Incognito added to Pro Bowl

I assumed you were suggesting that Martin was angling for a lawsuit because that's literally what almost everyone has done, and it's the only scenario that makes even the slightest bit of sense.

Martin took a leave of absence from the team, which is what prompted this entire process. I'm sure they did eventually end up paying him once they realized what a ****-storm they had occur right under their noses, but you can't decide to voluntarily leave in the middle of the year and still get paid.

This isn't true, and the reason why we're discussing it is because you wanted to make a distinction excusing what Incognito did as somehow less of an issue.

Because the victim chose not to pursue them. I doubt it would have played out that way if they knew how hapless the Dolphins would be in terms of dealing with it.

 

Well no, it's more along the lines of having a very basic understanding of how these things work.

This is looping back into your weird masculinity crisis thing again. You claiming you're a clear-eyed alpha male in a variety of predictably banal ways doesn't actually culminate in you making *anything* approaching a point.

 

I defended claims. If tbe jury got to see the fine book and hard that Incognito tried to get it destroyed they would ask howmany zeroes can we put behind the first number?

The texts show what any vaguely competent lawyer would describe as typical jekyl and hyde bhaviour used by bullies.

I got my bonuses based on my average claims cost. There is no way I would bet my bonus on being able to defend this case. I was my company's attack dog, and the best way to defend this one is to roll imto a ball and scream 'not the face, not the face'.

I've rwd those texts. They don't show what you think iT shows. It shows that at sometimes they behaved like buddies, which is accepted common ground. The trouble is, if you want to rely on that is that there are plenty of witness statemnts that showed Incognito suddenly turning into Mr Hyde on Martin and that's the meat and potatos of Martin's case.

The fine book on the other hand is a smoking cannon. Putting that in front of a jury opens the potential for aggravated damages. And ifa Jury has to think seriously about aggravated damages theywill punish you with a high assessment of damages even if they don't pay the aggravted damages.

 

I'm not sure what a "fine book" is or what "hard that Incognito tried to get it destroyed..." means.

What witness statements? If you have more info about this case please elaborate. I'm completely open to changing my mind if evidence shows what you're claiming.

However, and like I touched on in a few past posts, bullying isn't or shouldn't be acceptable. In this instance, and going by the evidence that I've seen, yes the texts do mean what I think they mean. Why? Because that's what I think they mean. And until Incognito or Martin or a shrink tells me differently it will continue to mean what I think they mean.

Also, I think it is quite possible that both Martin and Incognito have some sort of a personality disorder. I'm not a shrink so I don't know, but it sure seems like it because they both talked about committing themselves. So, in this case, why is it that Martin gets excused for his behavior and Incognito does not? (I'm not talking about the sexual assault allegations) As a typical lawyer, like you suggested, you wouldn't get to "describe" anything related to mental health. At least not to a judge or jury. I'd assume you have an expert for that. An expert that you, nor anyone else here, is. We're all going by our own experiences.

 

But, you really don't. Since I don't know you I can't be 100% certain, but I'd bet money that you've never been an NFL football player. I'd also bet money that you have never been around that same type of an environment...not even close. As I talked about in my last post to Pauly, you're using your own past experiences as proof of, well, something. I'm not quite sure what. And your past experiences of being in an office or in your parents basement, et al, means little. Does that mean you can't express your opinion? Of course not. But it does mean that you really shouldn't be so snarky about other's opinions.

To you it may seem weird and like some sort of a "crisis", but to those with my experiences it's called *reality*. And I wouldn't expect someone with your experiences, or lack thereof, to get the point. Kind of like I don't expect my 4 year old daughter to understand how I behave around my former military buddies. Not that she's privy to that, mind you.

 

So you've handled cases where grown men have sued for verbal bullying and got damages?

I'm sorry, but I don't believe that.

 

Let me guess. Your life is rough today because of someone else.

It's an accountability thing, maybe you get it maybe you don't.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

I will be the first to say Richie is a fat idiot behemoth.

But that doesn't make Jon Martin any better for the way he handled that situation.

