Ben Roethlisbergers Attorney Writes Letter To Commish

[Dan The Man Ravens #1 Fan]

I read this article about Bens attorney writing to Roger Goodell requesting some other form of discipline. In the letter he says that this type of discipline will not help Ben make a better choice the next time he decides to have consensual sex. Now didnt Ben say that he did not have sex with the girl in the bathroom? Im not trying to beat a dead horse but what else did Ben lie about? I would hope that Goodell does not change his mind on the disciplinary choice that he has made. Im not convinced that Ben committed rape but as many many have said, his character sure is trash. This is just a little proof that something sure does stink about the whole situation. Check out the article [url="http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=5159611"]My link[/url]
This article is about Ben having his evaluation but in the 7th paragraph is where the lawyer is quoted as saying Ben had consensual sex.

[The Flock]

If he did then he shouldn't play in the NFL the whole 2010 season.

[Moderator 3]

I don't believe Ben said he didn't have sex. I believe he said he committed no crime.

[thewarden86]

[quote name='Dan The Man Ravens #1 Fan' date='04 May 2010 - 08:26 AM' timestamp='1272976010' post='404283']
I read this article about Bens attorney writing to Roger Goodell requesting some other form of discipline. In the letter he says that this type of discipline will not help Ben make a better choice the next time he decides to have consensual sex. Now didnt Ben say that he did not have sex with the girl in the bathroom? Im not trying to beat a dead horse but what else did Ben lie about? I would hope that Goodell does not change his mind on the disciplinary choice that he has made. Im not convinced that Ben committed rape but as many many have said, his character sure is trash. This is just a little proof that something sure does stink about the whole situation. Check out the article [url="http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=5159611"]My link[/url]
This article is about Ben having his evaluation but in the 7th paragraph is where the lawyer is quoted as saying Ben had consensual sex.
[/quote]

Doesn't appear as the the lawyer is saying that Ben DID have consensual sex. But he did try to have consensual sex. semantics.

[darklight1216]

[quote name='Moderator 3' date='04 May 2010 - 11:46 AM' timestamp='1272987992' post='404367']
I don't believe Ben said he didn't have sex. I believe he said he committed no crime.
[/quote]
That was the first one. In the most recent incident, he said that they had "sexual contact," but not intercourse.

http://abcnews.go.com/TheLaw/ben-roethlisberger-accused-quarterback-admits-sexual-contact-intercourse/story?id=10077171

[FlaccoFlicker]

[quote name='darklight1216' date='04 May 2010 - 01:52 PM' timestamp='1272995576' post='404444']
That was the first one. In the most recent incident, he said that they had "sexual contact," but not intercourse.

http://abcnews.go.com/TheLaw/ben-roethlisberger-accused-quarterback-admits-sexual-contact-intercourse/story?id=10077171
[/quote]
oh god another Clinton"I did not have relations with that woman"

[Dan The Man Ravens #1 Fan]

[quote name='Moderator 3' date='04 May 2010 - 11:46 AM' timestamp='1272987992' post='404367']
I don't believe Ben said he didn't have sex. I believe he said he committed no crime.
[/quote]

Ben most certainly did say he had no sexual intercourse with the woman from Georgia.[url="http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=4984207"]My link[/url]

This is why I said he is lying. His lawyer said he did, he says he didnt. Whats up with that? Sounds like Ben lied to me.

It doesnt really matter. I just thought it was fishy coming from his attorney. Like I said I just hope Goodell doesnt change his decision.

[BloodRaven]

The horror.... the horror...

[plesiosaur]

[quote]I cannot fathom how a suspension or any other form of traditional discipline will help Ben make a better choice the next time he decides to have consensual sex.[/quote]


BR having had sex during his latest "incident" isn't implicit in this statement. The only reference is to "the next time."

On the other hand, a highly-paid pack of lawyers and "bodyguards" covering for a highly-paid celebrity isn't a big surprise.

[JonM229]

So, cutting a guy's paycheck almost in half isn't going to make him think twice before getting into another questionable situation with a woman?

Though, what's the difference between several million and only a few million?

[theFRANCHISE]

[quote name='thewarden86' date='04 May 2010 - 12:19 PM' timestamp='1272989943' post='404382']
Doesn't appear as the the lawyer is saying that Ben DID have consensual sex. But he did try to have consensual sex. semantics.
[/quote]
I'm inclined to agree. However, that is the power of language. As we've discussed endlessly in one of my English classes this semester, even changing just [i]one word[/i] can make a statement entirely different from its intended meaning because of the symbolism behind each word, and how we construct words when they're put together.

For example:
"I did it" vs. "I did [b]not[/b] do it" is an obvious one.
"[b]Had I[/b] done it..." vs. "[b]I had[/b] done it" is an example of when words can be leading.

There are better examples, but I can't think of any without consulting my notes for class. Either way, just changing one word or one phrase can change the implication or impact of a statement. Had the attorney chosen his words more carefully, we would not be jumping to these conclusions that sex did occur, consensually or otherwise.

That said, I still think he did it, but that's only in the court of public opinion. The NFL has already ruled and whatever happens, happens.

[FerrariFan87]

[quote name='JonM229' date='05 May 2010 - 10:20 AM' timestamp='1273069228' post='405000']
So, cutting a guy's paycheck almost in half isn't going to make him think twice before getting into another questionable situation with a woman?

[b]Though, what's the difference between several million and only a few million?[/b]
[/quote]

A couple million?

