Taro T

With this hanging over him he should've been able to get put onto an exempt list while it gets sorted out. That appears to have not been an option because the events in question predate his participation in the NFL. After watching the post game press conference, fully expected him to be cut yesterday and he was.

So, the question gets ignored because it's academic? That seems to be setting a really slippery slope and is uniformly not applied uniformly by the NFL. How do you know there is no exculpatory evidence? The criminal investigation has been ongoing for over 10 months and as yet has not resulted in any charges. The civil complaint appears to have been filed only 3 days ago. Though the girl's attorney is quite fine with trying his case in the court of public opinion, that isn't where the merits of the case will actually be determined. The only thing we seem to know other than no criminal charges have been filed yet but civil charges have been filed is that both parties involved seem to agree (she through her TV interview, notes, & lawsuit & him through indirect comments by his lawyer) that they met inside the house and then had sexual relations in the side yard of the house. They don't agree on whether he gave her a drink (roofied or non) and it could be they both remember that part of the event correctly. How? She said she'd been drinking prior to arriving. Maybe he was at the keg (presuming there was one at the party) pouring himself a refill & she showed up with plastic cup in hand and he kept the tap running for her and maybe her friend and others. She is fairly petite. If she had been drinking prior to talking to him, that beer she had with him might've been the one that got her "drunk, drunk" later and though there was nothing else it the cup but beer feeling much drunker at some point before having another one might make an inexperienced drinker think in hindsight that something nefarious rather than simple biochemistry was occurring. As they're chit chatting while deciding if they're gonna do the nasty she might've said she went to whatever school it was. He thinks she meant the college, she thought he knew it was the HS. Again, 2 people experiencing the exact same event while perceiving it radically differently. After they get to know each other in the biblical sense, that's when the stories diverge completely. We haven't heard from any of the other witnesses, the police have. His lawyer states that several witnesses including one of her friends said he didn't take her inside when questioned (no data on whether that's true nor whether the friend said that to him, police investigators, or both). We know absolutely nothing about what the police actually know other than the girl did have a rape kit performed and they had her speak with him and other investigation targets through a bugged line. So, how do you know this apparent lack of exculpatory evidence is in fact an ACTUAL lack of exculpatory evidence? The police aren't going to make their evidence public until after the DA has finalized the investigation and made a charging decision. Look, he could be guilty of both statutory rape & of taking part in a forcible rape. In which case he should be punished severely. But if all he did was have sex with a girl that said she was in college, not sure that the punishment apparently being doled out is appropriate. Perhaps that in itself is enough to warrant this punishment, but just can't get to that place at this moment with so few facts known by us.

Expect though a lot of the people that chose #3 would've gone w/ "further establish himself as the Sabres #1 while improving over last year but not in the "elite" category" had it been a choice.

If he was the facilitator of her getting gang raped or he participated in it, absolutely 100% throw the book at him. But, IIRC in her notes she believes she didn't get out of the room until after the party had pretty much ended. He certainly knows about the events of that night as she has described them as he has been one of the targets of the criminal investigation. But IF his contention that he did not take the girl back into the house, much less the bedroom where the incident is alleged to have taken place is true (and we don't know if it is or isn't & the Bills possibly don't know THAT for certain either) then should he lose his job if he took no part in it and didn't even find out about that until the next day? (Which is plausible.) Again, under that scenario he'd've taken NO part in the gang rape including not even facilitating it nor even knowing about it in real/nearly real time.

And, his lawyer says that she told him she was a student at a college of the same name as the high school. (Essentially a "Canisius" situation.) The handwritten (by her presumably) notes that her lawyer put out which he claims were essentially contemporaneous only give the name of the school. It doesn't include either HS nor College. So, if the "she was misleading about her age" defense is valid; whether the punter can avoid a statutory rape conviction may still be possible. Again, not a lawyer, definitely not a CA lawyer.

@nfreeman had said "assuming he didn't force her to do anything" which implies he didn't roofie her but he had consensual sex with her and he did not take any part in what certainly seems to be a forcible rape back in the bedroom to preface his question to you. Which, per the punter's lawyer's statements appears to be his position and at this time may very well be what happened. (The truth may also have been far closer to her position for all we know at this point.) How do you get from him asking the question, to him "already setting aside her allegations?"

Hearing people claiming that under CA law you are correct about that. Also hearing that if the underaged person represents themself as being of age, it may be a legitimate excuse. Have never lived there and am not a lawyer. Will wait until we see how the cases unfold before believing either interpretation is the correct one. (And not interested enough to look up the full statute itself nor to see if in case law out there that exception has been used successfully as a defense.)

A more interesting question is did they find anything different out about his personal actions after Thursday or did the simply decide having every moment that McDermott, Beane, & every single player is in front of a reporter they are getting grilled about a player that steps on the field for 8 plays a game (4 PAT tries, 2 FG attempts, & 2 punts) would be too distracting to accomplish the goals they have set for the year.

My expectation is that Dahlin continues what he was building last year and he establishes himself as clearly the Sabres best D-man. Expect he tops last year's #'s and might even become a positive on the +/- for the 1st time ever. He'll finally show the physicality he displayed as a junior on a consistent, rather than occasionally, basis. But expect he is still 1 year away from entering the Norris conversation as a serious contender. Expect this year he'll be darn close to that guy @Thorny thought he was seeing all these years. 😉

1/2 of the people are dumber than the average person.

Almost positive it was filed Thursday (which would've been off 1 day regardless as had meant to write it was filed literally the day before the game; thanks for catching that the post indicated Friday and it was filed prior to that). (Lots of on-line articles stating it was Thursday. Haven't seen any stating Monday, but haven't seen the actual filing and don't feel like looking it up on Pacer to confirm the actual date.) Point still stands there was almost no heads up to the civil suit prior to last night's game. 🍺

No to SD. There's at least 3 in Rapid City alone. And it isn't Louisiana. The Hammond store still seems to be open, though it may still be the only one in that state.

