PDA

View Full Version : Roethelisberger accused of Sexual Assault



Pages : 1 [2]

Chip R
04-14-2010, 10:04 AM
Type of reporters like this are so awesome at their job.

This guy used to work in pro wrestling and give out "scoops" if you called some 900 number. If he's a journalist, I'm Mary, Queen of Scots.

GIDP
04-14-2010, 10:29 AM
This guy used to work in pro wrestling and give out "scoops" if you called some 900 number. If he's a journalist, I'm Mary, Queen of Scots.

I'm not being serious. I hate people like that reporter.

Sea Ray
04-14-2010, 10:31 AM
I'm not sure about comparing Roethlisberger to players of other positions or other race. Has the Commissioner suspended anyone who has never faced a criminal indictment? I'm not sure folks can throw a comparable situation out to pressure a suspension in this case

Chip R
04-14-2010, 10:34 AM
I'm not being serious. I hate people like that reporter.


Yeah, I figured.

Caveat Emperor
04-14-2010, 12:40 PM
This guy used to work in pro wrestling and give out "scoops" if you called some 900 number. If he's a journalist, I'm Mary, Queen of Scots.

Funny you should question his journalism credentials -- Madden actually had a fairly famous (at least in first amendment circles) case litigated regarding whether or not someone who is employed by an entity or "shills" on behalf of an entity is entitled to first amendment protections as a journalist when asked to disclose sources for a report. I wrote a paper on the case in law school as it relates to clearly slanted political reporting or blogging on behalf of a 527 group or political entity.

During the last days of WCW (when it was train-wreck TV and, therefore, appointment viewing) back in the late 90s, he also briefly was promoted to "heel" commentator for Monday Nitro. He was on mic for such famous events as Vince Russo firing Hulk Hogan live on Bash at the Beach, and David Arquette being named WCW Champion.

He's pretty much a blowhard, but what he says is absolutely correct: until Roethlisberger is charged and convicted with a crime, the law states we have to presume him innocent of all allegations.

RedsBaron
04-14-2010, 01:00 PM
How does Madden know there was "not a shred" of evidence against Roethelisberger?
Roethelisberger may be a victim in all of this. He may have been falsely accused. The allegations may have been a blackmail attempt. I sure do not know any of that for certain, and I wonder if Madden does.
Caveat Emperor is correct: From the standpoint of criminal charges Roethelisberger is entitled to the presumption of innocence and he would have had to have been proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt before he could be properly convicted by a criminal jury. The prosecutor apparently determined that he couldn't meet that burden. That is all we know for certain.

Hoosier Red
04-14-2010, 01:04 PM
He's pretty much a blowhard, but what he says is absolutely correct: until Roethlisberger is charged and convicted with a crime, the law states we have to presume him innocent of all allegations.

Only in terms of his next legal situation. The law doesn't state that anyone has to presume anything until they are asked to serve on a jury.

I don't have to presume OJ didn't kill two people. In fact I can speculate how he got away with it.

As RedsBaron notes, Madden is dead wrong that their wasn't any evidence of wrong doing. If this was the case the investigation would have wrapped up within a week. My guess is there was in fact some evidence of wrongdoing, but not enough to prove beyond a reasonable doubt.

Chip R
04-14-2010, 01:41 PM
Funny you should question his journalism credentials -- Madden actually had a fairly famous (at least in first amendment circles) case litigated regarding whether or not someone who is employed by an entity or "shills" on behalf of an entity is entitled to first amendment protections as a journalist when asked to disclose sources for a report. I wrote a paper on the case in law school as it relates to clearly slanted political reporting or blogging on behalf of a 527 group or political entity.

During the last days of WCW (when it was train-wreck TV and, therefore, appointment viewing) back in the late 90s, he also briefly was promoted to "heel" commentator for Monday Nitro. He was on mic for such famous events as Vince Russo firing Hulk Hogan live on Bash at the Beach, and David Arquette being named WCW Champion.

He's pretty much a blowhard, but what he says is absolutely correct: until Roethlisberger is charged and convicted with a crime, the law states we have to presume him innocent of all allegations.

Oh, yeah. I do remember him now being the heel commentator for a short while. Of course it was pretty unwatchable by then.

I thought I read something a while back that Ben and Madden are very good friends.

RBA
04-14-2010, 03:13 PM
I'm out of the loop. I thought this thread was either about the Pope or that creepy Clliff from Cheers.

savafan
04-15-2010, 04:58 PM
Scumbag isn't quite strong enough:

http://www.tmz.com/2010/04/15/big-bens-accuser-i-dont-know-if-we-had-sex/print

http://news.gather.com/viewArticle.action?articleId=281474978175369

Tom Servo
04-15-2010, 05:23 PM
Mark Madden as a heel commentator in WCW made me want to take a baseball bat to my TV. His job was to be obnoxious, but it wasn't enjoyable in any way. But at least there was this

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nSY_iX8_Bgc

Jack Burton
04-15-2010, 06:03 PM
From what I've read he definitely sounds like a predator. He's really going to hear it on the road this season.

Redsfaithful
04-15-2010, 06:11 PM
Ben raped that girl, it's just my opinion, but to me this pretty much seals the deal:

http://deadspin.com/5518136/the-roethlisberger-documents-his-penis-was-already-out-of-his-pants


The alleged victim repeatedly told him she didn't want to have sex, but he kept reassuring her, as they had unprotected sex. She told her friends immediately after, and they reported it to the first police officer they saw.

I'm guessing he either paid the girl off or she just flat out didn't want to go through a very public trial and investigation.

Yachtzee
04-15-2010, 08:11 PM
How does Madden know there was "not a shred" of evidence against Roethelisberger?
Roethelisberger may be a victim in all of this. He may have been falsely accused. The allegations may have been a blackmail attempt. I sure do not know any of that for certain, and I wonder if Madden does.
Caveat Emperor is correct: From the standpoint of criminal charges Roethelisberger is entitled to the presumption of innocence and he would have had to have been proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt before he could be properly convicted by a criminal jury. The prosecutor apparently determined that he couldn't meet that burden. That is all we know for certain.

I think Madden goes overboard by saying he should keep on doing what he likes. As you, I and Caveat should know, just because someone doesn't get charged or indicted doesn't mean they didn't do it. It just means the prosecution didn't feel confident about the evidence to go forward. If Ben keeps going like he's going, I have a feeling he's going to become very familiar with the justice system.

Yachtzee
04-15-2010, 08:18 PM
I wonder if Ben's case is going to show up on some torts exams - how many torts can you get him for? Assault? Battery? Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress, False Imprisonment?

GIDP
04-15-2010, 09:02 PM
Some of these things are pretty amazing.

Eric_the_Red
04-15-2010, 10:58 PM
I used to hate Ben because he was a Steeler. Now I have a much more substantial reason.

TC81190
04-16-2010, 01:00 AM
The investigation records are now public, Deadspin has highlights (http://deadspin.com/5518136/the-roethlisberger-documents-his-penis-was-already-out-of-his-pants)(definitely not work safe.)

My stomach turned, to be honest.

Kingspoint
04-16-2010, 01:47 AM
How does Madden know there was "not a shred" of evidence against Roethelisberger?
Roethelisberger may be a victim in all of this. He may have been falsely accused. The allegations may have been a blackmail attempt. I sure do not know any of that for certain, and I wonder if Madden does.
Caveat Emperor is correct: From the standpoint of criminal charges Roethelisberger is entitled to the presumption of innocence and he would have had to have been proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt before he could be properly convicted by a criminal jury. The prosecutor apparently determined that he couldn't meet that burden. That is all we know for certain.

Read this:

Read it all.

http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/years/2010/0415101roethlisberger1.html

redsfandan
04-16-2010, 06:20 AM
Scumbag isn't quite strong enough:

http://www.tmz.com/2010/04/15/big-bens-accuser-i-dont-know-if-we-had-sex/print

http://news.gather.com/viewArticle.action?articleId=281474978175369

Let's be honest, it's not like there aren't more guys out there that act like he did. Some get caught and have to pay. But some get away with it like it's just another day at the office. There are alot of scumbags out there that aren't celebrities.


I'm guessing he either paid the girl off or she just flat out didn't want to go through a very public trial and investigation.
I'd like to think that there'll at least be a civil trial. But, if the victim didn't want the attention that a criminal trial would bring I doubt she'll go for a civil trial.

I thought this was interesting:


Mr. Roethlisberger, who has an off-season residence in the area, had been out celebrating his 28th birthday with a number of friends including teelers tackle Willie Colon, off-duty Pennsylvania State Trooper Trooper Ed Joyner and off-duty Coraopolis police officer Anthony J. Barravecchio.
I'm starting to wonder if there was a team that would want to take a chance on a qb that has "a lot of baggage" and, if there is, who would be willing to take the chance? And, how does this compare to the Michael Vick situation. I think the biggest difference might be that Vick is old news. Big Ben is just the latest pro athlete that thought he could get away with whatever he wanted.

The Steelers starting the season with Dennis Dixon at qb will likely only help the Bengals.

But, are there any Miami University alum that haven't disowned him by now?

RedsBaron
04-16-2010, 06:50 AM
Ben raped that girl, it's just my opinion, but to me this pretty much seals the deal:

http://deadspin.com/5518136/the-roethlisberger-documents-his-penis-was-already-out-of-his-pants



I'm guessing he either paid the girl off or she just flat out didn't want to go through a very public trial and investigation.

Yeah. I agree with you. I do not know beyond a reasonable doubt that Roethelisberger raped her, but, yeah, what do I think? I think he is as guilty as sin.

vaticanplum
04-16-2010, 10:54 AM
This whole thing has now turned beyond sordid and disgusting. Everybody I know in Pittsburgh wants him gone at this point.

Chip R
04-16-2010, 11:01 AM
This whole thing has now turned beyond sordid and disgusting. Everybody I know in Pittsburgh wants him gone at this point.


Until he throws his first TD.

vaticanplum
04-16-2010, 11:32 AM
Until he throws his first TD.

