

if a guy is truly "drunk" he is going to have a hard time getting "hard". thus, no sex, thus no rape (on her part) unless she is giving him the ole "ralphie treatment"

i suppose there are some sexual supermen out there who are "hard and drunk" at the same time, but I envy those guys so (as a juror) I will never side on their favor in criminal proceedings against the cougar that mounted them. Of course if she "ralphie's" him, then I could see finding in his favor, send the bitch to women's jail

You truly have a twisted view on life and the law.

it isn't that my view is twisted AC. it is just that I have no time for bullshit. when people ask bullshit questions (like what about men giving consent to sex while drunk), they get a bullshit answer

It's kind of ironic that you claim not to have time for bullshit when you have done nothing but bullshit in this thread. The question is legit. Just because you have two beers and can't get an erection doesn't mean that real MEN who aren't impotent have the same condition. You should see a doctor for your problem.

You clearly are not qualified to comment on legal issues or erections since you have no knowledge on how either should work.

this response gave me an errection

[BCFAN94]

She was drunk which means she can't LEGALLY give consent to sex. So you can charge him for that. Lets say she wasn't drunk. Even if it WAS consentual (and she was sober), the DA STILL has Ben on statitory rape if she is underage. But she has to press charges. Don't let a criminal get away!

If this were true, I would say most guys could probably have been accused and convicted of rape. Can drunk guys consent to sex or are they being abused also?

well in all seriousness, that depends on the gender of the person "abusing" the man.

assume it is a woman he is having sex with, drunk or sober, (for a man) consenting to sex is only halfway there.

if a guy is truly "drunk" he is going to have a hard time getting "hard". thus, no sex, thus no rape (on her part) unless she is giving him the ole "ralphie treatment"

i suppose there are some sexual supermen out there who are "hard and drunk" at the same time, but I envy those guys so (as a juror) I will never side on their favor in criminal proceedings against the cougar that mounted them. Of course if she "ralphie's" him, then I could see finding in his favor, send the bitch to women's jail

You truly have a twisted view on life and the law.

it isn't that my view is twisted AC. it is just that I have no time for bullshit. when people ask bullshit questions (like what about men giving consent to sex while drunk), they get a bullshit answer

It's kind of ironic that you claim not to have time for bullshit when you have done nothing but bullshit in this thread. The question is legit. Just because you have two beers and can't get an erection doesn't mean that real MEN who aren't impotent have the same condition. You should see a doctor for your problem.

You clearly are not qualified to comment on legal issues or erections since you have no knowledge on how either should work.

this response gave me an errection

I find that really hard to believe since judging by your last response you must be drunk.

[pick6pedro]

I can give Ben a reprieve for him not knowing she was under 21- I mean it wasn't his job to check ID's and the club should be held responsible for that, but the rest of the story absolutely disgusts me.

Not to add to the abundance of legal intricacies being spewed here, but the law does not care whether he knew she was the age of consent (which is usually 16-18 as mentioned earlier - 14 in Montreal by the way!) when statutory rape is involved. Even if she had a very convincing fake ID, 14 friends vouched for her, and any reasonable person would think she was 35, the law wouldn't care because it's statutory rape. I believe the only state where mistake of fact is allowed as a defense for statutory rape cases is Alaska. Go figure. Either way, it doesn't apply here, but something for you cassanovas to keep in mind.

[Eagledom]

regardless of what you think of big ben (logic would tell you he is a scumbag), this is a slippery slope for the NFL. What does the NFL PA think of a 6 game suspension when there was no legal conviction? Do future allegations against a player, no matter how bogus they may be, result in a suspension?

[innocentbystander]

i only mentioned statutory rape because someone else on this thread (incorrectly) mentioned she was under-age. i assumed that THEY knew what they were talking about, apparently they didn't.

she is below the legal drinking age of 21 (underage). she is above the age of consent (16). YOU are the one that doesn't know what you are talking about because northeastern doesn't stress reading comprehension as much as thinking like a rapist

touche

you eagles have a keener sense of sight for these minute details than us huskies. but we are still better at pulling that snow sled

mush!

