49ers LB Ahmad Brooks accused of Sexual Assault in lawsuit

[dontbelikethat]

MacDonald's case against the girl for defamation was already dropped due to insufficient evidence?

Hadn't heard that...I know the initial incident with his wife was dropped and he was cleared by the NFL.

It's from the TMZ article, so Idk about credibility of it...

McDonald had sued the woman for defamation ... after the San Jose PD investigated the allegations but dropped the case due to insufficient evidence.

It's in the OP.

 

[Marvin49]

MacDonald's case against the girl for defamation was already dropped due to insufficient evidence?

Hadn't heard that...I know the initial incident with his wife was dropped and he was cleared by the NFL.

It's from the TMZ article, so Idk about credibility of it...

McDonald had sued the woman for defamation ... after the San Jose PD investigated the allegations but dropped the case due to insufficient evidence.

It's in the OP.

uh....I don't think it works that way. The SJPD isn't involved in Civil Suits so they couldn't drop it for lack of evidence. Its not being prosecuted by the DA. It isn't a criminal complaint. Its a Law Suit for $$$. I think they are mixing up the initial issue and his suit over the second incident.

EDIT: Just re-read it.

They are saying McDonald sued after the case against HIM was dropped for lack of evidence...and I don't even think THATS correct either. LOL.

 

[Marvin49]

Moreover, she's not even saying she had sex with Brooks...only that he "groped her" while she was unconscious. How would she even know? She was unconscious. Its like somebody told her what was on the video she hasn't even seen and now she sees an opportunity for $$$.

Are you seriously implying that if she didn't know about the alleged sexual assault at the time, that she shouldn't have recourse after the fact? Sorry, but that is horrible.

Dude. Seriously?

Do you just read that it's me posting and take the other viewpoint?

Of course that's not what I'm saying. What I'm saying is that she's suing with no knowledge of what happened. She wasn't conscious. She hasn't seen the video. So the first thing she does is hire a lawyer and sue? That doesn't seem fishy to you?

If it doesn't...more power to ya. IMO, and I've said this often, any guy that hits/rapes a woman should be castrated. I just find it odd that she goes straight to the "give me $$$" card before the police have finished the investigation. Strikes me much more as a "one-up" on BEING sued for defamation.

I think I have posted in the same threads as you twice, so please don't act like I am seeking you out.

I don't presume to take sides on an issue I know nothing about other than what has leaked to the media. I think making statements about possible victims' intentions and their desire for money are generally misinformed and baseless. Usually things like this are said to devalue the alleged victims' position. No different than the Frank Clark situation, I think all the people making judgments on either side should step back and realize that they are choosing their biases based on their team affiliation and that is just wrong.

If you have ever been in a situation where you don't believe justice will be served, the only other real recourse you have is civil court. That doesn't automatically make someone a gold digger. We have a culture of blaming the victim, especially when it comes to our sports heroes.

Right...but the legal process didn't finish. Its still ongoing. OJ Simpson is a good example of the family looking for justice after the law let them down.

Thing is tho, Brooks wasn't a part of the initial complaint.

I have no idea what happened, but if some peeps are going to essentially convict these guys on an accusation, I think it's fair to say it looks fishy when it looks fishy.

In this country, the accused has just as many rights as the accuser.

 

[dontbelikethat]

MacDonald's case against the girl for defamation was already dropped due to insufficient evidence?

Hadn't heard that...I know the initial incident with his wife was dropped and he was cleared by the NFL.

It's from the TMZ article, so Idk about credibility of it...

McDonald had sued the woman for defamation ... after the San Jose PD investigated the allegations but dropped the case due to insufficient evidence.

It's in the OP.

uh....I don't think it works that way. The SJPD isn't involved in Civil Suits so they couldn't drop it for lack of evidence. Its not being prosecuted by the DA. It isn't a criminal complaint. Its a Law Suit for $$$. I think they are mixing up the initial issue and his suit over the second incident.

EDIT: Just re-read it.

