| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
PickledGinger
Joined: 04 Oct 2013
Posts: 1362
Back to top |
 Posted: 07/16/19 11:03 pm ::: |
Reply  |
|
Also the fact that she hasn’t been suspended in light of the overwhelming evidence, and that the league has not contacted Jackie, is a strong indicator that the Storm was previously aware of the situation and that Natasha remains in good standing with them.
For me, the situation of Tasha being exonerated and Jackie being charged with slander is not completely outside the realm of possibility.
|
|
justintyme
Joined: 08 Jul 2012
Posts: 8407
Location: Northfield, MN
Back to top |
| Posted: 07/16/19 11:17 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| PickledGinger wrote: |
It means that I think Jackie might be manipulative enough to have tried to pull off a scam on social media. I can’t explain the dustpan video, but literally EVERYTHING else about this reads as fabricated. The evidence of her conversations with Tasha’s “Mom” is shot down the second she turns her text records over to them, making the fact that she has apparently given a written statement in he matter a sign of good faith for her daughter.
Also, where is the evidence that the “in my pocket” text was even Tasha to begin with? It’s from someone called “Regret”?!?
Not playing devil’s advocate here and certainly not excusing physical abuse if that is the case; but coming from someone who has been psychologically abused in a relationship I can tell you that PEOPLE REALLY DO CRAZY SHIT LIKE THIS!!! And I am seeing a lot of similarities here to my situation. |
But you see, that's the point. If this stuff is all fabricated, it is the stupidest fabrication ever and will eventually come out. Because it would be easy to prove that it is fake during the divorce.
So why assume that it is fake right now, with no evidence at all that it is, and everything suggesting that it isn't (like contemporaneous documentation, etc)? Literally everything I have seen here I have seen happen before in 100% legitimate cases of severe abuse. Nothing jumps out at me as a red flag that would have me question this on a prima facie basis.
And why hurry to jump to that conclusion when the fight against domestic abuse is so much the fight against the surivor's fear of not being believed? Why not accept the evidence until we have an actual reason not to?
_________________
↑↑↓↓←→←→BA
|
|
GlennMacGrady
Joined: 03 Jan 2005
Posts: 8225
Location: Heisenberg
Back to top |
| Posted: 07/16/19 11:25 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| justintyme wrote: |
.That is a standard legal answer denying claims against someone. No evidence was provided. All it is is her saying "I didn't do it", which is what we would have expected her to file in divorce proceedings.
|
Howard did more than make a simple denial. Howard said:
| Quote: |
I also filed with the court my own sworn statement and a sworn statement from my Mom. Both statements fully address -- and deny -- the allegations made against me. The filed documents are public record.
My attorney has provided all of these documents to the Seattle Storm, and my attorney has authorized the sharing of the documents with the WNBA. |
These documents should be available on the King County Superior Court website, if it has one. Otherwise, someone in Seattle will go to the court and get them. |
|
justintyme
Joined: 08 Jul 2012
Posts: 8407
Location: Northfield, MN
Back to top |
| Posted: 07/16/19 11:26 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| PickledGinger wrote: |
Also the fact that she hasn’t been suspended in light of the overwhelming evidence, and that the league has not contacted Jackie, is a strong indicator that the Storm was previously aware of the situation and that Natasha remains in good standing with them.
For me, the situation of Tasha being exonerated and Jackie being charged with slander is not completely outside the realm of possibility. |
You mean like how they waited months to suspend Williams even though she was charged with a crime? I really wouldn't read anything into the league choice to suspend or not.
People are going to feel about this how they feel about this. I just wish more people would have "support survivors" as their default setting.
_________________
↑↑↓↓←→←→BA
|
|
justintyme
Joined: 08 Jul 2012
Posts: 8407
Location: Northfield, MN
Back to top |
| Posted: 07/16/19 11:30 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| GlennMacGrady wrote: |
| justintyme wrote: |
.That is a standard legal answer denying claims against someone. No evidence was provided. All it is is her saying "I didn't do it", which is what we would have expected her to file in divorce proceedings.
|
Howard did more than make a simple denial. Howard said:
| Quote: |
I also filed with the court my own sworn statement and a sworn statement from my Mom. Both statements fully address -- and deny -- the allegations made against me. The filed documents are public record.
