Since when is PED use worse then rape?

Discuss any and all NFL-related topics and matters of interest here. RATING: PG-13
Since when is PED use worse then rape?
Thu Jun 27, 2013 11:52 am
  • I just can't stand it. I just read on PFT that Parrish Cox has been aquitted for rape of a young girl that is Apperently pregnant with his baby-yet he denies having sex with her!! 2nd immaculate conception! Not ... Here is my gripe... A couple days ago, all you heard from niner fans and the league fans alike was them talking about our PED use, blah blah blah.. Yet nothing about this... Granted he was a bronco at the time but they cut him when that came to light... But SF takes a flyer on this guy? And harbaugh had the dacity to say we're cheaters? Screw that... Mr Harbaugh, take a seat and close that face hole .....

    If this is in the wrong forum please feel free to move ... Just venting here....;)
    User avatar
    RynoHawk
    NET Rookie
     
    Posts: 276
    Joined: Wed Aug 03, 2011 10:19 am
    Location: Seattle


Re: Since when is PED use worse then rape?
Thu Jun 27, 2013 12:07 pm
  • Not sure how they are related at all. The one is cheating on the field and the other one is hiring someone that did have his day in court and was aquitted. S

    I am not saying that Cox isn't guilty but he went to court and the system of this country however flawed deemed him innocent of the crime. So now are you saying he can never ever work again in his profession? That is a very interesting take on how the legal system should work

    The PED issue is different. If players on the team takes PED to improve the result of the team then how is it not cheating? I am as much a seahawk fan as 99% of the people on this board and I simply don't get why people tries to make excuses for the guys caught cheating. Do I believe other teams are packed with cheaters - yes. HOWEVER normally the number of people caught is directly related to the number of people cheating. If the Seahawks don't have another guy suspended for the next two years - fine we solved the problem / started doing HGH
    mikeak
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3502
    Joined: Fri Aug 24, 2012 6:24 pm
    Location: Anchorage, AK


Re: Since when is PED use worse then rape?
Thu Jun 27, 2013 12:11 pm
  • Even though what you stated is great, my point was more to the Holier-then-thou attitude that people have. It's pretty apparent that he was guilty- she is fricken prego with HIS baby. I think the main issue is that everything is subjective... Thanks for the reply
    User avatar
    RynoHawk
    NET Rookie
     
    Posts: 276
    Joined: Wed Aug 03, 2011 10:19 am
    Location: Seattle


  • I think it just further shows this league is full of scumbags and every team has them on the roster.. That goes with all sports for that matter.
    World Champs - Sounds good don't it
    User avatar
    hawker84
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 4053
    Joined: Wed Oct 10, 2012 2:22 pm
    Location: Tri Cities, WA


  • RynoHawk wrote:Even though what you stated is great, my point was more to the Holier-then-thou attitude that people have. It's pretty apparent that he was guilty- she is fricken prego with HIS baby. I think the main issue is that everything is subjective... Thanks for the reply


    I havent read about the case but it seems like your leaving something out. If the case was as clear-cut as you make it seem I have a hard time believing he was let go
    User avatar
    therealjohncarlson
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3512
    Joined: Sun May 10, 2009 2:09 pm


  • Harbaugh has dacity?

    How awful that must feel.
    "Some people here have been groomed to accept mediocrity and lame ducks, I'm on board with the vibrato!" -SouthSoundHawk
    "BFS is kicking ass in here." -kearly (8/9/2013)
    User avatar
    bestfightstory
    * Glitter over Knives *
     
    Posts: 8511
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 4:13 pm


  • therealjohncarlson wrote:
    RynoHawk wrote:Even though what you stated is great, my point was more to the Holier-then-thou attitude that people have. It's pretty apparent that he was guilty- she is fricken prego with HIS baby. I think the main issue is that everything is subjective... Thanks for the reply