They both suck as people...One just "did" on the field all to often.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

We've had two people with relevant expertise tell you exactly why you're wrong and what a pretty clear outcome would be, and somehow you think that your gut feeling and general confusion are still somehow winning out. How exactly does that work?

 

But then who do you blame? It is 100% the abuser's fault for being the scum of the Earth...I agree with that. But statistics show that in almost 100% of all cases, the abuse NEVER stops. It almost always escalates until the victim leaves or someone winds up dead.

I'm not blaming the victim for the abuser's behavior. But if you have a guy that won't stop no matter what, then the victim is the only one who can end the cycle of abuse. There's not a person on Earth that can help in this situation without the victim speaking up...that's all I meant.

 

You really should just stick to asking questions.

No one here is an expert on this situation.

 

Let me help you read between the lines. He's likely current/former law enforcement. I am as well. Our gut feelings come from relevant expertise. And when you have two guys hanging out daily and being vulgar with each other, it's impossible to label one as an abuser based on words alone.

They both threatened each other...and then laughed about it. Martin apologized in writing after the fact. So no matter how you twist "the evidence", it does not add up to what you're trying to sell.

 

Harassment is defintely a charge.

Grabbing @ss without permission is most definitely a crime. It's sexual assault.

 

Boy howdy, would I hope the answer is "former" in both cases. Regardless, no one is talking about any sort of criminal case against Incognito for what he did in the Jonathan Martin thing.

Meanwhile, here's an actual legal analyst:

http://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/...an-martin-sue-miami-dolphins-richie-incognito

 

You have no understanding of the situation.

There's an entire psychological aspect to the abuser/abused relationship, that you're either ignoring, discrediting or are ignorant of. Suffice it to say, there is no such thing as a continual physically abusive relationship that isn't also a continually mentally abusive relationship.

You are I may never find ourselves in an abusive relationship, but that has no bearing on someone else's experiences.
This also has nothing to do with masculinity or toughness. Throughout history, there are examples of tough manly men, (tougher than you or I) being broken by abuse.

 

Law enforcement people are some of the LEAST qualified people to understand the inner workings of these sorts of things because you guys see the situation from a completely different angle due to the necessity of your job. It's like asking a plumber for proper digestive system nutritional advice.

 

Authored by Lester Munson...lol

Here's a little about your "legal analyst":

ESPN legal analyst Lester Munson, you, sir, have failed. Failed at your job. Failed at being a thought leader. Failed at failing in a funny, non-offensive way.

Even 1Ls won’t believe the kind of tripe Muson has been spewing on ESPN…

Given Mr. Munson’s woeful history with the Illinois Attorney Registration And Disciplinary Commission , an agency of the Illinois Supreme Court that investigates “allegations of misconduct by lawyers” and prosecutes “the cases where a lawyer's misconduct suggests a threat to the public or to the integrity of the legal profession,” and his continued misrepresentations of the facts of the case, it is difficult to understand what qualifies him as a legal expert and what constitutes “closely following the case.”
.
Equally confusing are both Mr. Munson’s assertion that he is “baffled by the conduct of Mike Nifong” and the mock disdain he shows in this comment: “As a lawyer and as a journalist, I am appalled at what he did . . .” With a penchant for misconduct that is well documented by the Illinois Attorney Registration And Disciplinary Commission, including “conduct which is prejudicial to the administration of justice,” one might expect that Munson could relate quite well to Defendant Nifong’s actions and current difficulties with the North Carolina State Bar. With regard to Defendant Nifong, one might expect that the combination of Munson's personal experience and self promoted ability "to put criminal charges and civil litigation in the sports industry into a context that gives new insights" would not leave him baffled nor appalled.
.
After his admittance to the Illinois State Bar in 1976 and practicing law for 13 years, it appears Munson, facing multiple charges of misconduct occurring during a time he was already on probation by the Ilinois Bar, voluntarily agreed to discontinue practicing law. As a mitigating factor in his misconduct, Munson pointed to his alcoholism. In its 1991 decision to suspend Munson’s law license because of his continued misconduct while on probation, the Disciplinary Commission wrote:
“On September 30, 1986, Respondent was suspended from the practice of law for three years and until further order of the Court, and this suspension was stayed and Respondent was placed on probation for three years with conditions. In re Munson, No. 85 CH 57, M.R. 4029. Respondent's misconduct included his neglect of three client matters as well as misstatements regarding the status of two of the client matters. Respondent's misconduct was attributable to his alcoholism.”
.