No, not anymore. He's crossed too many lines. I'm sure there are people who feel that way, but everybody I know is done with him. They don't even want him to have the chance. There's a point at which you can't even enjoy winning.

Jack Burton
04-16-2010, 11:43 AM
Will there be justice?

Chip R
04-16-2010, 11:59 AM
No, not anymore. He's crossed too many lines. I'm sure there are people who feel that way, but everybody I know is done with him. They don't even want him to have the chance. There's a point at which you can't even enjoy winning.


What are they going to do when he throws his first TD, boo him? Lakers fans don't seem to have any problem cheering Kobe.

Jack Burton
04-16-2010, 12:04 PM
Lakers fans don't seem to have any problem cheering Kobe.
Which is quite sad and they should all be ashamed. Cheering for a rapist? What's wrong w/ people?

"He pulled a roethelisberger" - To force yourself upon young drunk females

GIDP
04-16-2010, 12:07 PM
What are they going to do when he throws his first TD, boo him? Lakers fans don't seem to have any problem cheering Kobe.

I wonder if she will have a rap song about it like Kobes did.

Hoosier Red
04-16-2010, 12:10 PM
What are they going to do when he throws his first TD, boo him? Lakers fans don't seem to have any problem cheering Kobe.

I don't doubt they'll boo his first TD. But the subsequent ones will turn to be less boos and more cheers. I've never understood why they should boo him specifically. I want my team to do well. If he's on the team I want him to do well.

A friend of mine is an Eagles fan and when they signed Michael Vick he said, "I won't give any more money to the organization, I think its disgusting that they are employing this guy, but if he's on the field I'll want him to do well."
That seems like a sensible line.

vaticanplum
04-16-2010, 12:33 PM
I'm just repeating the general sentiment I'm hearing from every Steelers fan I know. They do not want him to be able to throw a touchdown. They want him off the team, period. Fans are fickle but I think that beyond the deplorable nature of his actions, people are just really tired of the whole show. They do not want this kind of thing to be the thing for which their team is recognized.

Most people expect the Steelers to draft a QB and be done with it. I don't know enough about football to know whether this is truly feasible, but that's what they want.

Chip R
04-16-2010, 12:34 PM
As Seinfeld said, "We cheer for laundry." More often than not, it doesn't matter to us what these people do in their personal lives. As long as they perform on the field, ice or court, we are behind them all the way. Conversely, if they are a Boy Scout off the field and don't perform up to our expectations, we treat them like they are awful people.

redsfandan
04-16-2010, 01:09 PM
As Seinfeld said, "We cheer for laundry." More often than not, it doesn't matter to us what these people do in their personal lives. As long as they perform on the field, ice or court, we are behind them all the way. Conversely, if they are a Boy Scout off the field and don't perform up to our expectations, we treat them like they are awful people.
I think that's true to an extent. But, while Roethelisberger is a good qb, he's not an elite player like Kobe Bryant. And the qb has always been a little less important to the Steelers. As long as they have their defense, running game, and a qb with a decent arm that doesn't make too many mistakes.

Dom Heffner
04-16-2010, 01:47 PM
I'm just repeating the general sentiment I'm hearing from every Steelers fan I know. They do not want him to be able to throw a touchdown. They want him off the team, period. Fans are fickle but I think that beyond the deplorable nature of his actions, people are just really tired of the whole show. They do not want this kind of thing to be the thing for which their team is recognized.

Most people expect the Steelers to draft a QB and be done with it. I don't know enough about football to know whether this is truly feasible, but that's what they want.

I really want to believe this- more so from the Rooneys, I guess, but when you hear something like, "They are fuming mad and the next time is the last..." it makes you scratch your head and say, "So, once and twice is fine, but the third time is what it takes?"

If you are mad, then get rid of him. It makes no sense to give somebody three chances at raping someone.

The first time he made the girl out to be a loon, this time he pays her off. Allegedly.

GIDP
04-16-2010, 01:51 PM
Steelers like to put out the message that they are a higher class organization. Anyone who pays attention really knows its just propaganda.

Caveat Emperor
04-16-2010, 02:43 PM
Steelers like to put out the message that they are a higher class organization. Anyone who pays attention really knows its just propaganda.

We'll see how long the organizations suspends Roethlisberger for -- I'm expecting a minimum of 4 games, probably closer to 6. I also expect they'll draft a QB this year in 1 or 2 and that Roethlisberger will be gone from Pittsburgh after the 2010 season.

Really, there's no precedent for what is going on in Pittsburgh with Ben. I can't recall a player ever having such a storm cloud of accusations and horrid details coming out about them from all directions without a pending criminal matter.

I don't envy the Steelers FO in any way regarding this. Though, I suppose you can claim they had it coming by NOT paying closer attention to the whispers about Ben after the first incident.

GIDP
04-16-2010, 02:45 PM
Ben was a sleeze ball when they drafted him. There was plenty of stories floating around at Miami.

redsfandan
04-16-2010, 03:12 PM
We'll see how long the organizations suspends Roethlisberger for -- I'm expecting a minimum of 4 games, probably closer to 6. I also expect they'll draft a QB this year in 1 or 2 and that Roethlisberger will be gone from Pittsburgh after the 2010 season.

Really, there's no precedent for what is going on in Pittsburgh with Ben. I can't recall a player ever having such a storm cloud of accusations and horrid details coming out about them from all directions without a pending criminal matter.

I don't envy the Steelers FO in any way regarding this. Though, I suppose you can claim they had it coming by NOT paying closer attention to the whispers about Ben after the first incident.
6 might be a little much although that would be fine with me. I'm expecting a minimum of 2 games with 4 games tops. I agree with the rest.

joshnky
04-16-2010, 03:21 PM
Steelers like to put out the message that they are a higher class organization. Anyone who pays attention really knows its just propaganda.

I was impressed with the way they handled Holmes. The Bengals should have done the same with Henry the first time around.

jredmo2
04-16-2010, 03:50 PM
I was impressed with the way they handled Holmes. The Bengals should have done the same with Henry the first time around.

See, this sort of attitude just boggles my mind. On what planet does a failed drug test trump rape? How in good conscience can you treat Roethlisberger and these reports with kid gloves, while administering swift justice to Pac-Man, Holmes, Vick, et al? Do I need to point it out? There is no WAY the NFL doesn't see this. It's just mind-boggling. In my mind Ben should be banned, without question, from the NFL. But I'll listen to Mike & Mike, and they are preaching an 'innocent until proven guilty' line with Roethlisberger. Which is fine, but why on earth would you start doing that now? Didn't do it with Jones or Vick. I just find this unbelievable, that people could even consider a 2-8 game suspension a fitting punishment given the precedent set by the NFL. Honestly, if this happened to any woman I know, my daughter, anyone, he would not walk the streets safely much less get to play football.

If he somehow gets on the field next year, here is my advice to all NFL front sevens: the whistle is only a suggestion.

Tommyjohn25
04-16-2010, 03:55 PM
I think at this point the Vick, Jones, and Henry (RIP) situations differ because Ben hasn't officially been CONVICTED of anything.

joshnky
04-16-2010, 03:57 PM
See, this sort of attitude just boggles my mind. On what planet does a failed drug test trump rape?

Did I say that, or anything about Ben at all?

And I think the suspension would be on Vick levels if he was actually convicted. Its hard to suspend someone for a year when charges have been dropped both times. I could see a lawsuit on Roethlisberger's part if that were to happen.

jredmo2
04-16-2010, 04:18 PM
Did I say that, or anything about Ben at all?

And I think the suspension would be on Vick levels if he was actually convicted. Its hard to suspend someone for a year when charges have been dropped both times. I could see a lawsuit on Roethlisberger's part if that were to happen.

If Roethlisberger was convicted, he would be going to jail for 5+ years.

But, I'm sorry that I inferred that from your post, I don't think that's the point you were trying to make.

I just cannot stand it that Holmes' punishment for smoking some weed will likely be greater or equal Roethlisberger's punishment. Not to mention the Steelers' attitude is 'sending a message' to Holmes. Seems arbitrary, and awfully suspicious to me. Personally, I prefer the way the Bengals handle these situations. At least it's consistent.

Sea Ray
04-16-2010, 04:37 PM
If you are mad, then get rid of him. It makes no sense to give somebody three chances at raping someone.



The problem here is that a third allegation is surfacing now as we discuss this and who knows? More may come up after that. With that in mind it's in Ben's best interests to get the suspension sooner rather than later. Everytime there's a new allegation that comes to light, it makes the suspension that much more harsh

Sea Ray
04-16-2010, 04:42 PM
But I'll listen to Mike & Mike, and they are preaching an 'innocent until proven guilty' line with Roethlisberger. Which is fine, but why on earth would you start doing that now? Didn't do it with Jones or Vick. I just find this unbelievable, that people could even consider a 2-8 game suspension a fitting punishment given the precedent set by the NFL. Honestly, if this happened to any woman I know, my daughter, anyone, he would not walk the streets safely much less get to play football.

If he somehow gets on the field next year, here is my advice to all NFL front sevens: the whistle is only a suggestion.


Innocent until proven guilty by what standard? Beyond a reasonable doubt? Goodell is not bound by that burden. He may feel that it's been proven "to his satisfaction" that Ben took advantage of this girl and that may be enough. In other words if he's convinced the things we've talked about in this thread really happened (like having a bodyguard keep her friends from her while he does his thing to a drunk co-ed) then I bet he'll come down on Ben harshly.

Jack Burton
04-16-2010, 05:15 PM
Permanent ban from the NFL

Caveat Emperor
04-16-2010, 05:18 PM
Permanent ban from the NFL

For allegations of wrongdoing that've never been proven in a court of law?

As his been stated, there would almost certainly be litigation if the league were to take that action.

reds44
04-16-2010, 05:45 PM
What are they going to do when he throws his first TD, boo him? Lakers fans don't seem to have any problem cheering Kobe.
Lol. The Kobe situation is completely different than this. Anybody who related the two just isn't seeing very clearly.

