| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
justintyme
Joined: 08 Jul 2012
Posts: 8407
Location: Northfield, MN
Back to top |
 Posted: 06/12/19 9:20 am ::: |
Reply  |
|
Hats off to Megdal, that was a quality article.
_________________
↑↑↓↓←→←→BA
|
|
Bob Lamm
Joined: 11 Apr 2010
Posts: 5065
Location: New York City
Back to top |
| Posted: 06/12/19 9:59 am ::: |
Reply |
|
Many thanks for posting this valuable article and accompanying videos.
|
|
ClayK
Joined: 11 Oct 2005
Posts: 11132
Back to top |
| Posted: 06/12/19 11:23 am ::: |
Reply |
|
The issue to me is violence against women, a worldwide problem that has gone unnoticed for too long.
This is a clear case of that (though not proven in court), and a women's league, and a women's team run by a woman, have an obligation (in my view) to take the entire issue of violence against women seriously.
This does not appear to be happening, and it's shameful.
_________________
Oṃ Tāre Tuttāre Ture Svāhā
|
|
Bob Lamm
Joined: 11 Apr 2010
Posts: 5065
Location: New York City
Back to top |
| Posted: 06/12/19 11:32 am ::: |
Reply |
|
| ClayK wrote: |
The issue to me is violence against women, a worldwide problem that has gone unnoticed for too long.
This is a clear case of that (though not proven in court), and a women's league, and a women's team run by a woman, have an obligation (in my view) to take the entire issue of violence against women seriously.
This does not appear to be happening, and it's shameful. |
Very well said.
|
|
pilight
Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 66880
Location: Where the action is
Back to top |
| Posted: 06/12/19 11:59 am ::: |
Reply |
|
| Most cases are clear when you only hear one side
_________________
I'm a lonely frog
I ain't got a home
|
|
shontay33
Joined: 01 Jun 2006
Posts: 471
Back to top |
| Posted: 06/12/19 12:16 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| GlennMacGrady wrote: |
Intelligent exchanges always help me to sharpen my views, and as a lawyer I always want to get the facts correct in legal cases I comment upon. Accordingly, I have to change what I said above about the specific Florida legal charges against Riquna Williams (RW), which I had based on newspaper reports. Those newspaper reports are incomplete.
I've just spent more than an hour reading every police and court document in this case, all of which are on line, and every Florida statute involved. Here's the accurate story, which I'll paraphrase or quote from the police and court documents and the witness affidavits.
On December 6, 2018, the police went to a home in Pahokee, Florida, occupied or owned by Antonio Wilson and his son Antavios Wilson. Also present in the house at the time was Alkeria Davis, who had been RW's girl friend "on and off for the past 5 years, just recently breaking up 1 month ago."
Alkeria said that she and RW had never been "living together" and that RW "has never became violent before in their past relationship." Because the two women never resided together, whatever crimes RW may have committed do not qualify as "domestic violence" under Florida Statute 741.28, nor is there any history of repeat violence.
RW banged on the door of the house with a skateboard. Alkeria opened it. RW forced her way through the open door and hit Alkeria "multiple times" with "a closed fist" and pulled her hair. (The affidavits do not say what, if anything, Alkeria was doing to RW.) Alkeria's only claimed injury was a "small lump on the side of her head."
Antonio and his son broke up the altercation and took RW outside. RW pulled a gun from her blue Camaro, put it on the trunk and said some threatening words to Antonio but didn't actually do anything, and then drove away.
The the DA officially charged RW with two criminal statute violations. First, burglary under Florida Statute 810.02. The requisite offense intended by the burglary is stated to be "an assault or battery upon Antonio D. Wilson and/or Alkeria Mone Davis." Note that this charge does not specify whether the charge is an assault (threat) or a battery (touching) nor whom it was against. Nor are there individual charges for assault or battery under their separate statutes -- just the burglary violation, which however is a felony.
Secondly, RW was charged with aggravated assault (with a deadly weapon without intent to kill) under Florida Statute 784.021 for the gun threat against Antonio and Antavios Wilson, which is also a felony.
