<p>Apparently what they needed for action was not the video itself-- if they needed that, they could have had it at any time-- but the video becoming public.</p>
<p>I’m from New York originally but now live in New England and have a lotttt of family that are Patriots fans. So it was great for me to say that the Patriots are in last place, as my Jets, the Dolphins and the Bills all won their games.</p>
<p>It won’t last but it feels good to not be in last place for once! 
</p>
<p>True, Fang, and I agree with your first post.
The first video was enough. </p>
<p>the Redskins were a comedy of errors this weekend… painful to watch.</p>
<p>Love the avatar. Anyway they should have stuck with Morris through out the game. Any way I’m not complaing 
1-0 and now its off to Oakland @soccerguy315 </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>But the big question is WHEN did the Ravens & NFL see the 2nd video. It’s not credible that they are just seeing it now after TMZ got access to it, as NFL claims.</p>
<p>Makes one wonder if NFL was trying to avoid opening up can of worms of setting a precedent for sanctioning players who committed domestic abuse. Likely Ray Rice is tip of the iceberg.</p>
<p>Oh, I think that’s a huge part of the calculus, GMT. They <em>say</em> that the second offense is a lifetime ban, but it’s clear now that they were just trying to placate the critics. They hung their 2nd (of 3) punishments on Rice’s ridiculous claim that he had no choice but to deck Janay. But now even they can’t claim that anymore. </p>
<p>I’m sure they have a pretty good idea of the universe of players who’ve beat up a wife/girlfriend more than once. Those are players who, under the NFL’s new rules, must be banished. Not suspended indefinitely, as Rice was. Banned for life. Let’s see how long they decide to abide by that rule. In fact, my prediction: not a single first-stringer will ever be permanently banned for domestic violence, no matter how many infractions he has. </p>
<p>Actually, the sad fact may be that with the threat of a lifetime ban, wives and gf’s may suffer more. They can threaten to report the abuse, but now the player has all the more reason to threaten increased punishment, or worse. </p>
<p><a href=“NFL Announces New Zero-Tolerance Policy On Videotaped Domestic Violence”>NFL Announces New Zero-Tolerance Policy On Videotaped Domestic Violence;
<p>I posted this thought on the “bullied autistic boy” thread and I am reposting here. I will follow in a second comment with what I heard on my way into work this am.</p>
<hr>
<p>I think most of us would say,“I can’t conceive of doing something like that.” That makes it perfectly reasonable that we can’t really quite imagine the circumstances as bluntly or badly as they actually were. If you recall, the whole thing about what made Vietnam different is that now it was broadcast daily into people’s living rooms rather than at arms length. People have been horrible forever, and pizzagirl, I agree with you that I go back and forth about which the default state is sometimes when there is a spate of horrifying news like this. People haven’t always filmed themselves being horrible and had the ability to broadcast it widely (or been filmed and broadcast by a 3rd party as in the Rice case). It is easier for most people to imagine some middle ground scenario where they were “scrapping back and forth” and Rice sort of shoved Jenay and she fell and hit her head because she was so drunk. I know that I didn’t imagine what it would look like to have a professional athlete just cold **** a woman like he was in a prize fight. I did’t imagine the devastation of Katrina until I saw Spike Lee’s documentary series and I can’t image this incident really because I haven’t seen it.</p>
<p>The rub is having that momentary revulsion and indignation move to a sustained call to action or change of heart and public policy. People have said that it is traumatizing to Rice’s wife to have that video of her abuse re-shown everywhere. I don’t disagree and I have mixed feelings about it for sure. I do feel, though, that in the broader conversation and “consciousness raising” about domestic violence and bullying it shakes people out of complacency to be confronted with the reality rather than the sanitized “gray area” version as presented by the perpetrator."</p>
<p>I was listening to Mike and Mike on ESPN radio on my way in they am and they had as a guest the President of the New Jersey State Senate. He has requested that the State Attorney General look at the handling for 2 reasons. The first being to see if the police and prosecutors followed appropriate procedure according to the law and didn’t afford Mr. Rice and special treatment. The second and he felt most important was to establish that if it is standard procedure for someone to get the pre-trial diversionary program after this level of violence they need to look at changing the laws to address that. For him the larger issue was all those other relationships out there where violence is committed and not appropriately dealt with.</p>
<p>Chris Carter followed up with the same sentiment RE the NFL. He sent unequivocally that domestic violence is a big problem in the NFL. He felt that this needs to be about much more than the Ray Rice case and what happens to him is secondary to how the league addresses the issue going forward both in punishment/sanction of players and in establishing a culture where it isn’t accepted or swept under the rug. He brought up the role model issue and that if the role model is bad behavior they will attract and promote more guys who come in with bad behavior rather than marginalizing them.</p>