There was nowhere near as many witnesses or accounts for Kobe, and no video magically dissapeared either. It was Kobe's word vs. the accuser.

Plus, the Kobe thing was a one time situation. Rothlisberger is a two time accused rapist.

That's a silly comparison.

jredmo2
04-16-2010, 05:59 PM
For allegations of wrongdoing that've never been proven in a court of law?

As his been stated, there would almost certainly be litigation if the league were to take that action.

I guess it all depends on the league policy -- the nature of the agreement between NFL and NFLPA, how the players enter into the policy, and if there is any limit to the severity of the punishment. I know a couple Vikings players were able to go to state court to challenge the steroids policy.

RichRed
04-16-2010, 06:14 PM
The NFL's policy says it's "not enough [for players] to simply avoid criminal activity"; they have to do better than that. Guess we'll see how well they follow through on that when it comes to Big Dumb Ben.

MWM
04-16-2010, 06:17 PM
As Seinfeld said, "We cheer for laundry." More often than not, it doesn't matter to us what these people do in their personal lives. As long as they perform on the field, ice or court, we are behind them all the way. Conversely, if they are a Boy Scout off the field and don't perform up to our expectations, we treat them like they are awful people.

There's a line even to that. I think that generally means that a player you hate for another team you will root for on yours. Lots of players I've hated over the years I'd want to well if the Reds signed him. But I don't think this absolute and Ben is past the line where the "cheering for laundry" dictum is no longer valid. I know I'm loyal to the Bengals, but I can say unequivocally I would NOT cheer or root for him if the they signed him. There's very few exceptions to this. Ben is one of them. I'd be livid if Mike Brown signed him.

The "innocent until proven guilty" starts and stops with whether or not someone is to be punished according to the law. It was never intended to be something we incorporate into everyday life when evidence is as clear and as strong as it is against Ben. They might not have been able to convict him in a court of law, but we "know" enough to know his actions were reprehensible and to let it influence our perception of him. Mike & Mike are idiots to begin with. Golic is just an ignoramus.... seriously low IQ. How he's paid to talk about anything is beyond me.

Chip R
04-16-2010, 06:17 PM
The Georgia cop who took Ben's statement has quit the force.

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=5099224

Caveat Emperor
04-16-2010, 06:33 PM
There's a line even to that. I think that generally means that a player you hate for another team you will root for on yours. Lots of players I've hated over the years I'd want to well if the Reds signed him. But I don't think this absolute and Ben is past the line where the "cheering for laundry" dictum is no longer valid. I know I'm loyal to the Bengals, but I can say unequivocally I would NOT cheer or root for him if the they signed him. There's very few exceptions to this. Ben is one of them. I'd be livid if Mike Brown signed him.

FWIW -- I've yet to talk to a single Steelers fan (and I've got lots of family in Pittsburgh) who doesn't want Roethlisberger cut immediately. Even knowing that would mean some combination of Dennis Dixon or Charlie Batch at QB for 2010.

MWM
04-16-2010, 06:41 PM
FWIW -- I've yet to talk to a single Steelers fan (and I've got lots of family in Pittsburgh) who doesn't want Roethlisberger cut immediately. Even knowing that would mean some combination of Dennis Dixon or Charlie Batch at QB for 2010.

I'm not surprised and I think the sentiment is genuine. I love sports.... A LOT. I get emotionally invested (although not like I used to when I was younger) into their performance. But there does come a point where even the most ardent sports nut case will put winning behind principle. It takes A LOT to get there, and I can't think of many other parallels in sports where it has gotten to the point that fans would rather lose that win with a particular player. But rape is something even the face painting, towel twirling, season ticket holding will not be able to cheer for any more.

Rojo
04-16-2010, 07:44 PM
The Georgia cop who took Ben's statement has quit the force.

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=5099224

Anyone else questioning cops moonlighting for private citizens?

Dom Heffner
04-16-2010, 10:40 PM
The Huffington Post is reporting another woman has come forward with an inappropriate sexual accusation. Someone will have to help me with the link as I'm unable to access that site right now.

And watch: the Rooneys won't count this one either.

Revering4Blue
04-16-2010, 10:46 PM
The Huffington Post is reporting another woman has come forward with an inappropriate sexual accusation. Someone will have to help me with the link as I'm unable to access that site right now.

And watch: the Rooneys won't count this one either.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/04/16/ben-roethlisberger-accuse_n_540442.html

Yachtzee
04-16-2010, 11:08 PM
Having read the parts of the police report on The Smoking Gun, the statements by the attorneys and DA's office, and the report that the officer involved in the initial investigation has resigned, I can understand why the victim doesn't want to pursue the case. I feel it's a vote of no confidence that the DA's office and the police can handle the case properly. I get the feeling that the victim and her family have no faith that someone either on the prosecution or the defense team won't leak her identity to the press. It's fall out from the Kobe Bryant case, where the victims name was leaked, allowing the defense to operate a smear campaign on the victim in public. The fact that another potential victim might be out there who didn't want to go to the DA could possibly indicate that the DA might not have the best reputation when it comes to handling these matters.

Why the DA wouldn't at least take the evidence to the grand jury is beyond me.

Chip R
04-16-2010, 11:26 PM
The Steelers could be facing up to $200K worth of fines for Ben's and Holmes' behavior.

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=5098560

Kingspoint
04-17-2010, 01:25 AM
Permanent ban from the NFL


Absolutely.

GIDP
04-17-2010, 01:48 AM
I was impressed with the way they handled Holmes. The Bengals should have done the same with Henry the first time around.

Holmes has been in trouble like 5 times. Lets not act like they just cut him loose after 1 thing. They traded him after he was going to be suspended.

Caveat Emperor
04-17-2010, 02:24 AM
Why the DA wouldn't at least take the evidence to the grand jury is beyond me.

If the victim isn't cooperating with the police and has requested the DA drop the charges, there isn't a whole lot the DAs office can do. I know some DAs offices won't even take a felony sex case to grand jury unless the victim comes in to testify (exceptions being when the victim is very young) b/c they look at it as a "trial run" to see how the victim does in front of people.

Even if you assume they could get an indictment signed just on the testimony of the investigators w/o the victim's cooperation, what good does that do? Most prosecutors get kinda squeamish (for good reason) at the thought of backing an indictment and pursuing a case where they lack enough usable evidence to survive a Rule 29 motion. Doing that is a quick way to end up on the wrong end of a civil proceeding and/or a disciplinary hearing.

Yachtzee
04-17-2010, 12:53 PM
If the victim isn't cooperating with the police and has requested the DA drop the charges, there isn't a whole lot the DAs office can do. I know some DAs offices won't even take a felony sex case to grand jury unless the victim comes in to testify (exceptions being when the victim is very young) b/c they look at it as a "trial run" to see how the victim does in front of people.

Even if you assume they could get an indictment signed just on the testimony of the investigators w/o the victim's cooperation, what good does that do? Most prosecutors get kinda squeamish (for good reason) at the thought of backing an indictment and pursuing a case where they lack enough usable evidence to survive a Rule 29 motion. Doing that is a quick way to end up on the wrong end of a civil proceeding and/or a disciplinary hearing.

Well, it seems to me that the victim didn't withdraw cooperation until it became apparent that the DA wasn't going to do anything with it. As far as taking it to grand jury, maybe we just work in different jurisdictions, but around here, the police usually get a signed affidavit from the victim at the initial interview. I've seen plenty of cases where the victim recants and the prosecution goes forward on the basis of the signed affidavit. This is especially true in cases involving sex offenses and domestic violence situations where the sensitive nature of the facts and/or the possible relation between the victim and the suspect lead to higher than normal incidences of victims changing their minds. The victim is then assigned a victim's assistance advocate to ensure that the victim isn't being unduly influenced to drop charges by the suspect or his attorneys. Of course, if it becomes apparent that the victim was lying when they spoke to police and signed the affidavit, the prosecution can then go after them for filing a false police report.

The reason I'm surprised they didn't at least go forward to grand jury is that they had multiple witnesses to testify regarding the events surrounding the alleged rape. Based on those witness statements, I could see the possibility of not only rape charges, but kidnapping, unlawful restraint and a few other things, not just for Ben, but for his security detail as well. If they had taken it to the grand jury and got Ben charged, they would have at least gotten his case into the system while they continued to gather evidence. Even if they couldn't get enough to take the rape charges to trial, they likely would have been able to prove some of the lesser offenses so that, should this happen again, Ben and his attorneys couldn't claim his record is clean and that he didn't do anything wrong.

I guess it goes down to the philosophy of the DA or the County Prosecutor, but some of the places I've worked on the prosecution side, the philosophy was that the prosecutor has a duty not just to the victim, but to the community as a whole. Regardless of whether the victim wants to go forward, the prosecutor needs to go forward if the evidence is sufficient to support wrongdoing in order to protect potential future victims.

I hope that Ben reconfigures his lifestyle to avoid these situations in the future, but even in my limited experience, these kind of people tend to live in a state of denial and rarely change their ways until their sitting in prison and end up having a duty to register as a sex offender.

Caveat Emperor
04-17-2010, 01:47 PM
The issue isn't just that the prosecutor has a duty to the community as a whole, the issue is that the prosecutor also has a duty to only go forward on charges for which he or she can meet, at minimum, each element of the offense.

If you look at the facts of the case, would you be able to make a claim of unlawful restraint or kidnapping without the testimony of the victim? I don't really think so. Her statement to the police indicated that she saw Roethlisberger with his genitalia out and she walked into the first door that she saw, which was the bathroom. Roethlisberger followed her in and the two proceeded to have sex.

What do the witnesses say? Witnesses say they saw Roethlisberger follow her into the bathroom and one of his goons set up shop next to the door to prevent them from going inside.