So, as to physical violence crimes, to more accurately re-summarize the actual charges: Riquana Williams has not been charged with any domestic violence crime, with any standalone physical violence (battery) crime, but has been charged with a form of burglary that will require proof of either an assault (verbal threat) or battery (physical touching) against either Alkeria Davis or Antonio Wilson.
This clarification of the legal charges and unproven witness claims against RW, does not change my opinion that the Sparks and WNBA are handling this situation properly.
The only interest of an employer when an employee is involved in a legal matter is to determine whether that employee presents a danger to other employees in the workplace if she remains on the job. The Sparks workplace is tiny, a handful of coaches and administrators and 11 other players. They all know RW personally, some of them probably for years, and they likely are of the opinion that she's never shown any tendency for violence in the workplace. The unproven allegations in the Florida case likely do not change the Sparks' evaluation of her temperament. RW has no criminal record, no history of prior violence even according the former girlfriend, and the unproven acts of physical violence involved, at most, some fist punches and maybe some hair pulling, allegedly resulting in no more than a small bump on the head. In the likely opinion of the Sparks, this one-time incident involving a former girl friend is not enough to change their pre-existing opinion that RW presents no danger to the workplace. |
thx for the insight. I seen the video footage of the police body camera that was posted on here. I am curious as to if this is a case of assault as people pointed out, did the victim go seek medical attention. If so, I am quite sure that the findings of the medical staff would have been enough evidence to lock RW up(in which they did).I just read a story in my hometown newspaper of a situation where a man assaulted his girlfriend twice and the police were called each time. The article stated that the victim had bruises on parts of her body and had a black eye. The man was charged with felony assault and kidnapping.
I think that the league is waiting to see what happens in a court of law. If RW has the charges or case dismissed then them suspending her would be over reacting. Especially if there is no footage of RW striking her ex like the other cases that were being compared to this one. The only footage we have is the victim stating to the police that her hair was pulled and that she had a bump on her head. If the police report has a statement from a person that examined the victim and they felt that RW violently assaulted her ex then yes, the league should suspend her and she should not have been signed. I am sure that the Sparks did their homework especially since they did not sign her right away. They would be in hot water if they did. I would say, let the legal process play out because as I have stated previously,there is no way that a person charged with assaulting another person would not have to show up for court. BG and Glory(even though theirs was a DV situation and both were arrested and charged)had to appear in court.
|
|
CamrnCrz1974
Joined: 18 Nov 2004
Posts: 18371
Location: Phoenix
Back to top |
| Posted: 06/12/19 5:21 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| GlennMacGrady wrote: |
| So, as to physical violence crimes, to more accurately re-summarize the actual charges: Riquana Williams has not been charged with any domestic violence crime, with any standalone physical violence (battery) crime, but has been charged with a form of burglary that will require proof of either an assault (verbal threat) or battery (physical touching) against either Alkeria Davis or Antonio Wilson. |
On a related note...
To address mass shootings, the Justice Department wants to prosecute more domestic abusers for illegally having guns.
The task force of U.S. Attorneys will identify best practices to prosecute these crimes. Domestic violence advocates say that's a good start, but the real problem is gaps in the fed's definition of domestic abusers. Federal law bans most people convicted of misdemeanor domestic violence from having a gun.
But while spouses, parents and live-ins qualify as domestic abusers, dating partners do not. Considering about half of all domestic violence involves dating partners – advocates say this is a problem.
Link: The Justice Department Wants To Address Mass Shootings By Putting More Domestic Abusers Behind Bars
https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/zoetillman/justice-department-domestic-violence-charges-guns
|
|
jap
Joined: 01 Apr 2007
Posts: 7922
Back to top |
| Posted: 06/12/19 11:51 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| pilight wrote: |
| Most cases are clear when you only hear one side |
Agreed 1000%!!!
I have personally witnessed several times when entire communities of gossiping fools turned out to be DEAD WRONG COMPLETELY because they did not have access to all the facts as they foolishly assumed they did.