<p>They both said that actually seeing the video was important to them in really understanding the magnitude of the thing and coming to grips with the reality of it.</p>
<p>I watched Sportscenter on Monday, and I was surprised at the very tough stance they took. </p>
<p>The video is a good thing in that people rarely actually witness domestic violence, and I think it is giving a better understanding of it in general. But “I didn’t know how bad it was until I saw the video” is no excuse for the NFL, and it’s certainly no excuse for law enforcement which also turned a blind eye to the seriousness of Rice’s crime.</p>
<p>I disagree. I don’t think the Prosecutor turned a blind eye. Also, it doesn’t appear to me that Rice got special treatment. Read some of the local coverage from New Jersey online sources. And keep in mind that NJ Domestic Violence laws are certainly strict. Arguing that the laws should be changed is one thing (and I believe that the recent statements from NJ politicians is their usual hot air and grandstanding), but it seems like the law was applied as usual by prosecutors in this case. The PTI clearly gives violators a break, but the state law is otherwise typically harsh. The NJ Prevention of Domestic Violence Act can have grave repercussions for people whom simply argue with their spouses. No physical threats or violence required. If you don’t believe me, look it up.</p>
<p>One reason why the prosecutor offered Rice alternative adjudication could have been that Janay Palmer made it clear that she was not going to cooperate. That’s a whole 'nother kettle of fish. Also, as the new footage revealed, she seems to have initiated or escalated the conflict (no excuse for decking her, however) by smacking him and spitting at him. And one NJ news source says Rice and Janay were inebriated. For all of those reasons, prosecutors might have decided that this case was a hot mess from the get-go.</p>
<p>
I think she is a total “ho” for marrying someone who would do that to her, especially after seeing the 1st video of herself being dragged out of the elevator. If she watches the 2nd assault video enough times, maybe she’ll get a clue.</p>
<p>Maybe you should go back and read some of the shared links on the dynamics of domestic violence.</p>
<p>I understand why prosecutors might be stymied by the victim not cooperating in the usual case, but I don’t see why it would matter in this case. Janay Palmer can say what she wants, but the judge (and jury, if it came to that) could see exactly what happened: he punched her unconscious. Punching your girlfriend unconscious is illegal, drunk or sober. Nor do I see how Rice being drunk, or Palmer being drunk, or them spitting on each other (looked like he spit on her in the hallway) is at all relevant.</p>
<p>Do these diversionary programs for domestic violence work? If they do, if they generally prevent future assaults, then maybe I’d support the law. </p>
<p>I’m upset that both Janay Palmer and Ray Rice refer to the problem as a “moment,” because I don’t believe that this is the only time he beat her.That’s as laughable as when people post here about being arrested for drunk driving and then say, But it was the only time I/my child drove drunk. No it wasn’t. Dishonesty is not a good sign for his reforming his behavior going forward.</p>
<p>I’ve been reading the twitter hashtag #WhyIStayed with interest. The relationship between the abuser and the abused isn’t as simple and obvious as we think.</p>
<p>"I think she is a total “ho.” GMT, that’s a bit harsh isn’t it? Particularly when you consider that Janay may be a stereotypical abuse victim who fears that her spouse may now abandon her (like the infamous Hedda Nessbaum-Joel Steinberg case years ago).</p>
<p>Look, she may well be speaking out of financial motivation, but he absolutely could have the same motivation. She being afraid of losing her and her family’s current financial status doesn’t make her a bum. Yeah, being loaded in the casino doesn’t portray her in the best light as a victim, but the fact remains that he knocker her out. My only point is that her contribution to the confrontation seems to have influenced the prosecutor.</p>
<p>No, I don’t think I’m being harsh. This woman watched video1 of herself being dragged out of an elevator, while Rice exercised total disdain for her as she lay unconscious. This video got played over and over and over and over on int’l television, and she still marries this guy? </p>
<p>Ho</p>
<p>She didn’t have a contribution to his punching her out. Nothing she did counts as even a tiny excuse for his punching her out. Drunk, arguing, spitting-- not excuses.</p>
<p>It’s as if a mother had a confrontation with her out-of-control seven-year-old. They yell, he spits at her, he runs at her, and she grabs him, slams his head against the wall and knocks him out. And she says, but he contributed to the confrontation. And you would say, what the heck are you talking about? Nothing the kid did excuses her. </p>
<p>It’s the same kind of strength differential between a mother and a 7-year-old as between an NFL player and his girlfriend. Whatever yelling, spitting and coming at him she may have done is irrelevant. He was in no physical danger from her. Nothing she did excuses him. Parents are not allowed to knock out their children, and men are not allowed to knock out women.</p>