    I havent read about the case but it seems like your leaving something out. If the case was as clear-cut as you make it seem I have a hard time believing he was let go


    The defense somehow managed to convince the jury that the DNA test on the at the time unborn child was flawed and was aquitted. I don't really understand how that was proven / why a new one couldn't be done etc etc

    They settled in the civil case
    mikeak
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3502
    Joined: Fri Aug 24, 2012 6:24 pm
    Location: Anchorage, AK


  • I don't think Cox ever denied having sex with the woman (correct me if I'm wrong). It was a case of consensual sex vs rape, and clearly the courts found him not guilty. Not sure how that even correlates to PED use..
    User avatar
    Alkasquawlik
    NET Bench Warmer
     
    Posts: 27
    Joined: Mon Jun 18, 2012 4:22 pm


  • Alkasquawlik wrote:I don't think Cox ever denied having sex with the woman (correct me if I'm wrong). It was a case of consensual sex vs rape, and clearly the courts found him not guilty. Not sure how that even correlates to PED use..


    It has NOTHING to do with PED use. It is more in the direction of attitudes and perceived that we are a cheeting "Horrible" no good team and can be called out my opposing teams coach yet can retain a rapist(suposed) on their team. I guess I'm reaching but like I said in the first post, I'm venting.... and I need something else to talk about besides Aaron H.
    User avatar
    RynoHawk
    NET Rookie
     
    Posts: 276
    Joined: Wed Aug 03, 2011 10:19 am
    Location: Seattle


  • RynoHawk wrote:
    Alkasquawlik wrote:I don't think Cox ever denied having sex with the woman (correct me if I'm wrong). It was a case of consensual sex vs rape, and clearly the courts found him not guilty. Not sure how that even correlates to PED use..


    It has NOTHING to do with PED use. It is more in the direction of attitudes and perceived that we are a cheeting "Horrible" no good team and can be called out my opposing teams coach yet can retain a rapist(suposed) on their team. I guess I'm reaching but like I said in the first post, I'm venting.... and I need something else to talk about besides Aaron H.


    The fact that you spell like a second grade exchange student makes me disregard everything you're saying, but I digress, vent away.
    User avatar
    Alkasquawlik
    NET Bench Warmer
     
    Posts: 27
    Joined: Mon Jun 18, 2012 4:22 pm


  • mikeak wrote:
    therealjohncarlson wrote:
    RynoHawk wrote:Even though what you stated is great, my point was more to the Holier-then-thou attitude that people have. It's pretty apparent that he was guilty- she is fricken prego with HIS baby. I think the main issue is that everything is subjective... Thanks for the reply


    I havent read about the case but it seems like your leaving something out. If the case was as clear-cut as you make it seem I have a hard time believing he was let go


    The defense somehow managed to convince the jury that the DNA test on the at the time unborn child was flawed and was aquitted. I don't really understand how that was proven / why a new one couldn't be done etc etc

    They settled in the civil case


    It's not entirely that simple. Let me try and explain the facts, i don't necessarily agree the jury's interpretation.

    Cox was accused of rape in a criminal matter. An investigation was conducted including which included a paternity test. The Defense could have sought to exclude the paternity test. If they did, they were unsuccessful. The paternity test was admitted into evidence. The defense doesn't want a new test because it would likely come back positive and show some form of sexual contact between Cox and the victim. The prosecution wouldn't want a new test because the results favored their case. Rather than move to exclude the evidence, the defense chose to convince the jury that the collection process was improper. The jury was still allowed to hear the evidence and still chose to acquit. Cox's own attorney admitted that his client was a liar (i believe in reference to sexual contact with the accuser), but the DNA, if reliable, could only prove sexual contact occurred. It couldn't prove a rape had occurred. It's not the job of the defense to explain all the facts of the case, only to show that the prosecution's allegations could not be proved beyond a reasonable doubt.