My attorney has provided all of these documents to the Seattle Storm, and my attorney has authorized the sharing of the documents with the WNBA. |
These documents should be available on the King County Superior Court website, if it has one. Otherwise, someone in Seattle will go to the court and get them. |
Yes. As I said if she provides actual evidence as a part of her divorce proceedings like she claims she will, we can see if that evidence counters the evidence provided by her wife or not. The statement she released above, however, has no evidence at all in it, and should have no impact at all on how someone views what happened. Whichever way they saw it.
_________________
↑↑↓↓←→←→BA
|
|
Shades
Joined: 10 Jul 2006
Posts: 63763
Back to top |
| Posted: 07/16/19 11:41 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
Text messages can be faked, in case you didn’t know. So let’s stop talking about how it’s solid evidence to have screenshots of what could be fake texts.
https://www.dallastxdivorce.com/2017/01/articles/evidence-issues/beware-of-fake-text-message-evidence/
| Quote: |
This isn’t the only case of a criminal conviction for fake messages. Another woman in California was sentenced to a year in jail after being convicted of sending hundreds of threatening text messages to herself in an attempt to get her former boyfriend arrested by blaming him as authoring the messages. The woman filed a report with the police following her breakup. In fact, the police discovered that the woman used a pre-paid cell phone she purchased in the boyfriend’s name to send herself the texts. (see Woman jailed for texting threats to herself)
Using text messages in court requires proof of a strenuous predicate. First, the texts must be preserved as evidence by taking screen shots or finding another method of saving the entire conversation to be admitted at trial.
The biggest hurdle for using texts as evidence is to authenticate the source of the message – for the judge to determine whether the texts were genuinely written, sent, or received by the parties and that they contain the full conversation. Texts can be authenticated by the other party admitting they are genuine, a witness who saw the message created or sent, circumstantial proof like from telephone company records, or “reply authentication” where a reply text is deemed authentic because it’s clearly in response to the message sent.
Lastly, text message evidence must overcome a hearsay objection as being out of court statements offered in court for the truth of the statement – which are inadmissible. A hearsay text can only come in as evidence if they fit in an exception – such as a statement by a party to the suit.
Other hurdles to admissibility of text messages in court may also include relevance, best evidence, and prejudice.
Because it is so easy to fake text messages and other types of electronic communications, courts should be extremely wary of allowing such evidence at trial and relying on it exclusively for substantive decisions in family law matters. Further, lawyers should be cautious about using such communications as probative of the requested relief to avoid propounding false evidence in court. At a minimum, allegations made where electronic communications are to be used as supportive evidence should have alternative methods of proof as well. |
_________________
Nnekalonians 1:14 - Thou shalt not accept that which is not earned
|
|
SDHoops
Joined: 09 Nov 2007
Posts: 1183
Back to top |
| Posted: 07/16/19 11:50 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| Ohhhh!!! and let's not forget that somebody (aka Jackie) hacked Tasha's Twitter and RETWEETED Jackie's tweets. Also, Jackie denied everything to the Storm GM days before she blasted Tasha. I smell a money grubber here all the way.. justyntime just wants to add fuel to the fire.
|
|
justintyme
Joined: 08 Jul 2012
Posts: 8407
Location: Northfield, MN
Back to top |
| Posted: 07/17/19 12:24 am ::: |
Reply |
|
See, it's shit like this that seriously makes it tough for women to come forward. Because even though there is no reason to believe that any of this happened, and she would be in a world of trouble if she did do it, and occurances like this are exceptionally rare, people are still convinced this is the case. And this is what happens way too often.
We act like we think abuse is wrong. That we want to take it seriously. We think it a terrible thing. But as soon as it becomes inconvenient, we look for reasons to not believe.
It would be one thing if we were being presented with compelling evidence of her doing something like this. But we're not. We are seeing people throw out these "it's possibles" and "whatabouts" and insinuations. I mean Natasha has literally said nothing that has been released yet. There is no counter-evidence to even weigh yet. So how can we ever expect someone to feel confortable coming forward, comfortable seeking support if society is going to treat them like this? If we will doubt with no reason?
And add "fuel to the fire"? If you mean "Advocate for survivors of domestic abuse and violence" then, yes, yes I guess I am. And I will always do so, will every fiber of my being. Volunteer work in this area will crush your spirit at times and it will break your heart. But it is a fight that is more than worth it.