They are saying McDonald sued after the case against HIM was dropped for lack of evidence...and I don't even think THATS correct either. LOL.

Yeah, just re-read it again. TMZ

 

[Scottemojo]

Moreover, she's not even saying she had sex with Brooks...only that he "groped her" while she was unconscious. How would she even know? She was unconscious. Its like somebody told her what was on the video she hasn't even seen and now she sees an opportunity for $$$.

Are you seriously implying that if she didn't know about the alleged sexual assault at the time, that she shouldn't have recourse after the fact? Sorry, but that is horrible.

Dude. Seriously?

Do you just read that it's me posting and take the other viewpoint?

Of course that's not what I'm saying. What I'm saying is that she's suing with no knowledge of what happened. She wasn't conscious. She hasn't seen the video. So the first thing she does is hire a lawyer and sue? That doesn't seem fishy to you?

If it doesn't...more power to ya. IMO, and I've said this often, any guy that hits/rapes a woman should be castrated. I just find it odd that she goes straight to the "give me $$$" card before the police have finished the investigation. Strikes me much more as a "one-up" on BEING sued for defamation.

I think I have posted in the same threads as you twice, so please don't act like I am seeking you out.

I don't presume to take sides on an issue I know nothing about other than what has leaked to the media. I think making statements about possible victims' intentions and their desire for money are generally misinformed and baseless. Usually things like this are said to devalue the alleged victims' position. No different than the Frank Clark situation, I think all the people making judgments on either side should step back and realize that they are choosing their biases based on their team affiliation and that is just wrong.

If you have ever been in a situation where you don't believe justice will be served, the only other real recourse you have is civil court. That doesn't automatically make someone a gold digger. We have a culture of blaming the victim, especially when it comes to our sports heroes.

On the other hand, issuing the label of victim when you don't even know the circumstances indicates a bias as well.

As of this moment, she is a plaintiff.

 

[Marvin49]

Right...but the legal process didn't finish. Its still ongoing. OJ Simpson is a good example of the family looking for justice after the law let them down.

Thing is tho, Brooks wasn't a part of the initial complaint.

I have no idea what happened, but if some peeps are going to essentially convict these guys on an accusation, I think its fair to say it looks fishy when it looks fishy.

You have no idea what happened, but feel compelled to defend the player on your team. Who cares what anyone else says? If McDonald and Brooks come up innocent, good for them. If either one comes up guilty, let the team and league handle it. Effectively trying to cast shade on the alleged victim, while admittedly having no clue what went on, is just silly.

Dude.

Here we go again (not you in particular but these kinds of issues in general).

I'm not defending Brooks. Go back and read everything I said. I think it looks fishy. That's it.

Its OK to discuss this situation if I assume he's guilty but not if it looks fishy to me? Please. Get off the high horse. If he did it, I want him in jail and off the team. Hell, I want him off the team anyway for football and cap reasons.

Ray McDonald isn't even on the team anymore. This has nothing to do with him being a Niner. It has to do with looking fishy to me. I'm allowed to make that comment. I'm also not the only one in this thread saying it.

 

[Scottemojo]

On the other hand, issuing the label of victim when you don't even know the circumstances indicates a bias as well.

As of this moment, she is a plaintiff.

I don't believe I have referenced her as a victim anywhere. I referenced, in general, possible or alleged victims, because I agree that is making an assumption.

You are correct. Making assumptions is pretty silly, and often driven by team loyalty.

Though I could counter your general statement with this: In civil cases, a criminal conviction goes a long way in securing a civil judgement. So when someone proceeds to the civil portion without charges even being filed, it isn't illogical to raise an eyebrow and wonder why they won't wait. It would not be the first time the cost of future litigation was used as a settlement tactic. I know for fact that prosecutors aren't big fans of trying to charge someone criminally when civil litigation is pending.

I most certainly hope that if there was a sexual assault, she doesn't accept any kind of settlement. Men like that should not be free, and should have their names drug through the mud even if convictions are difficult to secure.

 

[Marvin49]

On the other hand, issuing the label of victim when you don't even know the circumstances indicates a bias as well.