[BloodRaven]

Don't forget he'll still be making passes in his 6 week suspension........ in bars.

[Ravens0012]

[quote name='thewarden86' date='04 May 2010 - 12:19 PM' timestamp='1272989943' post='404382']
Doesn't appear as the the lawyer is saying that Ben DID have consensual sex. But he did try to have consensual sex. semantics.
[/quote]

I would agree with this, because (as i do believe) whatever Ben would have communicated with his lawyer is confidential between them (Attorney-Client privilege). So if Ben did actually say he had consensual sex to his lawyer but publicly stated he did not, then the lawyer, under the law could not release that information. Like i said, this is all what i believe is correct.

[thewarden86]

[quote name='theFRANCHISE' date='05 May 2010 - 10:57 AM' timestamp='1273071425' post='405016']
I'm inclined to agree. However, that is the power of language. As we've discussed endlessly in one of my English classes this semester, even changing just [i]one word[/i] can make a statement entirely different from its intended meaning because of the symbolism behind each word, and how we construct words when they're put together.

For example:
"I did it" vs. "I did [b]not[/b] do it" is an obvious one.
"[b]Had I[/b] done it..." vs. "[b]I had[/b] done it" is an example of when words can be leading.

There are better examples, but I can't think of any without consulting my notes for class. Either way, just changing one word or one phrase can change the implication or impact of a statement. Had the attorney chosen his words more carefully, we would not be jumping to these conclusions that sex did occur, consensually or otherwise.

That said, I still think he did it, but that's only in the court of public opinion. The NFL has already ruled and whatever happens, happens.
[/quote]

You're just scratching the surface when it comes to the legal system though Franny. Case in point; Name the author (Note: NOT intended to be political):
"It depends on what the definition of 'is' is."

Now THAT is getting deep.

[thewarden86]

[quote name='BloodRaven' date='05 May 2010 - 11:36 AM' timestamp='1273073805' post='405036']
Don't forget he'll still be making passes in his 6 week suspension........ in bars.
[/quote]

You almost done? If not, can you at least say something funny?

[BloodRaven]

[quote name='thewarden86' date='05 May 2010 - 02:11 PM' timestamp='1273086683' post='405155']
You almost done? If not, can you at least say something funny?
[/quote]

I keep hearing lately that he's a huge fan of Pujols.

[img]http://betweenthepoles.files.wordpress.com/2009/11/albert-pujols.jpg[/img]

[thewarden86]

[quote name='BloodRaven' date='05 May 2010 - 03:17 PM' timestamp='1273087073' post='405161']
I keep hearing lately that he's a huge fan of Pujols.

[img]http://betweenthepoles.files.wordpress.com/2009/11/albert-pujols.jpg[/img]
[/quote]

Nah. Still needs a little work (your humor that is).

[MKdave]

PFT was talking about some new information that has surfaced. Can really be bothered to link it right now but if someone would like to get over there and link it that would be excellent.

[thewarden86]

[quote name='MKdave' date='05 May 2010 - 03:28 PM' timestamp='1273087700' post='405168']
PFT was talking about some new information that has surfaced. Can really be bothered to link it right now but if someone would like to get over there and link it that would be excellent.
[/quote]

About Ben? Sweed? or Flacco?

There is entirely too much speculation and too many rumors and unsubstantiated claims around here.....NIGEL!

[MKdave]

They're about Ben. This is the (a) Ben thread is it not?

[JonM229]

The only thing I found was an article on SI.com saying that Ben's head injuries (both football and motorcycle-related) could be to blame for his behavior.

[url="http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2010/writers/david_epstein/05/05/ben.roethlisberger/index.html?eref=sihp"]http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2010/writers/david_epstein/05/05/ben.roethlisberger/index.html?eref=sihp[/url]


Sure...that, or that he's payed millions of dollars and treated like a God

[thewarden86]

[quote name='MKdave' date='05 May 2010 - 03:40 PM' timestamp='1273088426' post='405177']
They're about Ben. This is the (a) Ben thread is it not?
[/quote]

Well, quit being lazy and support your post.

[Moderator 2]

[url="http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/vault/article/magazine/MAG1169185/1/index.htm"]SI Article[/url] that excoriated Ben-- Its nothing I have not heard before but WOW.

[plesiosaur]

[quote name='thewarden86' date='05 May 2010 - 03:10 PM' timestamp='1273086645' post='405153']
You're just scratching the surface when it comes to the legal system though Franny. Case in point; Name the author (Note: NOT intended to be political):
"It depends on what the definition of 'is' is."

Now THAT is getting deep.
[/quote]

Y'know, that's interesting. Out of context, that sentence reeks of everything thats wrong with lawyerist politics. You know where you can find it [i]in [/i]context?

[AwakenTheDemon]

Maybe Ben should have his mommy write him an excuse to Goodell as well.

[MagicianCamille]

Ben should spend these 6 weeks writing a book called "If I Did It".

[AwakenTheDemon]

Or called:
"No Sex in a Public Bathroom (While a Pennsylvania State Trooper Guards the Door)"

Although I think that's a long-winded title.

[thewarden86]

[quote name='plesiosaur' date='05 May 2010 - 05:27 PM' timestamp='1273094836' post='405275']
Y'know, that's interesting. Out of context, that sentence reeks of everything thats wrong with lawyerist politics. You know where you can find it [i]in [/i]context?
[/quote]

Do you mean to tell me you don't know who said that?

[Ed_Reed20]

What a guy: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/vault/article/magazine/MAG1169185/1/index.htm