_________________
↑↑↓↓←→←→BA
|
|
SDHoops
Joined: 09 Nov 2007
Posts: 1183
Back to top |
| Posted: 07/17/19 12:42 am ::: |
Reply |
|
Justin, IMHO, you are crossing the line by having a love fest with Jackie on Twitter. You do not know both sides of the story. There is compelling evidence that I've seen that Tasha is either the one being abused or there is mutual abuse. Jackie was the AGGRESSIVE one! Go talk on Twitter to Jackie so she can keep retweeting you since you need that assurance. She is sitting there yelling at Tasha and treating her like an animal in every video and making threats, yup if this doesn't happen I'm going to the police. She is a master manipulator and yes that is interesting that she admitted to a hit and run with her ex in the past. She isn't so innocent.
BTW, I too have experience with true survivors of domestic violence and chronic abuse. Sadly, in most cases, the victim always wants to go back to the abuser. Seems like in those texts, Tasha was the one who wanted to go back to Jackie. Jackie could've easily did things to herself or Tasha could've been defending herself..it'll all come out!
|
|
NYL_WNBA_FAN
Joined: 28 May 2007
Posts: 14097
Back to top |
| Posted: 07/17/19 12:55 am ::: |
Reply |
|
| justintyme wrote: |
| NYL_WNBA_FAN wrote: |
| The dustpan video, if any of you have seen it, utterly defies any type of logical deduction. |
The video where Howard admits to chasing her wife around with the metal dustpan? |
Yeah. In the video Natasha is kneeling the entire time. On the surface, a totally submissive posture while Jacqueline is aggressively yelling. OTOH, Natasha acts like an oblivious child who’s done something wrong but minimizing it in the most nonsensical way possible. It’s bizarre on more than one level. In my opinion, on one hand, Jacqueline is not acting like a person fearful of abuse. It’s a highly aggressive tone directed at a person in a submissive posture “Right?!, RIGHT?!”
OTOH there’s no denying Natasha is acting like a deliberately oblivious child, admitting she did wrong but arguing that an obviously metal object is “not metal”. Gaslighting behavior, on the surface. Then I have the opinion it’s possible Jacqueline has had enough of the variety of abuses she alleges and her anger is totally justified and understandable. In other words, I simply don’t freaking know. I’m not going to dismiss either side or support it without knowing enough to judge. It’s certainly a bizarre video that begs multiple questions in my mind that go beyond the video.
You have more experience in this area than I do. However, again, I’ve seen both sides of it. I understand the firsthand experience of a domestic violence survivor. I also understand the experience of an “exceptionally rare” false allegation from someone who got through it. Automatically taking the side of someone making the allegations in such a public way because false allegations are “exceptionally rare”, especially when that person has already lied, is dangerous. Shunning survivors or women who speak out against abuse is also dangerous.
An awful lot of assumptions are being made in this thread by people who don’t have even remotely all the facts. Both ways. In support of or against both people. Either way, that’s dangerous. That’s all I’m saying. And without those facts, I’m not going to make a judgment for or against either person. To me, that would be the wrong thing to do.
_________________
The poster formerly known as LibWNBAFan.
Last edited by NYL_WNBA_FAN on 07/17/19 1:12 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
mavcarter
#NATC
Joined: 02 Sep 2010
Posts: 5935
Location: Chicago
Back to top |
| Posted: 07/17/19 1:12 am ::: |
Reply |
|
| NYL_WNBA_FAN wrote: |
| An awful lot of assumptions are being made in this thread by people who don’t have even remotely all the facts. Both ways. In support of or against both people. Either way, that’s dangerous. That’s all I’m saying. And without those facts, I’m not going to make a judgment for or against either person. To me, that would be the wrong thing to do. |
Agree 1000%._________________
| wrote: |
| Or maybe said poster should quit being a nuisance when people don’t agree? |
|
|
PickledGinger
Joined: 04 Oct 2013
Posts: 1362
Back to top |
| Posted: 07/17/19 1:49 am ::: |
Reply |
|
| justintyme wrote: |
| PickledGinger wrote: |
It means that I think Jackie might be manipulative enough to have tried to pull off a scam on social media. I can’t explain the dustpan video, but literally EVERYTHING else about this reads as fabricated. The evidence of her conversations with Tasha’s “Mom” is shot down the second she turns her text records over to them, making the fact that she has apparently given a written statement in he matter a sign of good faith for her daughter.
Also, where is the evidence that the “in my pocket” text was even Tasha to begin with? It’s from someone called “Regret”?!?