As of this moment, she is a plaintiff.

I don't believe I have referenced her as a victim anywhere. I referenced, in general, possible or alleged victims, because I agree that is making an assumption.

You are correct. Making assumptions is pretty silly, and often driven by team loyalty.

Though I could counter your general statement with this: In civil cases, a criminal conviction goes a long way in securing a civil judgement. So when someone proceeds to the civil portion without charges even being filed, it isn't illogical to raise an eyebrow and wonder why they won't wait. It would not be the first time the cost of future litigation was used as a settlement tactic. I know for fact that prosecutors aren't big fans of trying to charge someone criminally when civil litigation is pending.

I most certainly hope that if there was a sexual assault, she doesn't accept any kind of settlement. Men like that should not be free, and should have their names drug through the mud even if convictions are difficult to secure.

...and that's what I'm sayin'. You just said it much better.

 

[kearly]

Not saying she is telling the truth, but do you ever believe the female in any of these stories? Seems like your automatic response disbelieve the alleged victim.

If she's telling the truth I hope the guilty parties are dealt with accordingly. I just think her story seems a bit overly complicated, which has me suspicious, but stranger things have happened.

Given the varying nature of these cases, it's always good to have a healthy dose of skepticism. Every now and then, the accused could actually be the victim, ala Brian Banks. I wish the general public would better understand the complexity of these cases instead of always assuming guilt and belittle those who would prefer to see all the facts first.

 

[theENGLISHseahawk]

If video proving her story ever existed, and still exists, McDonald and Brooks would be the biggest morons of all time.

Well, the video is a big part of McDonalds defense. After the first incident with his wife he wanted to avoid he said/she said situations and had the cameras installed.

The reason he is suing her for defamation of character is that the video supposedly shows that it didn't happen. Seems kinda odd to me though that she's now roped Brooks in on it. If there were video evidence, I kinda doubt that the charges wouldn't have already been filed (this happened BEFORE the Bruce Miller incident which is now vandalism, not assault).

Can't say for sure as I wasn't there of course...but smells pretty fishy to me. Also odd that's she's SUING Brooks instead of letting the legal process play out. She's looking for $$$$.

There it is.

Marvin stooping to a new low to defend his team.

 

[Marvin49]

Not saying she is telling the truth, but do you ever believe the female in any of these stories? Seems like your automatic response disbelieve the alleged victim.

If she's telling the truth I hope the guilty parties are dealt with accordingly. I just think her story seems a bit overly complicated, which has me suspicious, but stranger things have happened.

Given the varying nature of these cases, it's always good to have a healthy dose of skepticism. Every now and then, the accused could actually be the victim, ala Brian Banks. I wish the general public would better understand the complexity of these cases instead of always assuming guilt and belittle those who would prefer to see all the facts first.

Pretty much exactly what I said up thread. I would say that your comment didn't come off as wanting all the facts first, sounded like you were making a judgment on the alleged victim's "story". People that want all the facts first, shouldn't make claims as to whose story sounds better or more believable without knowing all the facts.

Don't have a problem with that...

...tho it should be pointed out when I said similar stuff in regards to McDonald I was pretty much called a homer and kinda a horrible person for not leaping to the conclusion that he was a wife beater.

Wasn't you, but was happening a lot here. Even after he wasn't charged and NFL cleared him, I still got "Whatever, he paid her off" and the like. An accusation is enough to convict in court of public opinion.

As for this accuser...she could be telling the truth. She might not. I have no idea, but I don't think it's so taboo to say whether or not you think the story makes any sense. Should we not talk about it at all? Maybe...but the topic is here so I responded.

Peace.

 

[NorCal]

tracey kaplan ‏@tkaplanreport · 10m10 minutes ago
Alleged sex assault vic sues 49er Ahmad Brooks,Bears Ray McDonald, story to come. #49ers #Bears

Wow. Looks like she's suing BOTH of them.

Seriously? Why not let the legal process play out instead of going straight for the $$$? Is it just a response to GETTING sued?