Where in the post you quoted was that contradicted? Would rather have this tournament played in September when it won't #### with the regular season & should make the NHL & IIHF durn near the same amount of money as putting it in the middle of the year. IMHO, when they aren't doing weird things like having Team Euro & Team Underaged Drinkers, this is the best international tourney next to soccer's World Cup. And stated that upthread. Absolutely love that tourney, just wish it wouldn't compress the RS and break that into 2 completely separate chunks. So, what was your point?

One thing to remember in this when looking at timelines: This civil lawsuit literally was filed the day before yesterday. The criminal investigation is still on-going and the Bills seem to have been in the know on where that stood/stands. And, they appear to believe that Azaria wasn't going to be in too much hot water from that investigation or they wouldn't have punted Haack. From the little that is publicly known about this don't know what the Bills necessarily could've / should've done about the lawsuit that didn't get filed until it did as there is still an on-going criminal investigation. The girl's lawyer wanted to talk to them about a settlement & the Bills' lawyer apparently listened to him for over an hour. He's mad they wouldn't speak further to him. Could they without getting accused of tampering with an on-going criminal investigation? Don't know the answer to that, thus the Q. SDSU had been asked by the police not to investigate (for Title IX compliance) until their investigation was over. Were the Bills also asked to let law enforcement do their job without interference? There are still a lot of things WE don't know including why only 3 of the players are defendants in the civil suit when 5 are under criminal investigation. But what we do know is the civil suit was JUST filed and is also being filed before the criminal investigation is complete. THAT certainly seems unusual. Ttbomk, civil suits get filed after criminal investigations are completed unless there is a statutory deadline to file approaching. It doesn't appear this was being rushed by a deadline. Maybe one of our board lawyers can speak to that aspect of these cases.

Very interesting thought. If the team leaders said get rid of the distraction, that would significantly reduce/eliminate the backlash within the room. But would guess they'd say management should back the player (presuming they only have access to info so far made public). Which if they cut him anyway prior to his having his day in court could lose them the room. Of course, it also could solidify their resolve should management to agree to the course the players prefer as it becomes them against the world.

Who was suggesting sympathy for them? Those guys are pretty much the entire list of players (at least since 1960) that had 70+ games played without taking a single penalty the entire year. And since the Sabres entered the league, one can count on a single hand the number of additional guys that stayed penalty free playing at least 40 games.

Perhaps. And expect that they will cut him shortly. But if he doesn't end up facing criminal charges or gets found not guilty after a trial does the coach lose the room having cut a player because of an allegation prior to having had a chance to defend himself of the allegation? McDermott and Beane are in a very unenviable position. (Understatement of the year?) Agree with the 1st bolded. To the 2nd, someone posted a question on another board wondering if he could end up getting put on the Commissioner's exempt list to get some more time to sort through this. Don't know if the CBA would allow for it, but that seems like a reasonable course at present if allowable.

That full season penalty free is even more impressive than just that. Nobody else going back to at least '60-'61 has gone a full season without a single penalty. (Didn't look at lockout / strike years, so maybe somebody did in a shortened season but didn't look at those.) Goring came closest also going 78 games without a penalty but in an 80 game season. And Jimmy Peters did 77 games in a 78 game year. Val Fonteyne (who?) might've been the most impressive in that regard. Played 820 games from '59-'60 - '71-'72 taking only 26 PIMs. Had 2 or 4 PIM his 1st 5 years, topped out w/ 6 PIM in '64-'65. Then only took 2 more minors the rest of the way (436 games).

It's definitely a money grab. But it'd be a money grab in September too. And it wouldn't force a compression of the rest of the schedule around it.

Not sure what's "sleazy" about it. It's a suggestion to turn something that will be big news for probably a relatively short time regarding what seems to have been a horrible event regardless of Azaria's role or non-role in the horrible portion of events into something positive via the well known generosity of the Bills fan base. We definitely took different views of the suggestion to support charities that support sexual assault victims. Which is fine. Don't see a reason for either of us to be denigrated for their interpretation of the suggestion.

Why break up the regular season? This tourney should be played in September. Glad it is back. It's the best international hockey tourney there is provided they aren't using weird gimmicks.

Telegenic Canadian kid chosen 1st overall 2 years ago who has been top 4 on tournament teams in the WJCs, WCs, & Olympics playing on an improving Eastern Conference team. He'll be in the discussion & by the end of the year he'll be firmly in the discussion.

Have had 2 hen turkeys with 7 poults between them (there were 8 a month ago, no idea what got the other one) passing through our yard pretty much daily. This AM getting ready for a presentation heard a clucking outside the window and saw one of the adult hens around 6:30. She was by herself & this seemed rather strange behavior. Then noticed a red fox in the middle of the yard investigating. He didn't follow her but went off into the brush, so expected 1 or 2 of them to be missing this afternoon. But they just came back into the yard and all 9 birds are feasting as usual. Awesome.

Saw this elsewhere. For any interested in taking an action rather than simply reacting.

It's very possible that he is 4 from the get go. But don't see any of the top 3 getting bumped out initially & expect that they'd pencil in their "defensive defenseman" pick up in the top 4 PKers initially and make Power earn the bump up so expect him to be 5 initially. Remember, Dahlin didn't become a go to guy on the PK until after the AS break. They get to learn by doing, but they still have to earn that opportunity. (And, expect Power will force his way into the PK rotation sooner than later but not on day 1.)