Not playing devil’s advocate here and certainly not excusing physical abuse if that is the case; but coming from someone who has been psychologically abused in a relationship I can tell you that PEOPLE REALLY DO CRAZY SHIT LIKE THIS!!! And I am seeing a lot of similarities here to my situation. |
But you see, that's the point. If this stuff is all fabricated, it is the stupidest fabrication ever and will eventually come out. Because it would be easy to prove that it is fake during the divorce.
So why assume that it is fake right now, with no evidence at all that it is, and everything suggesting that it isn't (like contemporaneous documentation, etc)? Literally everything I have seen here I have seen happen before in 100% legitimate cases of severe abuse. Nothing jumps out at me as a red flag that would have me question this on a prima facie basis.
And why hurry to jump to that conclusion when the fight against domestic abuse is so much the fight against the surivor's fear of not being believed? Why not accept the evidence until we have an actual reason not to? |
Domestic violence doesn’t just mean physical. I’ve never experienced physical violence but I could write a novel about the psychological torment I have been through. And guess what...NOBODY BELIEVED ME! For like, 2 years.
I can tell you from experience what it is like to be gaslighted, and that’s what This whole thing feels like to me. It’s what I see in Tasha’s submissive body language and hear in Jackie’s violently aggressive voice. In those videos, Tasha never once gets angry. She just looks sad and defeated, and she just takes it. I HAVE EXPERIENCED THIS. I’m not going to apologize for having a different reaction to this situation because I have in a way been in Natasha’s shoes and therefore am obviously triggered in a different way than you. All I can say is that, based on MY OWN experiences, my intuition is telling me something is not authentic about the evidence that is being presented here.
Last edited by PickledGinger on 07/17/19 2:14 am; edited 6 times in total |
|
justintyme
Joined: 08 Jul 2012
Posts: 8407
Location: Northfield, MN
Back to top |
| Posted: 07/17/19 1:51 am ::: |
Reply |
|
| NYL_WNBA_FAN wrote: |
| An awful lot of assumptions are being made in this thread by people who don’t have even remotely all the facts. Both ways. In support of or against both people. Either way, that’s dangerous. That’s all I’m saying. And without those facts, I’m not going to make a judgment for or against either person. To me, that would be the wrong thing to do. |
The problem with this is that when it comes to domestic abuse, "sitting it out" can be just as devastating because of how tilted everything is against the abused in our system of justice and in how society tends to treat "he said/she said" claims. Add in the already fragile psyche that most are dealing with when they finally try and break free, and most of the time anything short of full support will send them spiraling. And, usually, that will come before you have a chance to know "both sides" or "all the facts". So instead, you learn what to look for. You concern yourself with what is in front of you and what support that person might need. Obviously if there are major red flags you pay attention to them, and keep note of them, but really you're not there to "prove" anything. You're there to advocate and support.
Because not doing this is 100% dangerous. As in, people get severely hurt. People die.
But the other side of it...I mean, what if it is all made up? Well, maintaining this sort of lie is nearly impossible. It eventually falls apart. And that is why no one at this point in time should be advocating for punishment. That would be dangerous. We need to hear all facts, hear all sides, know everything before we call for punishment--now that is different than saying what we've heard is troubling and is making us think poorly of someone. Poor thoughts are easy to remedy when new information arises. Punishment cannot be undone.
So, what I guess I am saying is that as long as we are not calling for punishment without the relevant facts, only one side really has any immediate danger to it. So it's best to default to support and belief out of hand, and adjust from there as the relevant facts come out.
_________________
↑↑↓↓←→←→BA
|
|
NYSports56
Joined: 03 Jul 2018
Posts: 1126
Location: New Jersey, USA
Back to top |
| Posted: 07/17/19 2:05 am ::: |
Reply |
|
This is such a tricky subject. A close friend's ex-wife bore false witness against him repeatedly during their divorce proceedings. I know this for a fact because I saw the legal papers where she described situations where he threatened her, and I was present at those times and I know it wasn't true.
I felt great anger over this. Not only was I furious in defense of my friend, but I was also enraged because of the very thing that justintyme said: every woman who cries wolf like this is ammunition for those who attack the real victims.
This instance with my friend also answers the question of why someone would fake evidence even if they know they'll get caught (beyond that they simply believe that they'll get away with it). My friend's wife used the lies to strip custody of their son for the duration of the divorce proceeding. I don't think there's a child in this instance, but I'm sure that's not the only instance where you benefit from bearing false witness and dealing with the consequences later.
All that said, I don't know what to make of the Howard situation. Witnesses seeing Riquna Williams say "you'll get all 18" makes things pretty straightforward. Something is telling me the Howard situation may be more nuanced than that. I believe the victim until proven otherwise, but I await the investigation.