Dunno. Not good.

The Statute of Limitations for injury to a person (which includes a civil assault claim) is 2 years. So, that could explain the timing of the suit.

 

[kearly]

Pretty much exactly what I said up thread. I would say that your comment didn't come off as wanting all the facts first, sounded like you were making a judgment on the alleged victim's "story". People that want all the facts first, shouldn't make claims as to whose story sounds better or more believable without knowing all the facts.

FHF,

I think you are letting some of our convo from the DV thread leak into here. Rape and DV are very different. A lot of the things I said over there would not apply here. This is much more serious. For both the victim and the accused. If these guys are guilty, I hope they are locked away as long as possible. And because the stakes are so high, it's that much more important that they get it right, which is why I mention tragic cases where they got it very wrong such as Brian Banks.

I'm passing no judgement. I wasn't there. I even said it could be true. Just seems a little off to me, but I'm very far from having my mind made up. I hope they are innocent, as should anyone since it would mean no rape took place, but I'm not invested in their innocence. If they are guilty I hope like hell they are found guilty.

 

[penihawk]

FHF, I generally keep my opinions about hot button topics such as this to myself but your next to last statement allows me to point a few things out to you.

You need to take your emotions off your shirt sleeve and get out of the "there always has to be a victim" mindset. You say you want everyone to have an open mind and let the process work but you have shown no ability to look at either case on this board with an open mind or with a case by case point of view.

DV,sexual assault and abuse are huge problems these days but empowering a certain group as always being the victim has just made it much worse. Good judgement and rational thought can not be achieved when wearing emotional scars of the past on your sleeve or carrying an agenda. Sorry if this offends you, I just thought I would point it out to you. Carry on.

 

[SoulfishHawk]

He's a Niner, he'll probably win some type of Award. :roll:

 

[penihawk]

FHF, I generally keep my opinions about hot button topics such as this to myself but your next to last statement allows me to point a few things out to you.

You need to take your emotions off your shirt sleeve and get out of the "there always has to be a victim" mindset. You say you want everyone to have an open mind and let the process work but you have shown no ability to look at either case on this board with an open mind or with a case by case point of view.

DV,sexual assault and abuse are huge problems these days but empowering a certain group as always being the victim has just made it much worse. Good judgement and rational thought can not be achieved when wearing emotional scars of the past on your sleeve or carrying an agenda. Sorry if this offends you, I just thought I would point it out to you. Carry on.

Sorry, but you have misread my posts if that is the conclusion you have come to. At no point do I even say there is an actual victim, only alleged victim. If you understand what that means, please re-read my posts and reconsider what you have said here, because what I am saying is 180* from what you have taken away from this.

I did and just because you choose your actual words carefully doesn't change the fact that you admittedly have a biased emotional opinion about the subject in question. Answer me one question. Is it ever ok for a woman to verbally abuse or get physical with a man?

 

[mikeak]

If video proving her story ever existed, and still exists, McDonald and Brooks would be the biggest morons of all time.

Well, the video is a big part of McDonalds defense. After the first incident with his wife he wanted to avoid he said/she said situations and had the cameras installed.

.

What could ever go wrong with camera's that I have installed myself?

Sincerely,

Aaron Hernandez

 

[penihawk]

Just think you are a little hypocritical then because I sure read some harsh biased words about Ray Rice in another post based on "limited or leaked information". The fact of the matter is the general public gets just enuf information to be lead to the conclusion and opinion they want you to have. Just think you were out of line calling some guys out for doing the same thing you did in another thread. No BS and no words in your mouth.

 

[penihawk]

Well I guess I'm the real dick here. You really need to change your pic on your avatar. I will return to keeping my pie hole shut about hot-button topics. Carry on.

 

[Uncle Si]

Well I guess I'm the real dick here. You really need to change your pic on your avatar. I will return to keeping my pie hole shut about hot-button topics. Carry on.

I need to change my avatar? Maybe you need to change your attitude, and think before you start calling people out.