    The defense was able to paint the accuser as sexually promiscuous based on testimony from Demaryous Thomas that the accuser had performed sexual acts with another woman willingly before leaving the apartment the same night. (http://www.denverpost.com/broncos/ci_20097030)

    The Jury initially chose not to discuss the case. The foreman later changed his mind:

    http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q= ... 2450,d.cGE

    Again. By no means am i trying to justify the actions of Cox. I'm only trying to explain the rational for an acquittal.
    Give me some damn skittles...
    User avatar
    Basis4day
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3357
    Joined: Mon Aug 15, 2011 11:57 am


  • I fail to see how my spelling changes your opinion but I digress, thank you...
    User avatar
    RynoHawk
    NET Rookie
     
    Posts: 276
    Joined: Wed Aug 03, 2011 10:19 am
    Location: Seattle


  • I'm all fairness to Mr. Cox he was equitted. I know he was accused and equitted. I have to take it for what it is on its face. Besides they are not related.@
    User avatar
    CALIHAWK1
    *PLATINUM SUPPORTER*
    *PLATINUM SUPPORTER*
     
    Posts: 9290
    Joined: Fri Nov 05, 2010 7:00 pm
    Location: Is Everything


Re: Since when is PED use worse then rape?
Thu Jun 27, 2013 10:17 pm
  • I think people are really just missing the point or just people are dull in general. He's not saying the two are anything alike, just that one is being blown way out of proportion, while the much worse act is being largely ignored.
    User avatar
    bellingerga
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 5313
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 12:28 pm
    Location: Beaverton, Oregon


  • bellingerga wrote:I think people are really just missing the point or just people are dull in general. He's not saying the two are anything alike, just that one is being blown way out of proportion, while the much worse act is being largely ignored.



    He was equitted. AKA according to the law he didn't do anything wrong. The much worse act, never happened.
    User avatar
    CALIHAWK1
    *PLATINUM SUPPORTER*
    *PLATINUM SUPPORTER*
     
    Posts: 9290
    Joined: Fri Nov 05, 2010 7:00 pm
    Location: Is Everything


  • There is a lot of sanctimony on this board. Hell, there is a lot of sanctimony everywhere. 90 percent of this board would have done time if all naughtiness were punished.
    SEAHAWKS.NET. We All We Got, We All We Need
    User avatar
    Scottemojo
    *Scott of Smacksville*
    *Scott of Smacksville*
     
    Posts: 11256
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 9:14 am


Re: Since when is PED use worse then rape?
Fri Jun 28, 2013 10:00 am
  • Basis4day wrote:It's not entirely that simple. Let me try and explain the facts, i don't necessarily agree the jury's interpretation.

    Cox was accused of rape in a criminal matter. An investigation was conducted including which included a paternity test. The Defense could have sought to exclude the paternity test. If they did, they were unsuccessful. The paternity test was admitted into evidence. The defense doesn't want a new test because it would likely come back positive and show some form of sexual contact between Cox and the victim. The prosecution wouldn't want a new test because the results favored their case. Rather than move to exclude the evidence, the defense chose to convince the jury that the collection process was improper. The jury was still allowed to hear the evidence and still chose to acquit. Cox's own attorney admitted that his client was a liar (i believe in reference to sexual contact with the accuser), but the DNA, if reliable, could only prove sexual contact occurred. It couldn't prove a rape had occurred. It's not the job of the defense to explain all the facts of the case, only to show that the prosecution's allegations could not be proved beyond a reasonable doubt.

    The defense was able to paint the accuser as sexually promiscuous based on testimony from Demaryous Thomas that the accuser had performed sexual acts with another woman willingly before leaving the apartment the same night. (http://www.denverpost.com/broncos/ci_20097030)

    The Jury initially chose not to discuss the case. The foreman later changed his mind:

    http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q= ... 2450,d.cGE

    Again. By no means am i trying to justify the actions of Cox. I'm only trying to explain the rational for an acquittal.