I'm assuming Georgia's unlawful restraint and kidnapping sections mirror Ohio's fairly closely -- and if that's the case, how are you going to prove, with only eyewitness evidence and without any statements before / during / after the fact of the victim (which would be excluded as hearsay) that she didn't go into the bathroom willingly with Roethlisberger for a sexual encounter at the bar? He didn't have a weapon on him. As best I can tell from reading the reports, no one heard him make threatening comments to the victim. The victim was, apparently, not accepting of his sexual advances, but can body language alone, without the words (hearsay) be enough to carry a kidnapping charge or an unlawful restraint charge beyond even the Rule 29 standard of "looking at the facts as they exist, in a light most favorable to the State, has the State met the burden of showing sufficient evidence to all elements of the offense?" I don't know. Doubtful.

Plus, most prosecutors I know would take issue with the "charge it to get it into the system" mentality. What you're essentially suggesting that the State do, in this case, is to present a case they know they have absolutely no chance of winning as it currently exists (because of the victim's lack of cooperation) just to get a guy charged with some felony offenses and hope that either A.) More evidence turns up, B.) The victim decides to cooperate, or C.) Ben's attorney decides to cop a plea deal to get the case finished. I don't know a prosecutor in the world who would sign off on that. It stinks of using the judicial system to accomplish some end as opposed to the prosecutor's duty to seek justice. That's to say nothing of the credibility that would be ruined in the eyes of the bench by a prosecutor's office that would seek an indictment on someone lacking the cooperation of the key witness.

There are lots of situations where a case can go forward without a witnesss. A domestic violence where the incident is witnessed by someone or where the victim makes a 911 call during the incident. A felony sex offense where the defendant admits to there being a lack of consent and sufficient outside evidence to prove corpus delicti of the case. But, looking at the facts of this case as they've been currently presented to the outside world, I see virtually no chance of successful prosecution without the testimony of the victim. If the State wants to allege rape by force, they need the victim (who was the only person present with Roethlisberger in the bathroom) to testify as to lack of consent. If the State wants to allege rape by impairment and inability to consent, the State will need the victim to tesitfy about her mental state at the time of the incident. If the State wants to allege kidnapping or false imprisonment, the State will need the victim to testify that she was unwillingly kept in the bathroom that she entered to get away from Roethlisberger.

That's just my read on the situation. Like you, I'd be eager to know when the victim became uncooperative with the investigation and what steps were done (such as assigning her a victim's advocate or assistant, etc.) to secure her cooperation. But, the truth is once she backed off, I don't think there was a whole lot the State could do.

WMR
04-17-2010, 03:08 PM
From everything I've read, the DA absolutely should have gone to the grand jury with what he had.

Yachtzee
04-17-2010, 05:19 PM
The only standard that the police and prosecution need to go forward on charges is probable cause. Level of burden to take it to grand jury and for grand jury to indict, probable cause. I know you know that. The only time it becomes necessary to meet the burden of proving each and every element beyond a reasonable doubt is at trial, period. A Rule 29 motion doesn't even come into play until a trial after the prosecution has brought all its evidence.

In my experience on both sides of the coin, the prosecution is never done collecting evidence and often does not have a complete investigatory file until after indictment. This is especially true if anything has been sent to BCI for testing. If the police and prosecutor were required to have all their evidence lined up before they even brought charges or indicted someone, there would be a lot more criminals on the street running free.

I think that if this case had been handled differently, the victim might still be on board to cooperate. If Ben had been arrested, charged, indicted, anything (probable cause), the victim might not have withdrawn cooperation, or might still change her mind again.

redsfandan
04-17-2010, 06:01 PM
Caveat Emperor and Yachtzee, what are the chances of a civil trial?

Yachtzee
04-17-2010, 06:15 PM
Caveat Emperor and Yachtzee, what are the chances of a civil trial?

If the victim's reason for not going forward in the criminal case is to avoid having her name and personal history getting out in public, I'd say there's little chance of a civil trial. If you want your name and sexual history to be put out there for everyone to see, file a civil suit.

bucksfan2
04-17-2010, 06:33 PM
When I read the bullet points released about the incident I am shocked that the case wasn't taken to at least the grand jury. I am surprised that the Prosecutor didn't file charges and then put some serious pressure on Ben's bodyguard goon, who just so happened to be a PA State Trooper, to testify in the victim's defense.

What I also thought was interesting is when the Prosecuter said that that there was semen found in the genital area but the there wasn't enough. How much semen must be present in order to get a DNA swab. The way I understand it when someone accuses rape and goes to the hospital a rape kit is applied and DNA is looked for.

Finally this is something I just don't understand in our legal system. If there is strong likelihood of rape or abuse why do prosecutors drop charges if the victim declines to testify? It seems to me that justice isn't done but also that in abuse cases your letting the defendant off scott free and putting the victim at risk again. In the Ben case you allowing someone with a checkered past of inappropriate sexual advances to continue to act in the manner he is acting. To me you are doing the public a diservice.

Finally I now expect Goddell to come down hard on Big Ben. With just the evidence released in this case the NFL should have enouh evidence to suspend him for a long time. But also I have to imagine that the NFL has a considerable amount more of evidence that the general public will ever know.

Caveat Emperor
04-17-2010, 06:40 PM
The only standard that the police and prosecution need to go forward on charges is probable cause. Level of burden to take it to grand jury and for grand jury to indict, probable cause. I know you know that. The only time it becomes necessary to meet the burden of proving each and every element beyond a reasonable doubt is at trial, period. A Rule 29 motion doesn't even come into play until a trial after the prosecution has brought all its evidence.

In my experience on both sides of the coin, the prosecution is never done collecting evidence and often does not have a complete investigatory file until after indictment. This is especially true if anything has been sent to BCI for testing. If the police and prosecutor were required to have all their evidence lined up before they even brought charges or indicted someone, there would be a lot more criminals on the street running free.

I think that if this case had been handled differently, the victim might still be on board to cooperate. If Ben had been arrested, charged, indicted, anything (probable cause), the victim might not have withdrawn cooperation, or might still change her mind again.

Grand Jury indictment is probable cause -- but with a case this high profile, the DA is already thinking three and four steps ahead. If the victim isn't cooperating with the case, they're drawing dead on an indictment. The only thing it would do is focus the media circus on the process -- which, in a case like this, probably only decreases the shot of getting the victim to cooperate. Having ESPN parked outside town for months isn't going to make the victim feel better about cooperating, I'd imagine.

And I agree -- there are a lot of times where people are arrested without a complete case file. But we're not talking about waiting for BCI or the local crime lab to come back with forensic results that nail a criminal -- we're talking about the key, lynchpin piece of evidence being not in the State's corner. This would be like collecting blood at the scene of the murder and arresting the guy you heard was loitering around the area on the hope that the DNA testing will link him to the crime. It's not that the State has a weak case against Roethlisberger without the victim, the State has no case whatsoever against him without the victim. You can go to the Grand Jury with a weak case, but I think it's questionable ethically if you go to the Grand Jury with no case at all.

Every case is different, and in this case, without the cooperation of the victim, I think the decision not to go to the Grand Jury was correct. It sucks, and I hate to see a scumbag like Roethlisberger go free, but the decision seems fairly sound. At minimum, at least it opens the door to future prosecution if the victim changes her mind. If you indict and the victim never comes around, you run the risk of losing a charge due to time running.

Where the fault probably lies in this whole matter is in the investigation, which sounds like it wasn't done as well as it could have been, and with the DA not waiting a little longer to secure the cooperation of the victim. There's no requirement that the DA's office come to a quick conclusion on whether or not to press charges. If the victim wasn't cooperating, we don't know how much of an effort was made to change her mind.

Caveat Emperor
04-17-2010, 06:47 PM
Finally this is something I just don't understand in our legal system. If there is strong likelihood of rape or abuse why do prosecutors drop charges if the victim declines to testify? It seems to me that justice isn't done but also that in abuse cases your letting the defendant off scott free and putting the victim at risk again. In the Ben case you allowing someone with a checkered past of inappropriate sexual advances to continue to act in the manner he is acting. To me you are doing the public a diservice.

Because the State is required with proving every element of every offense charged beyond a reasonable doubt. One of the elements of a Rape offense in virtually every jurisdiction is that the victim either did not consent to the act or that the victim was physically unable to give consent (due to impairment).

Since Roethlisberger and the Victim were alone when the act allegedly occurred, the only way to show that it was a non-consensual act would be for the Victim of the offense to testify, in court, that she did not consent to having sex with him (or, in the alternative, that she was sufficiently impaired that any consent given would be invalid).

The Victim's friends cannot testify what the Victim told them because that would be hearsay, which is always excluded in a criminal matter absent very specific circumstances (which may or not be present here -- I don't know enough about the specifics to say one way or another). The Victim's affidavit or statement to the police would similarly be inadmissible because it would violate the confrontation clause of the US Constitution, which gives criminal defendants the right to confront their accuser and witnesses against them in open court. The statement of the victim would clearly be deemed testimonial, since it was given to police investigators, and excluded unless the victim personally appeared and subjected herself to cross-examination.

When the victim of an offense declines to prosecute, it ties the hands of the DA severely.

Yachtzee
04-17-2010, 07:27 PM
If a prosecutor wants to drop a case because the victim won't press charges, that's fine. There are plenty of reasons for that and usually it comes down to something like overreacting to an incident and having time to think about it, realizing that what the suspect did to them didn't warrant criminal charges. There are some instances where the alleged victim is pleading with officers at the scene that they don't want charges filed and the police have done so anyway. Some police departments have the attitude that if they get a call, someone's getting charged. Do I think it's right? No.