“In October 1989, Respondent discontinued practicing. Respondent has no current intention to return to the practice of law.”


http://liestoppers.blogspot.com/2007/03/lester-munson-legal-expert.html

 

lol...Incognito is a very controversial person.

 

Are you referring to the sexual assault or bullying? If it's the latter, didn't you at some point in this thread claim that the bullying was way overblown? Maybe it was someone else, but I think it was you.

 

Physical assault in a relationship.

I did say it was overblown, though. But I meant in the media. The media treated it as big as the Pats cheating.

Ritchie was a bully and Martin was bullied. It just shouldn't have been as big a story as it was.

 

I dunno, I guess I don't see what's so **** show and sad funny about having this conversation.

 

I think this is a great piece and kind of explains a lot as to why there is such a wide variety of opinions on the Incognito bullying matter.

I also think you could replace "pro sports" in this article with "military", "law enforcement", "college sports", etc and come to the realization that those of us with these experiences will feel differently than most others. "You (meaning those who haven't experienced what I wrote about) may never actually understand any of this."

 

I'm not disagreeing with you or ignoring what you're saying. I realize that it's there and it's real.

But how do you stop it? That's the real question. And as long as there's pieces of garbage in the world, there's no answer UNLESS the victim takes action. I can't save them...neither can the government, the police or any of the organizations out there. The whole system is powerless without the victim reaching out for help.

And you're right, every situation is unique. We don't know what people really feel in those instances- it has to be terrifying. But we do know something that most victims never realize; what the outcome is going to be.

I'm not trying to generalize anyone- I'm asking how we stop this pattern completely.

I was a corrections officer so I saw the other side- the part where a woman drags herself through a parking lot looking like she's attending a funeral, and then sitting there in visitation for an hour staring at the floor. While the husband/boyfriend never raises his voice, you can see it plain as day- he's dominating that person with every word. Making her feel worthless like a dog or a piece of meat- it turned my stomach.

When the female finally leaves, you literally see her shoulders pick up as she starts to breathe and relax. I saw this happen with hundreds of females almost every single weekend for years, and its something that I took very personal. I even reported these incidents to abuse counselors and asked plenty of questions- so I'm not just sharing my personal opinion here. There is no answer to the problem without the victim changing the situation.

 

Its been happening for about 20 years now. It will depend on the individual state as to what the thresholds are, but it is a very well established legal principal.

 

Interestingly it was cases from cops and corrections officers that established verbal harrassment as a grounds to sue your employer.

 

http://deadspin.com/dolphins-line-kept-a-fine-book-incognito-tried-to-de-1522877536

Nate Garner getting +250 bonus for "not crackng first"
Incognito getting a 200 fine for "breaking jmart"

Those entries alone establish mens rea well beyond what is needed in civil actions.

To be more clear, What I was saying about the texts is that, taken as a whole, they don't prove anything. They don't prove bullying or friendship. They can be interpreted both ways easily, and if it went to trial it would be up tp the persuasiveness of the other evidence to prove the case.

 

So I guess the answer is no?

 

How could you possibly say that mens rea has been established here Pauly?

These are after the fact, mens rea has to be established before the fact.

 

It shows that he knew he was putting ptressurw on Garner anf Martin and he was aware that it could break them. Attempting to have the book destroyed is indicitive that he knew it shows his culpability.

I didn't work very much with criminal levels of proof so I don't know if it reaches beyond reasonable doubt level of mens rea, but on civil on the balance of probabilities standard it is easily reached.

What's written is the antithesisof what would be written if Incognito and Martin were buddies sharing banter.

 

I get that's the tact you would take on the case, and the attempted destruction of evidence certainly doesn't look good, but along with the texts it shows that they were putting pressure on Turner, Garner and Martin to play better.