    Thanks a bunch for laying it out

    I get how the point is not to prove sexual contact but to prove rape which is very different. Get it completely. Which is why it wouldn't make sense for Cox to lie about not having sexual contact with her as the DNA test if the jury believed it was done right would prove this to be a lie. If the jury believes you lied about one thing I would think (not a lawyer) that they are likelier to believe you lied about something else.....

    You state that the defense attorney said Cox lied about not having sexual contact. Did he do that in court and is that because of trying to play things two ways. 1) Try to get the jury to dismiss the dna test but if they don't 2) admit the sexual contact and now make the focus be on the district attorney to focus on the rape and not sue the lie against the defendant

    Makes sense?

    EDIT: read the links after posting so yes looks like the above. The decision sure seems baffling from an outside perspective. He lies aobut having sexual contact, she was passed out (not sure if they got him to admit that she was passed out / he saw her passed out to verify this). As far as I understand it in most states it would be rape to have someone have sex with a person passed out..........

    REGARDLESS - he went free and shoud have the right to a job. Principly that is how life needs to work. This is different than people cheating within the sport
    mikeak
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3502
    Joined: Fri Aug 24, 2012 6:24 pm
    Location: Anchorage, AK


Re: Since when is PED use worse then rape?
Fri Jun 28, 2013 12:41 pm
  • mikeak wrote:
    Basis4day wrote:It's not entirely that simple. Let me try and explain the facts, i don't necessarily agree the jury's interpretation.

    Cox was accused of rape in a criminal matter. An investigation was conducted including which included a paternity test. The Defense could have sought to exclude the paternity test. If they did, they were unsuccessful. The paternity test was admitted into evidence. The defense doesn't want a new test because it would likely come back positive and show some form of sexual contact between Cox and the victim. The prosecution wouldn't want a new test because the results favored their case. Rather than move to exclude the evidence, the defense chose to convince the jury that the collection process was improper. The jury was still allowed to hear the evidence and still chose to acquit. Cox's own attorney admitted that his client was a liar (i believe in reference to sexual contact with the accuser), but the DNA, if reliable, could only prove sexual contact occurred. It couldn't prove a rape had occurred. It's not the job of the defense to explain all the facts of the case, only to show that the prosecution's allegations could not be proved beyond a reasonable doubt.

    The defense was able to paint the accuser as sexually promiscuous based on testimony from Demaryous Thomas that the accuser had performed sexual acts with another woman willingly before leaving the apartment the same night. (http://www.denverpost.com/broncos/ci_20097030)

    The Jury initially chose not to discuss the case. The foreman later changed his mind:

    http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q= ... 2450,d.cGE

    Again. By no means am i trying to justify the actions of Cox. I'm only trying to explain the rational for an acquittal.


    Thanks a bunch for laying it out

    I get how the point is not to prove sexual contact but to prove rape which is very different. Get it completely. Which is why it wouldn't make sense for Cox to lie about not having sexual contact with her as the DNA test if the jury believed it was done right would prove this to be a lie. If the jury believes you lied about one thing I would think (not a lawyer) that they are likelier to believe you lied about something else.....

    You state that the defense attorney said Cox lied about not having sexual contact. Did he do that in court and is that because of trying to play things two ways. 1) Try to get the jury to dismiss the dna test but if they don't 2) admit the sexual contact and now make the focus be on the district attorney to focus on the rape and not sue the lie against the defendant

    Makes sense?

    EDIT: read the links after posting so yes looks like the above. The decision sure seems baffling from an outside perspective. He lies aobut having sexual contact, she was passed out (not sure if they got him to admit that she was passed out / he saw her passed out to verify this). As far as I understand it in most states it would be rape to have someone have sex with a person passed out..........