However, my impression of the case has been that the victim has declined to go forward not because she felt that she might have been mistaken, but rather out of concern that she was going to be trashed in the media. I don't know the timeline of her decision, but it seems to me like it came well after this case had been under investigation. To me, that appears to be a failure on the DA's office to assure the victim that this case was going to be handled properly and that she wasn't going to be revictimized by taking the case to trial. When you have a situation where there are numerous witnesses giving essentially the same facts to the effect that Roethlisberger was supplying her with drinks, he either followed her to the bathroom or had one of his bodyguards take her there, had the door locked with a bodyguard keeping people out, and then the victim comes out upset and immediately tells her friends she was raped, and they report it to the first officer they see, I just can't believe that Roethlisberger wasn't at least taken down to the station to be booked and had DNA samples taken then and there. And if they needed a warrant, a lot of jurisdictions have judges or magistrates on speed dial just for that purpose. But when you have the officer at the scene taking photos with Roethlisberger and allegedly making derogatory comments about the victim to Roethlisberger's entourage, no one taking steps to preserve evidence at the scene, and the DA taking days dithering over whether to even bring charges, I can understand why the victim and her family have no faith in the police and DA's office to ensure she's protected from being further victimized.

bucksfan2
04-18-2010, 02:53 PM
Because the State is required with proving every element of every offense charged beyond a reasonable doubt. One of the elements of a Rape offense in virtually every jurisdiction is that the victim either did not consent to the act or that the victim was physically unable to give consent (due to impairment).

Since Roethlisberger and the Victim were alone when the act allegedly occurred, the only way to show that it was a non-consensual act would be for the Victim of the offense to testify, in court, that she did not consent to having sex with him (or, in the alternative, that she was sufficiently impaired that any consent given would be invalid).

The Victim's friends cannot testify what the Victim told them because that would be hearsay, which is always excluded in a criminal matter absent very specific circumstances (which may or not be present here -- I don't know enough about the specifics to say one way or another). The Victim's affidavit or statement to the police would similarly be inadmissible because it would violate the confrontation clause of the US Constitution, which gives criminal defendants the right to confront their accuser and witnesses against them in open court. The statement of the victim would clearly be deemed testimonial, since it was given to police investigators, and excluded unless the victim personally appeared and subjected herself to cross-examination.

When the victim of an offense declines to prosecute, it ties the hands of the DA severely.

Would her original statements to the police officers be thrown out or court? Didn't she go right to the police after the incident claiming that Ben raped her? If they have that statement along with DNA evidence then that should be enough to take the case to court, correct?

Also whether or not the rape charge is legit another crime was committed. Ben was supplying alcohol to a minor and admitted so in his statement to the police. Shouldn't charges have been filed for that?

I by no means am a lawyer and do not fully understand the way the legals system opperates. But what I do know is this situation seems like it is out of a John Grisham novel. A cop photographed with the suspect and heard making derogatory comments about the accuser becoming the lead investigator, later being released from the police force. An off duty PA State Trooper acting as a body guard to Ben who no is under investigatoin. A small town college bar has the tapes of the night taped over, not erased, but taped over as to no evidence is recoverable.

KoryMac5
04-19-2010, 09:25 AM
Yahoo Sports reporting Ben will be suspended by the Commish this week. Most likely a four game suspension.

Also a great article that gives you an inside look at how this case was handled or mishandled by the police.

http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/10108/1051441-455.stm?cmpid=MOSTEMAILEDBOX

Hoosier Red
04-19-2010, 11:43 AM
Finally this is something I just don't understand in our legal system. If there is strong likelihood of rape or abuse why do prosecutors drop charges if the victim declines to testify? It seems to me that justice isn't done but also that in abuse cases your letting the defendant off scott free and putting the victim at risk again. In the Ben case you allowing someone with a checkered past of inappropriate sexual advances to continue to act in the manner he is acting. To me you are doing the public a diservice.


I'm probably Pollyanna here but in Ben's case I would hope the police didn't see a "checkered past" because he's never been charged with a crime. While I sympathize with the victim of a sexual assault, legally speaking the benefit of the doubt has to go to the alleged perpetrator right?
If he isn't given the right to face his accuser or defend himself from what could be a libelous charge(don't forget he's countersuing in the other situation,) than what good are his other rights?

Remember the justice system is designed so that guilty people should go free rather than innocent people going to jail.

Caveat Emperor
04-19-2010, 12:41 PM
Yahoo Sports reporting Ben will be suspended by the Commish this week. Most likely a four game suspension.

Also a great article that gives you an inside look at how this case was handled or mishandled by the police.

http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/10108/1051441-455.stm?cmpid=MOSTEMAILEDBOX

The one police officer, Blash, comes off very poorly in the investigation. It sounds like he single handedly might've torpedoed the case. His conduct was completely unprofessional.

Otherwise, the problem was probably not getting the state-level investigators involved in the case quickly enough. The hours delay probably shot any chance of getting evidence from the bathroom (f there was any there to begin with). The second, and really major, problem is the victim benig unwilling to cooperate. Even with the missteps in the investigation, the testimony of the victim (if corroborated by the witneses) could've been enough to carry a case forward.

Hoosier Red
04-19-2010, 02:25 PM
I've heard two definitions of violating consent here. Either a) She said no or b)She was too intoxicated to say no.

Even if they can't prove she said no, don't all the statements back up the idea she was too intoxicated to give consent?

Caveat Emperor
04-19-2010, 03:12 PM
I've heard two definitions of violating consent here. Either a) She said no or b)She was too intoxicated to say no.

Even if they can't prove she said no, don't all the statements back up the idea she was too intoxicated to give consent?

Possibly. It'd be difficult to prove impairment level based on observations of others alone, but not totally impossible. However, without the victim's cooperation in the case, there's almost no way to prove any sexual contact happened at all -- especially since the forensics came back as inconclusive.

Chip R
04-19-2010, 03:28 PM
However, without the victim's cooperation in the case, there's almost no way to prove any sexual contact happened at all -- especially since the forensics came back as inconclusive.


I think that's the biggest obstacle. It sounds like there was sexual contact but Ben's not telling and neither are his bodyguards. The woman involved isn't sure and all her friends have to go on is heresay. There's no forensic evidence so there isn't much of a case at all.

vaticanplum
04-19-2010, 03:34 PM
The one police officer, Blash, comes off very poorly in the investigation. It sounds like he single handedly might've torpedoed the case. His conduct was completely unprofessional.

Otherwise, the problem was probably not getting the state-level investigators involved in the case quickly enough. The hours delay probably shot any chance of getting evidence from the bathroom (f there was any there to begin with). The second, and really major, problem is the victim benig unwilling to cooperate. Even with the missteps in the investigation, the testimony of the victim (if corroborated by the witneses) could've been enough to carry a case forward.

I'm so horrified by that cop that I can't even see straight. The whole investigation too, yes, but the cop in particular.

I am sure that most police officers to their jobs admirably, and take seriously the basis of their whole job: to protect the public, to help bring justice to victims, to respect facts of the case at hand, to keep an orderly society, and to behave professionally and fairly. As far as I can tell, this guy unabashedly flew in the face of every single one of these goals. And he does a huge disservice to his profession, because it's people like this who make people like me distrust all cops. Which I do. And it's totally not fair to most of the very fine law enforcement officers out there.

This woman was a victim of a vicious crime, and if he's disgusted by her physical and mental state, he has NO BUSINESS being in a profession where his job is to help and protect. And the very blatant way he made his feelings clear and let it affect the way this entire case was handled really makes my blood boil. This. is. why. victims. do. not. report. rape. If the cops are not going to be in your corner, what are you supposed to do? It's such a horrifying experience that the ONLY way you're going to move forward with charges is if you know the supposedly good guys are going to fight for you.

Roethlisberger is a scumbag, and he's going to rightfully walk on this, because there isn't enough evidence to prosecute him. What this cop did is equally egregious. Maybe more so, in my opinion.

Chip R
04-19-2010, 04:26 PM
Goodell says that Roethlisberger violated league policy so they should come down on him.

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=5113322


I'm so horrified by that cop that I can't even see straight. The whole investigation too, yes, but the cop in particular.

I am sure that most police officers to their jobs admirably, and take seriously the basis of their whole job: to protect the public, to help bring justice to victims, to respect facts of the case at hand, to keep an orderly society, and to behave professionally and fairly. As far as I can tell, this guy unabashedly flew in the face of every single one of these goals. And he does a huge disservice to his profession, because it's people like this who make people like me distrust all cops. Which I do. And it's totally not fair to most of the very fine law enforcement officers out there.

This woman was a victim of a vicious crime, and if he's disgusted by her physical and mental state, he has NO BUSINESS being in a profession where his job is to help and protect. And the very blatant way he made his feelings clear and let it affect the way this entire case was handled really makes my blood boil. This. is. why. victims. do. not. report. rape. If the cops are not going to be in your corner, what are you supposed to do? It's such a horrifying experience that the ONLY way you're going to move forward with charges is if you know the supposedly good guys are going to fight for you.

Roethlisberger is a scumbag, and he's going to rightfully walk on this, because there isn't enough evidence to prosecute him. What this cop did is equally egregious. Maybe more so, in my opinion.

Can't disagree with you on that. The case was handled terribly and you have to believe this cop was star struck by Roethlisberger and if he didn't bend over backwards, he certainly was of a mind to help Roethlisberger out. Perhaps if it was Joe Schmo who did this, he'd be sitting in jail right now.

If he did rape her, it's a horrible thing and hopefully, someday, someone in the know will come forth and they can re-open the case - if that's even possible. But that doesn't look like that's going to happen and I see a couple of things happening here for Roethlisberger. He's either going to admit he has a problem and get help for it. I'm thinking that would be a good thing and that can "curb" his predilictions. Or he believes that he is getting off Scot free (save for the suspension) and he will do this again. I hope he doesn't but it's highly likely it will happen again. Perhaps that time the law will be on the side of the victim and not the star.

Even if he gets out of it again, the NFL is going to come down on him like a ton of bricks. He probably will be suspended for a year at the very least and you have to believe the Steelers will drop him like a hot potato. Of course some other team will pick him up - like Vick - but he's always going to have that rapist label attached to him. Unless he turns his life around, no one's going to want to hire him as a coach or a broadcaster. He'll be hard-pressed trying to get a job as a Pop Warner coach. Ben may not have been - or ever will be - found guilty of a sex crime but he's going to have that stink of a sex offender around him.

Yachtzee
04-19-2010, 08:14 PM
The one police officer, Blash, comes off very poorly in the investigation. It sounds like he single handedly might've torpedoed the case. His conduct was completely unprofessional.