That is something that coaches expect from players, and that would be corroborated by the team and coaches, basically from any team, and the pressure has to be real, it's no Lifetime, after school special out there, lol.

It's very similar to the military, because it works, basically shaming people into doing better, there has to be a "sting", so you attack their pride, which also weeds out the weak(most of the time, lol), and evidence of that can be found in any Hard Knocks.

What can also be construed is that Incog didn't think that Martin was gone for good, or that he was going to "run crying to brigade" when he wrote that in the book, as that book was clearly a "fun" thing with the team.

Context would also be huge in this case, an NFL field is one of the most violent places on earth that isn't actually a hostile environment, because in it's own bubble, it is a hostile environment, the avg human cannot exist there.

Trying to tackle Jayjay once, or block Suh once, or get past Tunsil once, or taking a hit from Jones once could land an avg person in the hospital, with broken bones, ruptured whatyoulike, even maiming, and many a college star has found that out, as many of them every year could not hack an NFL field.

This is why the military and these coaches will tell you that these tactics are beneficial to the players, it is a rare person that can push themselves to their own limit without outside pressure, "a horse runs faster with a man on it's back" is the general concept, and it's a truism.

Look, I get that once you start to think about this with your legal "minds eye", you start to "take up his case", it's a natural thing to do, you are by definition, a professional "devils advocate", no offense, I'm sure you know that, I'm just making sure others don't misconstrue my meaning, it's the basic foundation of what a lawyer is, defend your client with prejudice.

However, if you were to take a step back, not try to make his case, you'd have to admit it's a 50/50 proposition at best, a long, drawn out, murky, ugly case that would be both embarrassing and humiliating for Martin, with scant hope of damages since Martin still got all his money, so there is no case for lost wages or potential earnings.

At the same time, I also realize that the lawyer in you thinks you could win the case, you wouldn't be much good as a lawyer if you didn't, , probably the most critical element in this case would be who the is.

 

Great post. I don't think many people read the article I quoted from in my last post, but that too hit this nail right on the head.

The NFL locker room, the military, law enforcement, et al, is nothing like the average person believes. If most here saw what goes on in Marine Corps boot camp, for example, they'd be appalled. lol That doesn't make what goes on there wrong, however. And in fact, the treatment received inevitably saves lives.



"Whatever you think of Incognito, the response from players makes the story more complicated than just some evil offensive lineman. Or at least murky enough to leave me with other questions... For example, is this whole thing a case of stupid macho culture run amok in pro sports? Absolutely. This is every MAN UP beer commercial taken to the most awful extreme.

"But imagine how screwed up in the head you'd have to be to go out and play offensive line every week for a decade in the NFL. If guys convince themselves that it's time for them and their teammates to MAN UP every Sunday, and it works, then the macho culture for them — professional football players who play the sport that we just talk about — isn't necessarily as stupid and juvenile as it seems to everyone else.

"But on some level, locker rooms will always be pretty removed from reality or any sane standards of decency, and we couldn't change it if we tried...Casual fans and people like my mom may recoil at the details from Miami, but the general absence of horror around the NFL hints at one [of] the bigger lessons from all this. There's a disconnect between people who play professional sports and people who watch them, and that gulf is probably a lot wider than we realize. Even if a world full of all-access shows and instant information allows us to know more about athletes and locker rooms than ever before, we may never actually understand any of this."
--Andrew Sharp

 

Yeah, but it's not like civil court is some kind of bastion of civility. And what does that book really prove? And, did it say somewhere that Incog tried to destroy it? Granted, if he did that looks suspicious, think Brady destroying cell phones and Hillary destroying emails, but I don't think those acts alone would have gotten either one of them into trouble.

 

So you work in a restaurant as a chef and you're a lawyer? I'm curious because I was bored looking through the "Pictures/Videos" thread and came across this and found it funny.

 

Lomg story short, I got sick of being a suit and did what I love.

 

That's awesome!

 

I hear that, good for you bro, you can't put a price on contentedness.

 

I had been in insurance law so long I had forgotten what it was like to have a soul.