    REGARDLESS - he went free and shoud have the right to a job. Principly that is how life needs to work. This is different than people cheating within the sport


    The defense argued that she was asleep rather than completely passed out as she claimed:

    "Steinberg’s close lasted a bit more than 30 minutes. He pitched the jury on how no one was a credible witness _ not the victim, not Che, not even Thomas _ in the night in question when Cox, a former Broncos cornerback, allegedly had intercourse with a woman without the woman’s knowledge or consent.

    Steinberg also cited examples of why the victim did not pass out, as she claimed, but knew what was going on that night more than she had let on. Steinberg wondered how she could walk two blocks from the nightclub to the car, and how she could walk up three flights of stairs to Cox’s apartment if she was in such a disoriented state.

    “This was a couple party girls, let’s call it what it is,” Steinberg said in his close."


    If it helps to understand a verdict, you need to remember that a jury must decide the facts of a case as presented. They don't have the same access to statements or reports from the news like you or i.
    Give me some damn skittles...
    User avatar
    Basis4day
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3357
    Joined: Mon Aug 15, 2011 11:57 am


Re: Since when is PED use worse then rape?
Fri Jun 28, 2013 12:57 pm
  • Basis4day wrote:The defense argued that she was asleep rather than completely passed out as she claimed:

    "Steinberg’s close lasted a bit more than 30 minutes. He pitched the jury on how no one was a credible witness _ not the victim, not Che, not even Thomas _ in the night in question when Cox, a former Broncos cornerback, allegedly had intercourse with a woman without the woman’s knowledge or consent.

    Steinberg also cited examples of why the victim did not pass out, as she claimed, but knew what was going on that night more than she had let on. Steinberg wondered how she could walk two blocks from the nightclub to the car, and how she could walk up three flights of stairs to Cox’s apartment if she was in such a disoriented state.

    “This was a couple party girls, let’s call it what it is,” Steinberg said in his close."


    If it helps to understand a verdict, you need to remember that a jury must decide the facts of a case as presented. They don't have the same access to statements or reports from the news like you or i.


    I understand - thanks for that extra outline. Clearly you can put some doubt in how drunk she was if she walked away etc. Not going to argue the number of times I walked somewhere severly drunk - the defense attorney clearly did the best job and I don't have all the facts presented in the case. Appreciate the inside view and thoughts on this
    mikeak
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3502
    Joined: Fri Aug 24, 2012 6:24 pm
    Location: Anchorage, AK


  • mikeak wrote:
    Basis4day wrote:The defense argued that she was asleep rather than completely passed out as she claimed:

    "Steinberg’s close lasted a bit more than 30 minutes. He pitched the jury on how no one was a credible witness _ not the victim, not Che, not even Thomas _ in the night in question when Cox, a former Broncos cornerback, allegedly had intercourse with a woman without the woman’s knowledge or consent.

    Steinberg also cited examples of why the victim did not pass out, as she claimed, but knew what was going on that night more than she had let on. Steinberg wondered how she could walk two blocks from the nightclub to the car, and how she could walk up three flights of stairs to Cox’s apartment if she was in such a disoriented state.

    “This was a couple party girls, let’s call it what it is,” Steinberg said in his close."


    If it helps to understand a verdict, you need to remember that a jury must decide the facts of a case as presented. They don't have the same access to statements or reports from the news like you or i.


    I understand - thanks for that extra outline. Clearly you can put some doubt in how drunk she was if she walked away etc. Not going to argue the number of times I walked somewhere severly drunk - the defense attorney clearly did the best job and I don't have all the facts presented in the case. Appreciate the inside view and thoughts on this


    Anytime. Just remember, when in court, your fate is decided by 12 people who were unable to get out of jury duty.
    Give me some damn skittles...
    User avatar
    Basis4day
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3357
    Joined: Mon Aug 15, 2011 11:57 am


  • CALIHAWK1 wrote:
    bellingerga wrote:I think people are really just missing the point or just people are dull in general. He's not saying the two are anything alike, just that one is being blown way out of proportion, while the much worse act is being largely ignored.