Otherwise, the problem was probably not getting the state-level investigators involved in the case quickly enough. The hours delay probably shot any chance of getting evidence from the bathroom (f there was any there to begin with). The second, and really major, problem is the victim benig unwilling to cooperate. Even with the missteps in the investigation, the testimony of the victim (if corroborated by the witneses) could've been enough to carry a case forward.

It's pretty clear the victim didn't trust Blash after talking to him. Based on the comments that the victim claimed to be receiving unwanted calls on her cell phone hours after the incident, I can't help but wonder if Blash didn't pass additional information about the victim to his out-of-state "brothers" when he was talking to them about the incident. Do you think maybe he resigned to avoid a potential investigation into his own conduct? Now that he's resigned, I imagine he could always get work as part of Ben's "security" next time Ben's in GA.

redsfandan
04-20-2010, 06:07 PM
This woman was a victim of a vicious crime, and if he's disgusted by her physical and mental state, he has NO BUSINESS being in a profession where his job is to help and protect. And the very blatant way he made his feelings clear and let it affect the way this entire case was handled really makes my blood boil. This. is. why. victims. do. not. report. rape. If the cops are not going to be in your corner, what are you supposed to do? It's such a horrifying experience that the ONLY way you're going to move forward with charges is if you know the supposedly good guys are going to fight for you.
Well put.

It's pretty clear the victim didn't trust Blash after talking to him. Based on the comments that the victim claimed to be receiving unwanted calls on her cell phone hours after the incident, I can't help but wonder if Blash didn't pass additional information about the victim to his out-of-state "brothers" when he was talking to them about the incident. Do you think maybe he resigned to avoid a potential investigation into his own conduct? Now that he's resigned, I imagine he could always get work as part of Ben's "security" next time Ben's in GA.
I really hope there is an investigation into any improper things that went on.



On a related note, the Steelers traded a 7th round pick to Tampa for Byron Leftwich today. Looks like they are preparing for the inevitable as best they can.

Chip R
04-20-2010, 06:29 PM
It looks like Georgia police aren't the only cops who don't take rape accusations of NFL players seriously.

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=5118145

Revering4Blue
04-20-2010, 09:50 PM
The Steelers have fielded phone calls about Ben Roethlisberger and have not ruled out a trade, according to the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette's Gary Dulac.


This wouldn't be a straight dump like the Santonio Holmes trade. Though the Steelers are not "actively" shopping Big Ben, the Rooney family would give the green light on a trade if the right offer comes along. Until recently it seemed unlikely that Roethlisberger would be dealt, but the tide has turned against him in Pittsburgh. It would no longer surprise us to see Big Ben in another uniform.

http://www.rotoworld.com/content/playerpages/player_main.aspx?sport=NFL&id=1181

Blimpie
04-21-2010, 12:19 PM
Adam Shefter (sp?) is reporting that Pittsburgh is now listening to offers for Big Ben. Rumor has it that they want at least a top 10 pick in return.

GIDP
04-21-2010, 12:38 PM
Ben is worth a top 10 pick about as much as Santonio Holmes was.

Hoosier Red
04-21-2010, 12:43 PM
Reportedly 4-6 games.

http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/news;_ylt=As1qrtbLr3Ph1V88wkrwwvk5nYcB?slug=txroet hlisbergersuspen

CTA513
04-21-2010, 01:00 PM
Adam Shefter (sp?) is reporting that Pittsburgh is now listening to offers for Big Ben. Rumor has it that they want at least a top 10 pick in return.

It would be a pretty big risk to give up at least a top 10 pick for him.
His football skills are worth it, but the guy is about to be suspended and who knows if he can stop putting himself in the situations that led up to this suspension.

BuckeyeRed27
04-21-2010, 01:26 PM
It would be a pretty big risk to give up at least a top 10 pick for him.
His football skills are worth it, but the guy is about to be suspended and who knows if he can stop putting himself in the situations that led up to this suspension.

So if your St. Louis you don't at least consider trading that pick for Ben? That stock is never going to be lower and you really don't know what you are getting with Bradford. I'm not saying its a sure fire deal, but I'd consider it pretty hard.

Chip R
04-21-2010, 01:36 PM
Reportedly 4-6 games.

http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/news;_ylt=As1qrtbLr3Ph1V88wkrwwvk5nYcB?slug=txroet hlisbergersuspen

It's 6.

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=5121614

Degenerate39
04-21-2010, 01:42 PM
It's 6.

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=5121614

Why couldn't the Bengals play the Steelers in one of the first 6 games of the season :(

CTA513
04-21-2010, 01:43 PM
So if your St. Louis you don't at least consider trading that pick for Ben? That stock is never going to be lower and you really don't know what you are getting with Bradford. I'm not saying its a sure fire deal, but I'd consider it pretty hard.

Anyone that trades for him is getting a QB that is suspended for 6 games and thats without even being convicted of what hes been accused of. The Rams already had to deal with Leonard Little killing someone while driving drunk so my guess is they might not want to deal with Bens issues which seem to be more then just a 1 time thing.

BuckeyeRed27
04-21-2010, 01:59 PM
Anyone that trades for him is getting a QB that is suspended for 6 games and thats without even being convicted of what hes been accused of. The Rams already had to deal with Leonard Little killing someone while driving drunk so my guess is they might not want to deal with Bens issues which seem to be more then just a 1 time thing.

Well he won't be convicted of anything because he isn't being charged with anything. So he misses 6 games this season. He's still a pretty young QB that I would say has a better chance of success over the next 4-6 seasons that Bradford or any other QB.

Put another way, even missing 6 games this year I bet the Rams would have a better record with Ben than with Bradford.

CTA513
04-21-2010, 02:12 PM
Well he won't be convicted of anything because he isn't being charged with anything. So he misses 6 games this season. He's still a pretty young QB that I would say has a better chance of success over the next 4-6 seasons that Bradford or any other QB.

Put another way, even missing 6 games this year I bet the Rams would have a better record with Ben than with Bradford.

I'm sure they know they would be better with Roethlisberger, but I'm not sure they want to deal with his issues and the possibility that he'll miss even more time if he continues to do the things that got him suspended.

Slyder
04-21-2010, 02:13 PM
Mark Madden as a heel commentator in WCW made me want to take a baseball bat to my TV. His job was to be obnoxious, but it wasn't enjoyable in any way. But at least there was this

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nSY_iX8_Bgc

This guy made me realize just how good Bobby Heenan was and just how much of a drop in the talent there was from the rest of them.

Its being reported that the Steelers reacquired Byron Leftwich from Tampa for a 7th round pick. Leftwich was Ben's backup the year they won the Super Bowl and is expected to compete with Dennis Dixon for the starting time while Ben is serving his suspension.

Ben is teetering on Pacman Jones territory... Another strike and he might be in Canada for a LOOOOOOOOOONNNNNNNGGGG time.

GIDP
04-21-2010, 02:33 PM
Why couldn't the Bengals play the Steelers in one of the first 6 games of the season :(

Its why they took so long releasing the schedule.

Caveat Emperor
04-21-2010, 02:40 PM
From Adam Schefter's Twitter (http://twitter.com/Adam_Schefter/status/12583162729):

Pittsburgh has begun contacting teams to trade Ben Roethlisberger for a top 10 pick. At least one team considering it. Story far from done.

My bold prediction is that, if a trade does happen, it'll be the Oakland Raiders acquiring Ben for their Top-10 pick. I imagine the Steelers would then use either that pick or their other 1st rounder to draft Tim Tebow.

Slyder
04-21-2010, 02:46 PM
From Adam Schefter's Twitter (http://twitter.com/Adam_Schefter/status/12583162729):


My bold prediction is that, if a trade does happen, it'll be the Oakland Raiders acquiring Ben for their Top-10 pick. I imagine the Steelers would then use either that pick or their other 1st rounder to draft Tim Tebow.

I hope not. We've (Raiders) have been down that path before, remember the mess that was the Randy Moss Era? Not to mention the fact he's been suspended for almost HALF of the year already? We wasted our 1st rounder next year for Seymour (defense still stunk) don't waste this years first on a guy 1 step away from being Pacman. NFL has changed you cant take everyone's problem children and expect to win still.

redhawkfish
04-21-2010, 02:55 PM
Why couldn't the Bengals play the Steelers in one of the first 6 games of the season :(

I am sure it will be considered a conspiracy by a select few of overly paranoid Bengal fans.

TC81190
04-21-2010, 03:18 PM
Glad to see he got more than 4 games, but 8 or even the whole season wouldve been much more suitable in my eyes.

Jack Burton
04-21-2010, 03:32 PM
Guy's a predator, should have been at least suspended for the season.

vaticanplum
04-21-2010, 03:35 PM
I imagine the Steelers would then use either that pick or their other 1st rounder to draft Tim Tebow.

Oh geez. I'm just going to hate the Steelers no matter what they do, aren't I?

redsfandan
04-21-2010, 04:29 PM
It's 6.

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=5121614
Correction, 6 games ISN'T set in stone:

The suspension could be reduced to four games for good behavior after the behavioral evaluation is completed. Roethlisberger can't attend any Steelers offseason activity until he completes the evaluation.

http://www.nfl.com/news/story?id=09000d5d817aaafc&template=with-video-with-comments&confirm=true

redsfandan
04-21-2010, 04:37 PM
Its being reported that the Steelers reacquired Byron Leftwich from Tampa for a 7th round pick. Leftwich was Ben's backup the year they won the Super Bowl and is expected to compete with Dennis Dixon for the starting time while Ben is serving his suspension.
That was already posted in this thread yesterday.

From Adam Schefter's Twitter (http://twitter.com/Adam_Schefter/status/12583162729):


My bold prediction is that, if a trade does happen, it'll be the Oakland Raiders acquiring Ben for their Top-10 pick. I imagine the Steelers would then use either that pick or their other 1st rounder to draft Tim Tebow.
That could happen. I'd laugh if it did. But who knows...