_________________
Regards,
J A P
|
|
justintyme
Joined: 08 Jul 2012
Posts: 8407
Location: Northfield, MN
Back to top |
| Posted: 06/13/19 9:13 am ::: |
Reply |
|
| pilight wrote: |
| Most cases are clear when you only hear one side |
I am confused as to your point?
Clay's "clear case" was obviously in reference to what she was being accused of, and stated directly that this "hasn't been proven in court". Hearing her side is not going to change the elements of what she is being accused of at all, so it is 100% fair to say what Clay did based solely upon the evidence against her. Her case clearly involves violence against a woman.
What has yet to be determined, and is not yet clear, is her guilt of these charges. That is what the jury is for.
BTW, according to the latest (2018) figures, the conviction rate for people charged with felonies is 69%. To convince 12 people "beyond a reasonable doubt" of a person's guilt is no easy burden. So why is the conviction rate so high? Because prosecutors only charge cases that they feel the evidence actually supports. If the evidence is weak or lacking, they decline to press charges and the person doesn't go on trial.
So for all the people saying, "we need to wait and see, people could be wrong"....what about the other side? What about the league playing someone who the government is saying "we seriously believe has committed these crimes", and who is now representing the league and all it stands for to any young fan who many google her name? Yes, she might eventually be acquitted, it happens. There might, in fact, be stuff we don't know that could clear her. But for the league, just the mere fact that she put herself in this position to have to be on trial should be enough to warrant suspension until it plays out, and the fact that reality says when the state actually decides to go forward with charges the person is convicted the vast majority of the time should give pause to the idea that this could be a "big pile of nothing".
It is, at the very least, an incredibly serious issue all around.
_________________
↑↑↓↓←→←→BA
|
|
FrozenLVFan
Joined: 08 Jul 2014
Posts: 3510
Back to top |
| Posted: 06/14/19 8:39 am ::: |
Reply |
|
| Her case involves more than violence against women. What about invading someone's home? And later threatening the homeowner with a gun? Did she even own that gun legally? There's been a lot of nitpicking here over the charges that have been filed to date, but there are others that could have been added as well.
|
|
lethalweapon3
Joined: 17 May 2018
Posts: 333
Location: ATL ITP, GA
Back to top |
| Posted: 06/14/19 11:28 am ::: |
Reply |
|
| Shades wrote: |
Damn, Megdal came through with those videos. Seeing these makes it more difficult to just dismiss things like it was no big deal. They even swear-in the witnesses, which I didn’t know was a thing the cops could do.
So basically the excuse for the inaction from the league is the commissioner hasn’t taken the position yet, and Tatum doesn’t want to make it his call?
Toler’s excuse seems to be “That’s a Florida thing, not a California thing”. Maybe Toler’s decision to sign Williams even after being arrested should be the decision that finally gets her fired.
Magic Johnson’s twitter handle is @MagicJohnson
Sparks PR guy’s twitter handle is @CoachHorowitz13
LA Sparks twitter handle @LA_Sparks
Incoming WNBA Commissioner @CathyEngelbert
Sparks marquee sponsor (apparently owned by Magic Johnson)
is EquiTrust Life Insurance. Can’t find a twitter handle for them. |
also Sparks minority owners, recent Dodgers foundation honorees and outspoken equality advocates @BillieJeanKing and spouse @ilanakloss
|
|
lethalweapon3
Joined: 17 May 2018
Posts: 333
Location: ATL ITP, GA
Back to top |
|
mavcarter
#NATC
Joined: 02 Sep 2010
Posts: 5935
Location: Chicago
Back to top |
| Posted: 07/08/19 2:55 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
Agent: The NBA is seeking suspension against Riquna Williams
| Quote: |
| According to Orlando Castaño, the agent for Los Angeles Sparks guard Riquna Williams, the NBA wants to suspend his client under the Player Conduct and Discipline clause of the WNBA’s Collective Bargaining Agreement. |
| Quote: |
| Even though Williams was arrested and charged for crimes, her court case is ongoing and she has not been convicted of any crime, which means she cannot be suspended under the clause requiring players to “comply at all times with all applicable federal, state, and local laws.” |
https://www.swishappeal.com/platform/amp/wnba/2019/7/8/20686248/wnba-riquna-williams-criminal-charges-suspension_________________
| wrote: |
| Or maybe said poster should quit being a nuisance when people don’t agree? |
|
|
myrtle
Joined: 02 May 2008
Posts: 32335
Back to top |
| Posted: 07/08/19 3:04 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| Quote: |
| The WNBA has the authority to suspend a player before the conclusion of a criminal case and without the player having admitted to the allegations against her. |
They say this in conclusion without attributing the statement to anybody. ?? The rest of the article is quite informative, but I'd like to know where that last statement comes from?