At the very least, Howard should be suspended with pay. Maybe now that we've got a commissioner, some action will happen soon.
|
|
justintyme
Joined: 08 Jul 2012
Posts: 8407
Location: Northfield, MN
Back to top |
| Posted: 07/17/19 2:18 am ::: |
Reply |
|
| PickledGinger wrote: |
| justintyme wrote: |
| PickledGinger wrote: |
It means that I think Jackie might be manipulative enough to have tried to pull off a scam on social media. I can’t explain the dustpan video, but literally EVERYTHING else about this reads as fabricated. The evidence of her conversations with Tasha’s “Mom” is shot down the second she turns her text records over to them, making the fact that she has apparently given a written statement in he matter a sign of good faith for her daughter.
Also, where is the evidence that the “in my pocket” text was even Tasha to begin with? It’s from someone called “Regret”?!?
Not playing devil’s advocate here and certainly not excusing physical abuse if that is the case; but coming from someone who has been psychologically abused in a relationship I can tell you that PEOPLE REALLY DO CRAZY SHIT LIKE THIS!!! And I am seeing a lot of similarities here to my situation. |
But you see, that's the point. If this stuff is all fabricated, it is the stupidest fabrication ever and will eventually come out. Because it would be easy to prove that it is fake during the divorce.
So why assume that it is fake right now, with no evidence at all that it is, and everything suggesting that it isn't (like contemporaneous documentation, etc)? Literally everything I have seen here I have seen happen before in 100% legitimate cases of severe abuse. Nothing jumps out at me as a red flag that would have me question this on a prima facie basis.
And why hurry to jump to that conclusion when the fight against domestic abuse is so much the fight against the surivor's fear of not being believed? Why not accept the evidence until we have an actual reason not to? |
Domestic violence doesn’t just mean physical. I’ve never experienced physical violence but I could write a novel about the psychological torment I have been through. I can tell you from experience what it is like to be gaslighted and i honestly can’t see getting punched by someone being anywhere near as damaging. And that’s what I am seeing here. It’s what i see in Tasha’s submissive body language and hear in Jackie’s violently aggressive voice. I HAVE EXPERIENCED THIS. It’s what I feel in my gut. But, hey! Thanks for trying to invalidate my trauma. |
No one has said anything about your trauma. I am very sorry to hear that you went through that. It is something I wish no one would ever have to experience.
What you see in that video as submissive, I see as the normal abuser cycle. In the video she admits to having chased her wife around with a weapon (and had previously slammed doors on her so hard it broke the glass, cut her head, stabbed her in the chest and leg, had threatened suicide, and had threatened to frame her to the police to keep her from leaving) but also downplays/gaslights the fact that the dustpan is a weapon. "It wasn't metal!" When it obviously was. It's all part of the manipulation that I have seen too many times. When the abused person finally has had enough of the abuse, the abuser spins it so that the all that pent up frustration and anger boils over and now they look like the calm and rational one putting up with their "crazy" partner. Yes, what I see in that video is someone who is tired of being gaslit and manipulated and just wants one moment of sanity after hours and hours of this conversation. And just wants her abuser to admit what she's done to her.
_________________
↑↑↓↓←→←→BA
|
|
PickledGinger
Joined: 04 Oct 2013
Posts: 1362
Back to top |
| Posted: 07/17/19 2:38 am ::: |
Reply |
|
Ok. I see it differently. Really interested to read Tasha’s Mom’s statement, as I currently do not believe that those texts were actually from her. That’s not the kind of conversation a Mother, that would file a police statement in support of their child, has behind her child’s back - especially with a spouse that said statement is defending their child from. It just doesn’t feel right TO ME.
There is no good outcome here.
Last edited by PickledGinger on 07/17/19 2:58 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
NYL_WNBA_FAN
Joined: 28 May 2007
Posts: 14097
Back to top |
| Posted: 07/17/19 2:57 am ::: |
Reply |
|
| justintyme wrote: |
| NYL_WNBA_FAN wrote: |
| An awful lot of assumptions are being made in this thread by people who don’t have even remotely all the facts. Both ways. In support of or against both people. Either way, that’s dangerous. That’s all I’m saying. And without those facts, I’m not going to make a judgment for or against either person. To me, that would be the wrong thing to do. |
The problem with this is that when it comes to domestic abuse, "sitting it out" can be just as devastating because of how tilted everything is against the abused in our system of justice and in how society tends to treat "he said/she said" claims. Add in the already fragile psyche that most are dealing with when they finally try and break free, and most of the time anything short of full support will send them spiraling. And, usually, that will come before you have a chance to know "both sides" or "all the facts". So instead, you learn what to look for. You concern yourself with what is in front of you and what support that person might need. Obviously if there are major red flags you pay attention to them, and keep note of them, but really you're not there to "prove" anything. You're there to advocate and support.