    He was equitted. AKA according to the law he didn't do anything wrong. The much worse act, never happened.


    That doesn't stop Niner fans from accusing Sherman of PED use or the team in general. That is the point as I understood it. Niner fans like to bag on Seahawks fans do to PED usage and don't stop at Sherman in fact they are pretty much on a crusade regarding Sherman.

    Harbaugh on record for stating that being abusive towards women is unacceptable and then goes along with signing this guy. Obviously the guy talks out both sides of his mouth. He really needs to learn to keep his ignorant mouth shut.
    The Lion has no interest in the opinion of the sheep.
    RichNhansom
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3026
    Joined: Wed May 25, 2011 7:26 am


  • RichNhansom wrote:
    CALIHAWK1 wrote:
    bellingerga wrote:I think people are really just missing the point or just people are dull in general. He's not saying the two are anything alike, just that one is being blown way out of proportion, while the much worse act is being largely ignored.



    He was equitted. AKA according to the law he didn't do anything wrong. The much worse act, never happened.


    That doesn't stop Niner fans from accusing Sherman of PED use or the team in general. That is the point as I understood it. Niner fans like to bag on Seahawks fans do to PED usage and don't stop at Sherman in fact they are pretty much on a crusade regarding Sherman.

    Harbaugh on record for stating that being abusive towards women is unacceptable and then goes along with signing this guy. Obviously the guy talks out both sides of his mouth. He really needs to learn to keep his ignorant mouth shut.



    Homerism aside if you beli eve that how Sherm got off means he didn't do it then I want you on my jury the next time I'm in court. Same as Ryan Braun.
    User avatar
    CALIHAWK1
    *PLATINUM SUPPORTER*
    *PLATINUM SUPPORTER*
     
    Posts: 9290
    Joined: Fri Nov 05, 2010 7:00 pm
    Location: Is Everything


  • So even you want to convict Sherman but let the rapist walk? Nevermind.
    The Lion has no interest in the opinion of the sheep.
    RichNhansom
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3026
    Joined: Wed May 25, 2011 7:26 am


Re: Since when is PED use worse then rape?
Fri Jun 28, 2013 11:25 pm
  • RichNhansom wrote:
    CALIHAWK1 wrote:
    bellingerga wrote:I think people are really just missing the point or just people are dull in general. He's not saying the two are anything alike, just that one is being blown way out of proportion, while the much worse act is being largely ignored.



    He was equitted. AKA according to the law he didn't do anything wrong. The much worse act, never happened.


    That doesn't stop Niner fans from accusing Sherman of PED use or the team in general. That is the point as I understood it. Niner fans like to bag on Seahawks fans do to PED usage and don't stop at Sherman in fact they are pretty much on a crusade regarding Sherman.

    Harbaugh on record for stating that being abusive towards women is unacceptable and then goes along with signing this guy. Obviously the guy talks out both sides of his mouth. He really needs to learn to keep his ignorant mouth shut.



    THIS!
    User avatar
    RynoHawk
    NET Rookie
     
    Posts: 276
    Joined: Wed Aug 03, 2011 10:19 am
    Location: Seattle


Re: Since when is PED use worse then rape?
Sun Jun 30, 2013 12:04 pm
  • We don't have a player accused of rape on our roster SF does, deal with it.
    User avatar
    General Manager
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2260
    Joined: Mon Oct 10, 2011 11:04 pm


Re: Since when is PED use worse then rape?
Sun Jun 30, 2013 12:12 pm
  • What?!? , did you bother to read the thread?
    User avatar
    RynoHawk
    NET Rookie
     
    Posts: 276
    Joined: Wed Aug 03, 2011 10:19 am
    Location: Seattle




It is currently Thu Oct 23, 2014 12:52 pm

Please REGISTER to become a member

Return to [ NFL NATION ]




Information
  • Who is online