Report: Raiders consider Roethlisberger trade

According to NFL Network's Jason La Canfora, the Raiders are in contact with the Steelers about a trade for Ben Roethlisberger. ...

Apr. 21 - 3:30 pm et
Source: Jason La Canfora on Twitter
http://www.rotoworld.com/content/playerpages/player_main.aspx?sport=NFL&hl=171738&id=1181
IF Pittsburgh is able to deal him before this season I think either a 2nd round pick with additional pick(s) late this year or next year

OR

a trade involving a swap of 1st round picks this year seems realistic to me.

RichRed
04-21-2010, 04:59 PM
Correction, 6 games ISN'T set in stone:


The suspension could be reduced to four games for good behavior after the behavioral evaluation is completed.

So if he can just go, what, a couple months without assaulting a woman, he could get the suspension reduced? I don't think he's up to the task.

KoryMac5
04-21-2010, 05:36 PM
Buffalo and the Rams have shot Pitts down on this trade.

Redsfaithful
04-21-2010, 06:08 PM
I think he's going to Oakland. Al Davis loves guys like Ben and Davis is senile now to boot.

The Raiders would probably be better off trading their first rounder every year anyway.

redsfandan
04-21-2010, 06:16 PM
I think he's going to Oakland. Al Davis loves guys like Ben and Davis is senile now to boot.

The Raiders would probably be better off trading their first rounder every year anyway.
Or maybe the Raiders can keep their 1st round pick to draft another kicker. :rolleyes:

Slyder
04-21-2010, 11:28 PM
Or maybe the Raiders can keep their 1st round pick to draft another kicker. :rolleyes:

Dont crack on our kicker he's been our third most productive first round picks we've had the last 10 years (Aso and Gallery). And yes Al Davis is senile thats not new news :deadhorse. Most Raider fans I know are still fans but have come to peace that we won't be relevant again until after Al has left this life because he isn't going anywhere until then.

Razor Shines
04-22-2010, 12:28 AM
6 games.....The Steelers first national TV game is their 7th game.....I wonder if their will be any hype for that game. If he's still a Steeler of course

Yachtzee
04-22-2010, 12:43 AM
6 games.....The Steelers first national TV game is their 7th game.....I wonder if their will be any hype for that game. If he's still a Steeler of course

I think the worst part will be to hear ESPN and the network broadcasters go on and on about how hard Big Ben has worked to overcome the adversity he's faced, as if it weren't somehow self-inflicted.

macro
04-22-2010, 02:01 AM
6 games.....The Steelers first national TV game is their 7th game...

That was no accident.

redsfandan
04-22-2010, 04:57 AM
Dont crack on our kicker he's been our third most productive first round picks we've had the last 10 years (Aso and Gallery). And yes Al Davis is senile thats not new news :deadhorse. Most Raider fans I know are still fans but have come to peace that we won't be relevant again until after Al has left this life because he isn't going anywhere until then.
It wasn't a crack on the kicker. It was a crack on the decision to draft a kicker in the 1st round. Maybe that was when Al officially lost it. I remember when Al wanted to turn the USFL into a minor league for the NFL. I didn't think that was a bad idea. Oh well.

The latest is that Roethelisberger probably won't go anywhere. Apparently the Steelers want too much for him. They really need to cut ties with the guy. Anything can still happen though so hopefully they come to their senses. For their sake.

bucksfan2
04-22-2010, 09:25 AM
It wasn't a crack on the kicker. It was a crack on the decision to draft a kicker in the 1st round. Maybe that was when Al officially lost it. I remember when Al wanted to turn the USFL into a minor league for the NFL. I didn't think that was a bad idea. Oh well.

The latest is that Roethelisberger probably won't go anywhere. Apparently the Steelers want too much for him. They really need to cut ties with the guy. Anything can still happen though so hopefully they come to their senses. For their sake.

Every once in a while a K comes around that in hindsight is worth a 1st round pick. Janikowski is one of those kickers and I think he has been worth of that pick. He really was the final piece for that Raiders team that was a AFC powerhouse for a handful of years. FWIW I think Davis officially lost it when Gruden left. I think him and Gruden clicked and made it work.

As for Big Ben if you could guarantee me that his issues are behind him and he will be a contributing member of society (still don't think its going to happen) I would trade Carson straight up for him right now. On the football field Ben is one heck of a QB. Tough as nails and damn near impossible to rile. He may not have the most gaudy numbers but he gets the job done. The problem with him is that off the field he is a world class jerk dating back to his MU days.

Slyder
04-22-2010, 11:26 AM
Every once in a while a K comes around that in hindsight is worth a 1st round pick. Janikowski is one of those kickers and I think he has been worth of that pick. He really was the final piece for that Raiders team that was a AFC powerhouse for a handful of years. FWIW I think Davis officially lost it when Gruden left. I think him and Gruden clicked and made it work.

As for Big Ben if you could guarantee me that his issues are behind him and he will be a contributing member of society (still don't think its going to happen) I would trade Carson straight up for him right now. On the football field Ben is one heck of a QB. Tough as nails and damn near impossible to rile. He may not have the most gaudy numbers but he gets the job done. The problem with him is that off the field he is a world class jerk dating back to his MU days.


Gruden sold his offense, philosophy, and everything to Al. I still think Pittsburgh will trade Ben just like Oakland did Randy a couple years back. Early Rumors were 2nd round pick, ended up being a 4th round pick. I think a team that misses out on QBs by Friday will take the risk with a Saturday pick and take Ben, IF Pittsburgh will take it.

MWM
04-22-2010, 11:26 AM
The more I think about this the more it infuriates me. Here's a guy who thinks because he's a famous athlete, he's entitled to have sex with whomever he pleases and they should be grateful for it. He got away with something despicable just because he's a celebrity and all that's going to happen to him is he has to take 4 games off (let's face it WILL be 4 games). Big freaking deal! Meanwhile, this poor young woman has had a seriously traumatic experience she didn't deserve that's going to take years to get over, and will be tough to ever get completely over.

She's had to make choices just to avoid getting her name publicly dragged through the mud nationwide. She was out with friends one night just like most women of her age in college might be, and this happened to her. Now she has to go to EXTREMES just to be able maintain any kind of privacy or a normal like for a 20 year old girl. Can you imagine the implications to her life if her identity ever did get out. It's something that would NEVER go away. I don't blame her one bit for choosing to let Ben walk rather than go through what she'd likely have to go through if she pushed forward.

Meanwhile, Ben is sitting in one of his million dollar homes with his posse probably laughing it off, and will be back on the field a month into the football season. This sucks!

Hoosier Red
04-22-2010, 11:49 AM
The more I think about this the more it infuriates me. Here's a guy who thinks because he's a famous athlete, he's entitled to have sex with whomever he pleases and they should be grateful for it. He got away with something despicable just because he's a celebrity and all that's going to happen to him is he has to take 4 games off (let's face it WILL be 4 games). Big freaking deal! Meanwhile, this poor young woman has had a seriously traumatic experience she didn't deserve that's going to take years to get over, and will be tough to ever get completely over.

She's had to make choices just to avoid getting her name publicly dragged through the mud nationwide. She was out with friends one night just like most women of her age in college might be, and this happened to her. Now she has to go to EXTREMES just to be able maintain any kind of privacy or a normal like for a 20 year old girl. Can you imagine the implications to her life if her identity ever did get out. It's something that would NEVER go away. I don't blame her one bit for choosing to let Ben walk rather than go through what she'd likely have to go through if she pushed forward.

Meanwhile, Ben is sitting in one of his million dollar homes with his posse probably laughing it off, and will be back on the field a month into the football season. This sucks!


I agree in feeling sorry for the victim, it's tragic to think that this will be with her for the rest of her life.
But I don't think he got treated necessarily better because he was a celebrity. I certainly don't think his sense of entitlement came because of his celebrity. The only advantages I could see from being a celebrity were a)The initial officer was clearly starstruck, and b) the DA was probably gun shy about prosecuting a very high profile case without impeccable evidence. That said, Rothelisberger is losing much more(not unjustly but still ) than many people in his situation would. At the end of the day he wasn't charged with anything but was still disciplined by his employer, has lost pretty much any endorsement power he had, and has to rebuild his reputation.

As a side note, one thing that has really aggravated me in following the case is how many national talking heads simply refer to him as Ben. Almost no other player is referred to like this in virtually any case and it has irritated me because it softens everything around him. You may sometimes hear announcers refer to Manning as Peyton when talking about on the field things, but for off the field issues, it's almost always the full name or just the last name.

bucksfan2
04-22-2010, 12:01 PM
I agree in feeling sorry for the victim, it's tragic to think that this will be with her for the rest of her life.
But I don't think he got treated necessarily better because he was a celebrity. I certainly don't think his sense of entitlement came because of his celebrity. The only advantages I could see from being a celebrity were a)The initial officer was clearly starstruck, and b) the DA was probably gun shy about prosecuting a very high profile case without impeccable evidence. That said, Rothelisberger is losing much more(not unjustly but still ) than many people in his situation would. At the end of the day he wasn't charged with anything but was still disciplined by his employer, has lost pretty much any endorsement power he had, and has to rebuild his reputation.

As a side note, one thing that has really aggravated me in following the case is how many national talking heads simply refer to him as Ben. Almost no other player is referred to like this in virtually any case and it has irritated me because it softens everything around him. You may sometimes hear announcers refer to Manning as Peyton when talking about on the field things, but for off the field issues, it's almost always the full name or just the last name.

Oh I absolutely think Big Ben's sense of entitlement comes from being a celebrity. Lets be honest Ben isn't the most attractive man and his stories of bad bar behavior are nothing new. Heck the stories have been around since his time in Miami.

vaticanplum
04-22-2010, 12:26 PM
The more I think about this the more it infuriates me. Here's a guy who thinks because he's a famous athlete, he's entitled to have sex with whomever he pleases and they should be grateful for it. He got away with something despicable just because he's a celebrity and all that's going to happen to him is he has to take 4 games off (let's face it WILL be 4 games). Big freaking deal! Meanwhile, this poor young woman has had a seriously traumatic experience she didn't deserve that's going to take years to get over, and will be tough to ever get completely over.