Because not doing this is 100% dangerous. As in, people get severely hurt. People die.
But the other side of it...I mean, what if it is all made up? Well, maintaining this sort of lie is nearly impossible. It eventually falls apart. And that is why no one at this point in time should be advocating for punishment. That would be dangerous. We need to hear all facts, hear all sides, know everything before we call for punishment--now that is different than saying what we've heard is troubling and is making us think poorly of someone. Poor thoughts are easy to remedy when new information arises. Punishment cannot be undone.
So, what I guess I am saying is that as long as we are not calling for punishment without the relevant facts, only one side really has any immediate danger to it. So it's best to default to support and belief out of hand, and adjust from there as the relevant facts come out. |
The problem is exactly that people who don’t know the facts ARE calling for punishment. Suspension is a punishment. With or without pay, it’s still a punishment. Was Williams suspended without pay or with pay?
And you’re not looking fully at the extent which false allegations can affect a person for a lifetime. Poor thoughts are far from easy to remedy. Guilty or innocent, Natasha Howard will never be viewed the same way again. And she’ll have to live with that forever. If she’s guilty she deserves it. But if she isn’t...
_________________
The poster formerly known as LibWNBAFan.
Last edited by NYL_WNBA_FAN on 07/17/19 3:06 am; edited 3 times in total |
|
PickledGinger
Joined: 04 Oct 2013
Posts: 1362
Back to top |
| Posted: 07/17/19 3:04 am ::: |
Reply |
|
| NYL_WNBA_FAN wrote: |
| justintyme wrote: |
| NYL_WNBA_FAN wrote: |
| An awful lot of assumptions are being made in this thread by people who don’t have even remotely all the facts. Both ways. In support of or against both people. Either way, that’s dangerous. That’s all I’m saying. And without those facts, I’m not going to make a judgment for or against either person. To me, that would be the wrong thing to do. |
The problem with this is that when it comes to domestic abuse, "sitting it out" can be just as devastating because of how tilted everything is against the abused in our system of justice and in how society tends to treat "he said/she said" claims. Add in the already fragile psyche that most are dealing with when they finally try and break free, and most of the time anything short of full support will send them spiraling. And, usually, that will come before you have a chance to know "both sides" or "all the facts". So instead, you learn what to look for. You concern yourself with what is in front of you and what support that person might need. Obviously if there are major red flags you pay attention to them, and keep note of them, but really you're not there to "prove" anything. You're there to advocate and support.
Because not doing this is 100% dangerous. As in, people get severely hurt. People die.
But the other side of it...I mean, what if it is all made up? Well, maintaining this sort of lie is nearly impossible. It eventually falls apart. And that is why no one at this point in time should be advocating for punishment. That would be dangerous. We need to hear all facts, hear all sides, know everything before we call for punishment--now that is different than saying what we've heard is troubling and is making us think poorly of someone. Poor thoughts are easy to remedy when new information arises. Punishment cannot be undone.
So, what I guess I am saying is that as long as we are not calling for punishment without the relevant facts, only one side really has any immediate danger to it. So it's best to default to support and belief out of hand, and adjust from there as the relevant facts come out. |
The problem is exactly that people who don’t know the facts ARE calling for punishment. Suspension is a punishment. With or without pay, it’s still a punishment. Was Williams suspended without pay or with pay? |
This!!! Justintyme, you are the only person here proposing any kind of punishment without proof. The entire basis of your suspension argument is completely hypocritical at this point. I, personally just want the truth and will support that truth.
|
|
Shades
Joined: 10 Jul 2006
Posts: 63763
Back to top |
| Posted: 07/17/19 3:07 am ::: |
Reply |
|
| SDHoops wrote: |
| Ohhhh!!! and let's not forget that somebody (aka Jackie) hacked Tasha's Twitter and RETWEETED Jackie's tweets. |
I’ve been following Howard on twitter ever since she joined the Lynx. I recall Howard’s twitter account retweeting all these accusatory tweets from her wife. It didn’t make any sense to me. What you said makes sense, except she didn’t hack Howard’s account. She demands to have access to Howard’s accounts because I think there are social media trust issues. Probably has access to the whole phone, which would be another way to make fake text messages.