_________________
For there is always light,
if only we’re brave enough to see it.
If only we’re brave enough to be it.
- Amanda Gorman
|
|
justintyme
Joined: 08 Jul 2012
Posts: 8407
Location: Northfield, MN
Back to top |
| Posted: 07/08/19 3:39 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| myrtle wrote: |
| Quote: |
| The WNBA has the authority to suspend a player before the conclusion of a criminal case and without the player having admitted to the allegations against her. |
They say this in conclusion without attributing the statement to anybody. ?? The rest of the article is quite informative, but I'd like to know where that last statement comes from? |
They have it earlier in the article. The CBA has this catch all (like many contracts that gives employers very wide discretion on discipline of employees):
"Players shall at all times conform their conduct to standards of good citizenship, good moral character, and good sportsmanship and shall not do anything detrimental or prejudicial to the best interests of the WNBA, their Teams, or the sport of basketball."
Just the act of getting arrested for a class 1 felony, even if she were to eventually be cleared, would be enough to trigger that clause as being an act "detrimental or prejudicial to the best interests of the WNBA...." Alternatively, if they were to conduct their own investigation and they determined that she did do the things she was accused of, they could enact punishment as well regardless of what the legal system determined (much like MLB did with Herrera, where the charges were dropped but MLB determined that he did, in fact, do what he was accused of since they have a lower burden of proof and can consider evidence that would be inadmissible at trial, like hearsay).
Of course that is just if they are talking about punishment; every employer has the right to non-punitively suspend a worker during an investigation. It's just that if they are a contract or exempt employee you typically have to pay them. So if they are taking about a paid suspension before trial and without admittance of guilt, again like MLB did with Herrera, then that could be done regardless and with ease.
_________________
↑↑↓↓←→←→BA
|
|
Richyyy
Joined: 17 Nov 2005
Posts: 24344
Location: London
Back to top |
| Posted: 07/09/19 12:38 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
There's a fair bit of stuff presented in that Swish Appeal article without any actual evidence backing it up, but assuming we take the author at her word that the NBA wants the Sparks to suspend her that seems pretty silly. a) They signed her after the arrest was known and public, so why would they suspend her for something they didn't care about when they gave her a contract? b) Why should the team have to do your job for you? If you think she deserves the suspension and it's jutifiable under the CBA, do it from the League office.
It also occurred to me that the timing of all this might give Williams an extra argument. She wasn't actually under contract to a WNBA team when the events occurred. Can she therefore claim that the league shouldn't be able to punish her for something that happened when she technically wasn't part of the WNBA? |
|
shontay33
Joined: 01 Jun 2006
Posts: 471
Back to top |
| Posted: 07/09/19 1:18 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| Richyyy wrote: |
There's a fair bit of stuff presented in that Swish Appeal article without any actual evidence backing it up, but assuming we take the author at her word that the NBA wants the Sparks to suspend her that seems pretty silly. a) They signed her after the arrest was known and public, so why would they suspend her for something they didn't care about when they gave her a contract? b) Why should the team have to do your job for you? If you think she deserves the suspension and it's jutifiable under the CBA, do it from the League office.
