Timsup2nothin
Deity
- Joined
- Apr 2, 2013
- Messages
- 46,737
Yet already punished to the tune of 8.5 million dollars.
Time to sue some cops
- Thread starter Timsup2nothin
- Start date
Yet already punished to the tune of 8.5 million dollars.
TheMeInTeam
If A implies B...
- Joined
- Jan 26, 2008
- Messages
- 27,995
What I don't understand is why the circumstances surrounding Collins dropped his draft stock so much in the first place. When I was looking over the player stats his biggest knock in my mind is that he's old for a NFL rookie (29, most are 24 or younger) and thus somewhat of a liability in terms of long-term contract viability, though not too bad.
I saw several articles on him in the first place, and he was never elevated past "want to question him", never made it to "person of interest". The timing is fishy as hell but the low risk involved in his case shouldn't have dropped him all the way from 1st to undrafted in my mind. Apparently, it did, but apparently the NFL scouts thought Blake Bortles to be a better NFL QB than Bridgewater going into last year's draft despite the latter's obviously superior stats so who knows. I thought the metrics between Mariota and Winston favored the former too (it isn't just TD/INT, but also accuracy, and lest you think it's just short passes, Mariota had around 10 YPA too, more than a yard higher than Winston and not too far from say Big Ben).
This whole thing stinks and I'm not sure why every team took it seriously either. And once he was cleared, why wouldn't a 1st round grade prospect command some attention on the open market? Why take such a small contract? There's a lot missing in my understanding on how this progressed.
I saw several articles on him in the first place, and he was never elevated past "want to question him", never made it to "person of interest". The timing is fishy as hell but the low risk involved in his case shouldn't have dropped him all the way from 1st to undrafted in my mind. Apparently, it did, but apparently the NFL scouts thought Blake Bortles to be a better NFL QB than Bridgewater going into last year's draft despite the latter's obviously superior stats so who knows. I thought the metrics between Mariota and Winston favored the former too (it isn't just TD/INT, but also accuracy, and lest you think it's just short passes, Mariota had around 10 YPA too, more than a yard higher than Winston and not too far from say Big Ben).
This whole thing stinks and I'm not sure why every team took it seriously either. And once he was cleared, why wouldn't a 1st round grade prospect command some attention on the open market? Why take such a small contract? There's a lot missing in my understanding on how this progressed.
warpus
Sommerswerd asked me to change this
It's just good etiquette to post a link in your OP. It fosters good discussion and so on.
So okay, I read a bit of a background to this, and nowhere does it really say much about the police doing much that was wrong. They questioned him, and it got in the way of his life, but.. well, crap happens, right? You're not suggesting that they shouldn't have done this just because of his status as a potential well paid professional sports player, are you? (Not saying that you are, but honestly wondering)
Just looks like bad luck to me, but again, there isn't really much information here about what the police might have done wrong. It seems to me that the people responsible for him lonot making as much money as he thought he was going to make are the teams that didn't end up picking him up. Now, I might not understand the draft system very well, but I am assuming they passed him over, once they found out that he might have criminal issues. So I mean.. That's their right, isn't it? It's crappy for him, but it doesn't really seem like anyone did anything wrong here, unless the police did something wrong and there just isn't any information out there to that effect.
Timsup2nothin
Deity
- Joined
- Apr 2, 2013
- Messages
- 46,737
Ah. So your employer is the key. You can count on them to back you even if you are falsely accused. They would never bow to pressure from their clients if your name were spread across the front pages. No worries. Good on you then.
Darkflight
Prince
There isn't enough details to make any kind of judgement when it comes to the legal aspect.
From a moral perspective, it is problematic (or possibly even directly wrong) but honestly we got far to many problems that are faaar worse to consider and he should just suck it up and deal with it since he is pretty much set for life with an average or better amount of effort.
From a moral perspective, it is problematic (or possibly even directly wrong) but honestly we got far to many problems that are faaar worse to consider and he should just suck it up and deal with it since he is pretty much set for life with an average or better amount of effort.
sophie
Break My Heart
It seriously pisses me off when people say [feces] like this.
No, they would.
Timsup2nothin
Deity
- Joined
- Apr 2, 2013
- Messages
- 46,737
I'm suggesting that this fits a pattern of police behavior and they shouldn't have done it, period, not just because of who he is. Use of the media to smear every potential suspect is standard procedure. Yes, if you are arrested and arraigned in open court there is going to be a reporter involved, but does the name of a potential suspect, or someone just being questioned, really have to be hotlined to the media? How does that improve the performance of our justice system? Is there some indication that the police "needed the help of the public to locate" the person they wanted to talk to?