Doesn’t retweeting her tweets to Howard’s followers reveal her diabolical nature, or is there some pyschobabble excuse for that too.
_________________
Nnekalonians 1:14 - Thou shalt not accept that which is not earned
|
|
justintyme
Joined: 08 Jul 2012
Posts: 8407
Location: Northfield, MN
Back to top |
| Posted: 07/17/19 9:11 am ::: |
Reply |
|
| PickledGinger wrote: |
| NYL_WNBA_FAN wrote: |
| justintyme wrote: |
| NYL_WNBA_FAN wrote: |
| An awful lot of assumptions are being made in this thread by people who don’t have even remotely all the facts. Both ways. In support of or against both people. Either way, that’s dangerous. That’s all I’m saying. And without those facts, I’m not going to make a judgment for or against either person. To me, that would be the wrong thing to do. |
The problem with this is that when it comes to domestic abuse, "sitting it out" can be just as devastating because of how tilted everything is against the abused in our system of justice and in how society tends to treat "he said/she said" claims. Add in the already fragile psyche that most are dealing with when they finally try and break free, and most of the time anything short of full support will send them spiraling. And, usually, that will come before you have a chance to know "both sides" or "all the facts". So instead, you learn what to look for. You concern yourself with what is in front of you and what support that person might need. Obviously if there are major red flags you pay attention to them, and keep note of them, but really you're not there to "prove" anything. You're there to advocate and support.
Because not doing this is 100% dangerous. As in, people get severely hurt. People die.
But the other side of it...I mean, what if it is all made up? Well, maintaining this sort of lie is nearly impossible. It eventually falls apart. And that is why no one at this point in time should be advocating for punishment. That would be dangerous. We need to hear all facts, hear all sides, know everything before we call for punishment--now that is different than saying what we've heard is troubling and is making us think poorly of someone. Poor thoughts are easy to remedy when new information arises. Punishment cannot be undone.
So, what I guess I am saying is that as long as we are not calling for punishment without the relevant facts, only one side really has any immediate danger to it. So it's best to default to support and belief out of hand, and adjust from there as the relevant facts come out. |
The problem is exactly that people who don’t know the facts ARE calling for punishment. Suspension is a punishment. With or without pay, it’s still a punishment. Was Williams suspended without pay or with pay? |
This!!! Justintyme, you are the only person here proposing any kind of punishment without proof. The entire basis of your suspension argument is completely hypocritical at this point. I, personally just want the truth and will support that truth. |
Suspension with pay is not punishment. It is, by definition, non-punitive and investigatory in nature.
I have always only asked for suspension with pay, exactly like I would face under the same circumstances. This gives time for due process to play out.
The proof required to start an investigation into this type of allegation, and to suspend with pay, should be "credible accusation of wrongdoing that meets a prima facie burden".
In the Williams situation, presumably the league has has looked at all the relevant facts on both sides of the issue and has issued a punishment. It's definitely been long enough for them to have heard her side of the story and be presented with any mitigating facts.
_________________
↑↑↓↓←→←→BA
|
|
NYL_WNBA_FAN
Joined: 28 May 2007
Posts: 14097
Back to top |
| Posted: 07/17/19 9:26 am ::: |
Reply |
|
| justintyme wrote: |
| PickledGinger wrote: |
| NYL_WNBA_FAN wrote: |
| justintyme wrote: |
| NYL_WNBA_FAN wrote: |
| An awful lot of assumptions are being made in this thread by people who don’t have even remotely all the facts. Both ways. In support of or against both people. Either way, that’s dangerous. That’s all I’m saying. And without those facts, I’m not going to make a judgment for or against either person. To me, that would be the wrong thing to do. |
The problem with this is that when it comes to domestic abuse, "sitting it out" can be just as devastating because of how tilted everything is against the abused in our system of justice and in how society tends to treat "he said/she said" claims. Add in the already fragile psyche that most are dealing with when they finally try and break free, and most of the time anything short of full support will send them spiraling. And, usually, that will come before you have a chance to know "both sides" or "all the facts". So instead, you learn what to look for. You concern yourself with what is in front of you and what support that person might need. Obviously if there are major red flags you pay attention to them, and keep note of them, but really you're not there to "prove" anything. You're there to advocate and support.