It also occurred to me that the timing of all this might give Williams an extra argument. She wasn't actually under contract to a WNBA team when the events occurred. Can she therefore claim that the league shouldn't be able to punish her for something that happened when she technically wasn't part of the WNBA? |
People are beating a dead horse when it comes to this. She has not been convicted of a crime. The league has not suspended her because her case is not complete. People need to stop comparing cases of other athletes who were convicted of crimes that they commited. Also, once again, Williams posted bail. If the court felt that she was a risk, they would not have granted her bail. People should wait and see the outcome of the case before they pass judgement. Keep in mind that we have not heard the other side of the story. Williams obviously feels that and or was probably advised not to make any statements regarding her case. My question is that if a jury finds her not guilty and she is suspended before the out come of the case, then she couldn't sue for lost wages?
|
|
NYSports56
Joined: 03 Jul 2018
Posts: 1126
Location: New Jersey, USA
Back to top |
| Posted: 07/09/19 1:28 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| shontay33 wrote: |
| People are beating a dead horse when it comes to this. She has not been convicted of a crime. |
The only dead horse that is being beaten is the idea that this lack of a conviction shields her from a suspension from the league. As has been repeatedly pointed out, sports leagues frequently hand out suspensions even to players who have already been acquitted.
|
|
Bob Lamm
Joined: 11 Apr 2010
Posts: 5065
Location: New York City
Back to top |
| Posted: 07/09/19 2:00 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| NYSports56 wrote: |
| shontay33 wrote: |
| People are beating a dead horse when it comes to this. She has not been convicted of a crime. |
The only dead horse that is being beaten is the idea that this lack of a conviction shields her from a suspension from the league. As has been repeatedly pointed out, sports leagues frequently hand out suspensions even to players who have already been acquitted. |
Exactly right, NYSports56.
|
|
FrozenLVFan
Joined: 08 Jul 2014
Posts: 3510
Back to top |
| Posted: 07/09/19 3:27 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| Other leagues and other professional organizations and employers will put players/employees on leave when such an incident occurs, particularly after the type of video testimony we've seen, and before the case goes to trial. We've already discussed MLB, and I can't imagine a physician or a teacher being allowed to work after an incident like this. The WNBA seems to have a singular response to this.
|
|
justintyme
Joined: 08 Jul 2012
Posts: 8407
Location: Northfield, MN
Back to top |
| Posted: 07/09/19 3:33 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| shontay33 wrote: |
People are beating a dead horse when it comes to this. She has not been convicted of a crime. The league has not suspended her because her case is not complete. People need to stop comparing cases of other athletes who were convicted of crimes that they commited. |
See: Herrera, Odubel.
Give you a quick run down:
1) Arrested and charged with misdemeanor simple assault for suspicion of causing minor injuries to his girlfriend's face and neck in a hotel room in Atlantic City, New Jersey.
2) Immediately suspended with pay while the case against him proceeded and the league conducted it's own investigation of the events.
3) The girlfriend decides she does not want to testify against Herrera, so the charges are dismissed (thus he is not convicted of a crime)
4) MLB concludes their investigation and determines that he violated their league conduct policy and suspends him without pay for 85 games.
So, no conviction, dropped charges, but the league determined he did it. Why? Because the league has a lower burden of proof and can use evidence that would not be admitted into a court room (in this case, the girlfriend's original statement, which without her testimony would be inadmissible as hearsay).
We are not bound to the criminal justice system to determine our actions. The criminal justice system has specific standards that must be met (due process) in order to take away someone's liberty. That is also why it finds someone "guilty" or "not guilty" with "not guilty" having a very different meaning than "innocent". A good example of this would be how OJ Simpson was found "Not Guilty" of muder in the criminal courts, but yet had been found to have killed them in the civil courts. The criminal courts are not the be-all-end-all of culpability.
_________________
↑↑↓↓←→←→BA
|
|
mavcarter
#NATC
Joined: 02 Sep 2010
Posts: 5935
Location: Chicago
Back to top |
| Posted: 07/09/19 3:43 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| Richyyy wrote: |
a) They signed her after the arrest was known and public, so why would they suspend her for something they didn't care about when they gave her a contract? b) Why should the team have to do your job for you? If you think she deserves the suspension and it's jutifiable under the CBA, do it from the League office.