While this case is obviously of unusual profile due to the amount of money lost, consider how many people this same sort of thing can be happening to that we never hear about. Do you think "hey man, I need to get to work, can we do this later?" is a reasonable request? Do you think cops honor such requests? What if it is backed by "I had a flat tire and was late to work yesterday, and if I'm late two days in a row I'll never work past it, even if they don't fire me on the spot"? I'll tell you flat out, to a cop that calls for "cool, confess fast then," not "oh, since you may not be guilty of anything perhaps I should treat you like a citizen."
warpus
Sommerswerd asked me to change this
I agree that someone's name shouldn't be made public if they are innocent. Once guilt has been proven - by all means air the dirty laundry, but until then, the media should not be releasing the names and/or identities of those accused.
So I'm with you on that account. But this sort of thing seems to be standard operating procedure throughout the western world and beyond. Look at your local paper and see how many people's names are in there who are just accused of something.
So I'm with you on that account. But this sort of thing seems to be standard operating procedure throughout the western world and beyond. Look at your local paper and see how many people's names are in there who are just accused of something.
Timsup2nothin
Deity
- Joined
- Apr 2, 2013
- Messages
- 46,737
I just said that.
I see this one case, because of the extreme dollar figure, as an opportunity to attack that standard.
Nobody that lost their minimum wage job at the convenience store because the cops held them in an interrogation room for three hours and then decided without even talking to them that they hadn't done anything is in a position to make a big deal out of it. But this guy lost millions of dollars. That could produce a sufficient settlement to get real lawyers interested.
And when the cops defend themselves by saying "well, we always do that kind of thing," I'll be right there to lead the chorus of "why the heck should we put up with that?"
warpus
Sommerswerd asked me to change this
I still don't really understand how he "lost" millions of dollars. Once he was in the clear, why wouldn't teams be all over him? Seems like there are potentially multiple issues at play here.
Collins is 21. He took the max contract available to an undrafted free agent. I know college athletes sometimes insure against the risk of lost draft position due to injury - I do not know if they could get a policy that would cover this type of situation.
How is this at all practical? This bars anyone from alleging that anyone has committed any crime prior to conviction.
If you thought the police in this case ought to be sued, you wouldn't be allowed to name them in this thread.
Timsup2nothin
Deity
- Joined
- Apr 2, 2013
- Messages
- 46,737
They were. He got paid the maximum an undrafted free agent can get.
warpus
Sommerswerd asked me to change this
It would be practical if we made it so that you could accuse people in court without those names being released to the public and the media.
Or heck, compromise - pass a law that you're not allowed to publish the names of the accused in any print on online media.
Ah, okay. Well that's down to league rules then. Guy had a mixup with the cops, it lead to this, and due to league rules he only makes $X instead of $Y.
He's only a rookie anyway, isn't he going to be making a lot more in the future? In theory? I'm not trying to excuse what happened, but it affects many many people a lot more than it affects this future millionaire.
How does that address my question at all?
If a known criminal performs a criminal act in front of dozens of witnesses, is anyone allowed to publish his name before he's convicted? What if he escapes the country? What if he escapes either a trial or conviction because he has corrupt friends in the justice department? What if he dies?
Timsup2nothin
Deity
- Joined
- Apr 2, 2013
- Messages
- 46,737
I agree. I'm operating from the idea that this future millionaire is in a position to present an example that all the people who suffer from the same thing on a smaller scale can't afford to present.
As to his future...teams put a lot more effort into helping a player succeed when they have sunk a first round draft pick into them, so the long term consequences are still up in the air.
And on the "blame the league rules" aspect, that while you only brushed against it a lot of real cop apologists would latch onto directly...when the cops tell the guy "you are free to go" long after his convenience store employer has said he is a no show no call and started processing his termination they will undoubtedly say "just tell them it was police business and I'm sure they will understand," but they generally don't.
Timsup2nothin
Deity
- Joined
- Apr 2, 2013
- Messages
- 46,737
What purpose does publishing his name serve here?
I know the prosecutor loves it, because the jury doesn't even need to pay attention to reach a verdict since they already know he is guilty just from reading the papers, but from any position other than the prosecutor what is gained?
You missed a bunch of my post. I'm sure you're smart enough to think of some purposes for the various situations I listed.
warpus
Sommerswerd asked me to change this
I don't get how that prevents us from doing such a thing. Deal with it on a case by case basis.
I'm not saying I want it to make it illegal to accuse people of crimes. I'm saying I want to make it illegal to publish the name of someone who has already been accused. Exact same thing we do with minors.