She's had to make choices just to avoid getting her name publicly dragged through the mud nationwide. She was out with friends one night just like most women of her age in college might be, and this happened to her. Now she has to go to EXTREMES just to be able maintain any kind of privacy or a normal like for a 20 year old girl. Can you imagine the implications to her life if her identity ever did get out. It's something that would NEVER go away. I don't blame her one bit for choosing to let Ben walk rather than go through what she'd likely have to go through if she pushed forward.

Meanwhile, Ben is sitting in one of his million dollar homes with his posse probably laughing it off, and will be back on the field a month into the football season. This sucks!

Totally agree. Times like this I honestly hate that I am a sports fan. I love the competition but the culture can be sickening. We're all talking about how squillion-dollar organizations might benefit or suffer for this and where this guy will end up earning his millions as if these things are really important. Meanwhile there's some young girl down in Georgia who, for all we know, isn't even able to earn a cent for herself at present due to inability to work because of her physical or mental state. Her entire life is affected, she's damned if she pursues this and damned if she doesn't, and the only thing that matters to most people is which jersey this predator will be wearing...and we debate THIS part of things, laughably, as if it's a matter of morality. It is one backward way of looking at things and treating people.

Those of you who have daughters? I'm going to go out on a limb and say that every single one of them will be drunk at some point during college. This could be her life in a second. How much would football matter to you then? Would you be ok with the way this situation is being handled by the NFL? (in all fairness, it doesn't seem like most people are ok with it as it is.)

Redsfaithful
04-22-2010, 12:37 PM
I'm still hopeful she'll file a civil suit, that's a possibility isn't it?

Hoosier Red
04-22-2010, 12:39 PM
Oh I absolutely think Big Ben's sense of entitlement comes from being a celebrity. Lets be honest Ben isn't the most attractive man and his stories of bad bar behavior are nothing new. Heck the stories have been around since his time in Miami.

There are a lot of ugly men who are not celebrities who likewise feel like they are entitled to sex. I think his sense of entitlement comes from the fact that's he's a jerk.

Chip R
04-22-2010, 02:15 PM
As a side note, one thing that has really aggravated me in following the case is how many national talking heads simply refer to him as Ben.


I think it's because his last name is so long and difficult to pronounce and/or spell. I don't think it's because of any fondness for him.

RichRed
04-22-2010, 02:21 PM
He got away with something despicable just because he's a celebrity and all that's going to happen to him is he has to take 4 games off (let's face it WILL be 4 games).

This part bugs the hell out of me too. He can actually get what's an already paltry punishment (in my opinion, anyway) reduced if he behaves himself from here on. I couldn't care less how he behaves AFTER he knows he's in trouble - he should be punished for how he ALREADY behaved. And yes, I know time off for good behavior happens in our legal system all the time but this isn't a court of law, and the idea of giving this guy any kind of concession just burns me up.

Hoosier Red
04-22-2010, 02:29 PM
I think it's because his last name is so long and difficult to pronounce and/or spell. I don't think it's because of any fondness for him.

Yeah I understand that, but it just bugs me all the same. Ben is a guy I have over to my house for a barbeque, Ben Rothelisberger was the guy accused of rape. It just sounds different.

TC81190
04-22-2010, 03:59 PM
The more I think about this the more it infuriates me. Here's a guy who thinks because he's a famous athlete, he's entitled to have sex with whomever he pleases and they should be grateful for it. He got away with something despicable just because he's a celebrity and all that's going to happen to him is he has to take 4 games off (let's face it WILL be 4 games). Big freaking deal! Meanwhile, this poor young woman has had a seriously traumatic experience she didn't deserve that's going to take years to get over, and will be tough to ever get completely over.

She's had to make choices just to avoid getting her name publicly dragged through the mud nationwide. She was out with friends one night just like most women of her age in college might be, and this happened to her. Now she has to go to EXTREMES just to be able maintain any kind of privacy or a normal like for a 20 year old girl. Can you imagine the implications to her life if her identity ever did get out. It's something that would NEVER go away. I don't blame her one bit for choosing to let Ben walk rather than go through what she'd likely have to go through if she pushed forward.

Meanwhile, Ben is sitting in one of his million dollar homes with his posse probably laughing it off, and will be back on the field a month into the football season. This sucks!
Agree completely.

I can only hope that after 6 games (and hopefully he is gone as long as possible), there are a few big linemen and linebackers on the other side of the ball that hold the same venom, and maybe a referee or two willing to look the other way on what may or may not be a late hit.

Redhook
04-24-2010, 07:29 AM
The more I think about this the more it infuriates me. Here's a guy who thinks because he's a famous athlete, he's entitled to have sex with whomever he pleases and they should be grateful for it. He got away with something despicable just because he's a celebrity and all that's going to happen to him is he has to take 4 games off (let's face it WILL be 4 games). Big freaking deal! Meanwhile, this poor young woman has had a seriously traumatic experience she didn't deserve that's going to take years to get over, and will be tough to ever get completely over.

She's had to make choices just to avoid getting her name publicly dragged through the mud nationwide. She was out with friends one night just like most women of her age in college might be, and this happened to her. Now she has to go to EXTREMES just to be able maintain any kind of privacy or a normal like for a 20 year old girl. Can you imagine the implications to her life if her identity ever did get out. It's something that would NEVER go away. I don't blame her one bit for choosing to let Ben walk rather than go through what she'd likely have to go through if she pushed forward.

Meanwhile, Ben is sitting in one of his million dollar homes with his posse probably laughing it off, and will be back on the field a month into the football season. This sucks!

Great post.

pedro
04-24-2010, 09:00 PM
The thing that makes me most ill about this is that it really appears that the police were complicit in covering this up.

Just disgusting all around.

I have a good friend who is from Pittsburgh and a huge Steelers fan and she is just crushed by this whole episode.

There is little doubt in my mind that Ben Rothlesberger is a predator and should be in prison. He's a way worse human being than Michael Vick IMO.

MWM
04-24-2010, 10:41 PM
He's a way worse human being than Michael Vick IMO.

Without question. Yet, he will not likely be despised as much (although Vick pretty much deserves what he's gotten).

goreds2
04-25-2010, 02:18 PM
A good story on Ben via ESPN's Outside The Lines Today

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/otl/index

Chip R
05-05-2010, 09:10 PM
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/vault/article/magazine/MAG1169185/1/index.htm

MWM
05-05-2010, 10:52 PM
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/vault/article/magazine/MAG1169185/1/index.htm

Wow! That's not a pretty picture.

The Operator
05-08-2010, 01:25 PM
Although that article had some stories in it I hadn't heard, the overall context of the stories wasn't very surprising, sadly.

He's been behaving that way since he was in Oxford.

What makes people like that? I just can't fathom any amount of fortune or fame driving me to the point of (not to mention the rape allegations) showing such a lack of respect for a great number of people you run into on a daily basis.

He's one guy I'd love to see blackballed and kept out of the NFL. But even if the Steelers were to let him go, there'll be another owner out there willing to give him a chance. Such is the game. Talent trumps character.

texasdave
05-08-2010, 01:49 PM
Although that article had some stories in it I hadn't heard, the overall context of the stories wasn't very surprising, sadly.

He's been behaving that way since he was in Oxford.

What makes people like that? I just can't fathom any amount of fortune or fame driving me to the point of (not to mention the rape allegations) showing such a lack of respect for a great number of people you run into on a daily basis.

He's one guy I'd love to see blackballed and kept out of the NFL. But even if the Steelers were to let him go, there'll be another owner out there willing to give him a chance. Such is the game. Talent trumps character.

And owners will always be willing to give a player another chance because of the inexplicably large number of fans who hold the attitude that they don't care what a player does off the field; the only thing that matters is what said player does on the field. There is a concurrent thread in this forum that illustrates that rather nicely.

vaticanplum
07-28-2010, 09:26 AM
Sorry to drag this up again, but I just wanted to stop by to say that all those Steelers fans who were infuriated by this and wanted him off the team because they just didn't want to deal with it anymore? Yeah, it took all of Big Ben...not even serving his sentence or playing a single game for them to get over that. Phrases like "allegedly" and "never charged" and "on the field is all that matters" have replaced any outrage.

It's a bit rich that this all comes out in light of the TO signing.

I hate the Steelers.

Chip R
07-28-2010, 09:30 AM
Sorry to drag this up again, but I just wanted to stop by to say that all those Steelers fans who were infuriated by this and wanted him off the team because they just didn't want to deal with it anymore? Yeah, it took all of Big Ben...not even serving his sentence or playing a single game for them to get over that. Phrases like "allegedly" and "never charged" and "on the field is all that matters" have replaced any outrage.

It's a bit rich that this all comes out in light of the TO signing.

I hate the Steelers.


I hate to say I told you so, but...

vaticanplum
07-28-2010, 09:39 AM
I hate to say I told you so, but...

I know. It actually makes me hate the entire sport. I feel like it brings out the absolute worst both in players and fans.

Chip R
07-28-2010, 10:00 AM
I know. It actually makes me hate the entire sport. I feel like it brings out the absolute worst both in players and fans.


I read a book back in the early 90s called "The Hundred Yard Lie" by Chicago sportswriter Rick Telander. He was a former fotball player at Northwestern back in the late 60s and has written a few books as well as for SI. His premise was that he was quitting covering college football because of all the deaths and recruiting scandals and crap that went (and still goes) on. One passage in there really struck me. I think Telander quoted someone as saying -and I'm paraphrasing - "We treat these players like barbarians so why should we be surprised why they act like barbarians i.e. rape, pillage and loot." And that was just about college football.

Dom Heffner
08-04-2010, 09:35 PM
I know. It actually makes me hate the entire sport. I feel like it brings out the absolute worst both in players and fans.

It's athletes in general.

They are the heroes, the people who are good at math are geeks.

Life is just high school.