It also occurred to me that the timing of all this might give Williams an extra argument. She wasn't actually under contract to a WNBA team when the events occurred. |
Agree with all._________________
| wrote: |
| Or maybe said poster should quit being a nuisance when people don’t agree? |
|
|
justintyme
Joined: 08 Jul 2012
Posts: 8407
Location: Northfield, MN
Back to top |
| Posted: 07/09/19 4:02 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| Richyyy wrote: |
| It also occurred to me that the timing of all this might give Williams an extra argument. She wasn't actually under contract to a WNBA team when the events occurred. Can she therefore claim that the league shouldn't be able to punish her for something that happened when she technically wasn't part of the WNBA? |
That is an interesting question.
However, I think it would be ultimately moot under most circumstances.
First off, they can always suspend with pay since it is non-punitive. And based upon other leagues, that would be the most likely action to take until resolution.
Then after resolution, they might not need to do anything. Either she is convicted, in which case the seriousness of these crimes means she is potentially facing a sentence measured in years so will likely end her career, she takes a plea which will also likely see her with prison time that would cause her to miss a season or more and serve as a de facto suspension, or else she is acquitted. In the case of an acquittal, depending upon what they feel the facts of the case are it is likely that they could come to an agreement with her to serve some token suspension to put it all behind them, something akin to what Griner/Johnson got even though this is a much more severe offense she was charged with.
Or if she is acquitted the WNBA could look at the facts and feel that she was, in fact, innocent, and do nothing.
The only way this would become an issue, imo, is if she is acquitted and the league feels she did do it based on the facts (a la Herrera) and they can't come to a compromise on what sort of suspension to serve.
_________________
↑↑↓↓←→←→BA
|
|
GlennMacGrady
Joined: 03 Jan 2005
Posts: 8225
Location: Heisenberg
Back to top |
| Posted: 07/09/19 8:20 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| NYSports56 wrote: |
As has been repeatedly pointed out, sports leagues frequently hand out suspensions even to players who have already been acquitted. |
Really? Name five. I'm honestly curious.
Or, name two examples where a league suspended a player simply for an arrest (no conviction) other than under a specific, bargained-for, written policy allowing league investigations, suspensions and punishments for arrests in its contract with the players union, such as MLB's suspension of Odubel Herrera under the 20-page Joint Domestic Violence, Sexual Assault and Child Abuse Policy in the MLB governing agreement. Suspension under such a specific contractual policy is completely different from the WNBA Collective Bargaining Agreement, which has no such specific investigation, suspension or punishment policy that can be invoked against a player. All the CBA has is a boilerplate morals clause, which is classically invoked only in extreme cases such as Harvey Weinstein.
If Riquna Williams was not under contract when she was arrested in December 2018, which is obviously in between seasons, the WNBA would not even have that CBA weak tea to rely on as a suspension authority.
If someone gets arrested on their own private time, in a state where their periodic employer doesn't even have a place of business -- such as Florida for the WNBA -- for an act that has nothing to do with the periodic employer, and at a time when the person is not even under active contract with that employer, then the arrest (prior to conviction) is none of the periodic employer's business. Unless the employer fairly determines, as a practical business matter, that the future presence of the person in the workplace would present a danger or disruption to the other employees or to the business itself.
It plainly appears that the WNBA and LA Sparks, so far, do not see any practical danger in Williams being in their workplace. That seems like a rational judgment to me. If the league were governed by executives who have totalitarian bents, or Queen of Hearts ("sentence first, verdict verdict afterward") impulses, or other Orwellian tendencies, then the treatment of Williams could be different. |
|
justintyme
Joined: 08 Jul 2012
Posts: 8407
Location: Northfield, MN
Back to top |
| Posted: 07/09/19 8:41 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| The most obvious would be the suspension of Glory Johnson, who was suspended for 7 games prior to resolution of her case, and without her having admitted fault. And that was under the WNBA's "morals" clause that supposedly is only for Harvey Weinstein.
_________________
↑↑↓↓←→←→BA
|
|
|
|