Because not doing this is 100% dangerous. As in, people get severely hurt. People die.
But the other side of it...I mean, what if it is all made up? Well, maintaining this sort of lie is nearly impossible. It eventually falls apart. And that is why no one at this point in time should be advocating for punishment. That would be dangerous. We need to hear all facts, hear all sides, know everything before we call for punishment--now that is different than saying what we've heard is troubling and is making us think poorly of someone. Poor thoughts are easy to remedy when new information arises. Punishment cannot be undone.
So, what I guess I am saying is that as long as we are not calling for punishment without the relevant facts, only one side really has any immediate danger to it. So it's best to default to support and belief out of hand, and adjust from there as the relevant facts come out. |
The problem is exactly that people who don’t know the facts ARE calling for punishment. Suspension is a punishment. With or without pay, it’s still a punishment. Was Williams suspended without pay or with pay? |
This!!! Justintyme, you are the only person here proposing any kind of punishment without proof. The entire basis of your suspension argument is completely hypocritical at this point. I, personally just want the truth and will support that truth. |
Suspension with pay is not punishment. It is, by definition, non-punitive and investigatory in nature.
I have always only asked for suspension with pay, exactly like I would face under the same circumstances. This gives time for due process to play out.
The proof required to start an investigation into this type of allegation, and to suspend with pay, should be "credible accusation of wrongdoing that meets a prima facie burden".
In the Williams situation, presumably the league has has looked at all the relevant facts on both sides of the issue and has issued a punishment. It's definitely been long enough for them to have heard her side of the story and be presented with any mitigating facts. |
If you’re taking away basketball from her, yeah. It’s a punishment. Just because you’re not taking money doesn’t mean it’s not punitive by definition. Punishment doesn’t only equal removal of money.
_________________
The poster formerly known as LibWNBAFan.
|
|
Richyyy
Joined: 17 Nov 2005
Posts: 24349
Location: London
Back to top |
| Posted: 07/17/19 9:40 am ::: |
Reply |
|
| NYL_WNBA_FAN wrote: |
| If you’re taking away basketball from her, yeah. It’s a punishment. Just because you’re not taking money doesn’t mean it’s not punitive by definition. Punishment doesn’t only equal removal of money. |
Also, in a WNBA context, WNBA performance is a central part of what earns contracts overseas, so you'd be damaging earning potential even regardless of the implications of a suspension. |
|
FrozenLVFan
Joined: 08 Jul 2014
Posts: 3511
Back to top |
| Posted: 07/17/19 9:41 am ::: |
Reply |
|
This case is obviously the least clear-cut of the three. There are no published videotapes of witnesses or other victims providing testimony to police officers under oath. There are no officers witnessing the offense and obtaining numerical evidence on electronic equipment.
Given that it took the WNBA 8 months to act on one case, and they still haven't acted on the other, I think it's unlikely they're going to jump to judgement on Howard's case unless they've seen far more clear-cut and compelling evidence than is publicly available.
|
|
miller40
Joined: 29 Jun 2006
Posts: 1334
Back to top |
| Posted: 07/17/19 9:47 am ::: |
Reply |
|
| FrozenLVFan wrote: |
This case is obviously the least clear-cut of the three. There are no published videotapes of witnesses or other victims providing testimony to police officers under oath. There are no officers witnessing the offense and obtaining numerical evidence on electronic equipment.
Given that it took the WNBA 8 months to act on one case, and they still haven't acted on the other, I think it's unlikely they're going to jump to judgement on Howard's case unless they've seen far more clear-cut and compelling evidence than is publicly available. |
Does the WNBA do the investigation or the team? Do they carry it out together? Does it vary case by case? In the Todd Troxel case, the Phoenix Mercury seemed to carry out the investigation without league input. Is that just the difference between coaches and players?
|
|
ClayK
Joined: 11 Oct 2005
Posts: 11140
Back to top |
| Posted: 07/17/19 11:12 am ::: |
Reply |
|
Does the WNBA do all it can to protect potential victims of domestic abuse?
How do its policies compare to other professional sports leagues?
If they differ, why?
It is clear that the NFL and MLB react forcefully and immediately in such situations. If the WNBA chooses to react differently, I disagree, but regardless, the WNBA should explain its position vis-a-vis other professional leagues.
The deafening silence is reprehensible, regardless of whether Howard deserves to be suspended, with or without pay.
_________________
Oṃ Tāre Tuttāre Ture Svāhā
|
|
|
|