[RegalBCeagle]

granted. i know nothing about the victim, least of all her age. i only mentioned statutory rape because someone else on this thread (incorrectly) mentioned she was under-age. i assumed that THEY knew what they were talking about, apparently they didn't. but you don't have to be under the age of 16 in Georgia to be raped (legally.) that is my point. i know things are back-woods there, but this isn't the 1840s.

Saying she is underage is absolutely not incorrect. She was not of legal drinking age, i.e "underaged." Seeing as you imagined a 13 year old girl hanging out with him at the bar, it's pretty clear I can add "pederast" to the list of adjectives I have for you.

[WhiskeyEagle]

What a bunch of law nerds

[BCEagle74]

There's a better chance of a 74/TRE makeout session than the Steelers trading their starting QB to the Browns. However, I wouldn't rule out the Bills discussing it internally. Clausen is going to be a bitch in the NFL and Roethlisberger is a proven cold weather QB.

For some strange reason, I think there were many more incidents --the NFL has a huge spy network of former FBI guys and other guys watching players and these guys wouldn't know if their asses were on fire-----and a few in college that were never publized but the Steelers are now aware. Ben may have some big psycho problems and if you read the Commish statement, it is damning that he is a serial sexual woman abuser.

That was some character shot!

There were some inklings of his behavior in college, motorcycle, his sister avoiding him, comments by Pittsburgh women, Vegas, his posse, his actions, no long term girlfriends in 6 years???

.......and I believe Ben will be traded out of Pittsburgh in the next 18 hours.

Yup, I think Ben will be with some otehr team before the draft starts.

[BCEagle74]

if the Browns even think...many here will die.

Camper...You are now on the Dead Pool list....

We have Frank Ryan, Milt Plum, Mike Phipps, Brian Sipe, Brady Quinn, Derek Anderson, no way....

We have Bernie Kosar busted throwing elbow Jake the Snake now deep into the downslide..

Trade up and get Bradford...

[pick6pedro]

regardless of what you think of big ben (logic would tell you he is a scumbag), this is a slippery slope for the NFL. What does the NFL PA think of a 6 game suspension when there was no legal conviction? Do future allegations against a player, no matter how bogus they may be, result in a suspension?

I agree it's a slippery slope, and I'm sure the PA hates it. But the main thing here is that while the NFL is encouraged to use the law and convictions against a player, it isn't by any means required to wait to act until convictions are obtained beyond a reasonable doubt or stricly follow along with the hurdles and shortcomnigs of the criminal justice system. As a private organization, it can punish its employees as it deems fit/hold them to a higher ethical standard (as long as its not unconstitutional or blatantly against public policy), especially when it expressly outline its policies. So they are free to weigh the evidence they have or even stage their own investigation and come to their own conclusions.

In this case it seems they have come to a conclusion that while Ben hasn't been proven guilty in a court of law, there is ample evidence to show he violated the league's ethical conduct policies. They are well within their bounds to do this. On top of that, there hasn't been any public outcry. My guess is that while the PA will interally take this seriously and fight it tooth and nail behind closed doors due to the implications it carries for the future, considering everything, they aren't going to go out on a limb or publicly support Benny Fingers.

[DomingoOrtiz]

The NFL did what it had to do here. Goodell's past decisions forced him to take a hardline. Pacman was never really charged with anything either.

I think if anyone gets any scrutiny for being "racist", it would be the Steelers, who sold Santonio for a pack of gum but are keeping Ben (If they keep him). I don't think it's racism, it's just priorities. Receivers are very replaceable, franchise quarterbacks who win superbowls aren't.

But the Steelers should probably trade him, if for no other reason than the fact that another scandal is very likely to strike, and at that point they won't get shit for him.

Good stuff: http://www.tmz.com/2018/07/11/pacman-jo ... ght-video/

[Los]

That airport employee probably had a good 3 inches of reach on Jones and still got dropped.