Trevor Bauer

[RZNJ]

2 minutes ago, Aristotelian said:

Thats illegal in most states but not all

There are things that are illegal that are not enforced or enforced strenuously. 

 

Anyway, I didn't mean to get off on a tangent.  Would we be more accepting of Bauer if he didn't have a reputation for being an oddball and a clubhouse cancer?  I didn't know about the latter.

[HowAboutThat]

23 minutes ago, Aristotelian said:

But if she did not give consent it would be criminal, correct:? Your earlier statement implied that it would not.

Actually there have been so many statements I don’t remember exactly what I said, but what I intended was that regardless of what he DID admit to, he did NOT admit to a criminal act. 
And the presumption of innocence is his, therefore until we can prove otherwise, by golly he’s innocent. 

[Frobby]

1 hour ago, Aristotelian said:

I understand the allegations were not legally proven but what she was alleging was criminal. He is still under criminal investigation. 

The woman testified that she in no way consented to how violent things got the second night when, as she was still reeling from being unconscious, Bauer punched her in the jaw, the cheekbones and the side of the head.

“I’ve never been punched in the face ever,” she said. “I felt like my soul left my body, and I was terrified. I couldn’t fight back.”

https://www.si.com/mlb/2021/08/17/trevor-bauer-accuser-testifies-hearing-protective-order-dodgers

In testimony Wednesday, the woman told the court: "To me, text messages do not mean consent. I did not consent to hurting all over my body and being put in the hospital and having things done to me when I was unconscious. That is not consensual."

https://www.reuters.com/lifestyle/sports/judge-denies-restraining-order-trevor-bauer-case-2021-08-20/

She alleged she didn’t give consent, but the judge found otherwise, after hearing her live testimony and seeing the text messages and other evidence.   I recognize that’s not the final word on the subject, unless we hear that the criminal investigation has been closed.   But I’ll say this: it’s going to tough for a prosecutor to believe that he or she can prove a case “beyond a reasonable doubt,” when a judge has already found, under a lesser burden of proof, that lack of consent could not be established by the alleged victim.   

The above makes it sound like I’m pro-Bauer, or believe his side of the case.   I’m not pro-Bauer, and I don’t have an opinion on which side is right in the case.   I’m just talking about what the judge found in the restraining order case, and it’s likely practical effect on the criminal case.   
 

[HowAboutThat]

13 minutes ago, RZNJ said:

There are things that are illegal that are not enforced or enforced strenuously. 

 

Anyway, I didn't mean to get off on a tangent.  Would we be more accepting of Bauer if he didn't have a reputation for being an oddball and a clubhouse cancer?  I didn't know about the latter.

Oh I have no interest in having the guy on the team at all. I didn’t even want Delmon Young. I didn’t want Barry Bonds or A-Rod or Reggie Jackson. I want guys who are easy to deal with and don’t worship at their own altar.

One reason I am so interested in signing Collin McHugh is because he is a terrific human being. 
The fact that he is going to be very inexpensive will probably not hurt either.

[HowAboutThat]

2 minutes ago, Frobby said:

She alleged she didn’t give consent, but the judge found otherwise, after hearing her live testimony and seeing the text messages and other evidence.   I recognize that’s not the final word on the subject, unless we hear that the criminal investigation has been closed.   But I’ll say this: it’s going to tough for a prosecutor to believe that he or she can prove a case “beyond a reasonable doubt,” when a judge has already found, under a lesser burden of proof, that lack of consent could not be established by the alleged victim.   

The above makes it sound like I’m pro-Bauer, or believe his side of the case.   I’m not pro-Bauer, and I don’t have an opinion on which side is right in the case.   I’m just talking about what the judge found in the restraining order case, and it’s likely practical effect on the criminal case.   
 

I think that the only danger here is that the prosecutor will fall sway to the “me too” movement. The court of public opinion has no idea what it’s talking about but if it screams loudly enough and threatens to vote the district attorney out in the next election if he doesn’t “do the right thing” a lot of people will take the path of least resistance, file charges anyway, and let the chips fall where they may.

During the Cuomo Scandal, at least two people who were both friends of the governor, and founders or directors of a abuse assistance organization, were forced to resign when it came out that they had helped Cuomo prepare for his public defense. My reaction was “WTF?” They helped him because they believed he was innocent, and what is wrong with that? And yet each of these two women publicly fell on their swords in apology. I can’t understand why they didn’t just say,” hey, I think the guys innocent.”

Because they’re not allowed to think that he’s innocent, that’s why, and if that is the prevailing attitude these days then God help the USA.

[SteveA]

18 minutes ago, Philip said:

Actually there have been so many statements I don’t remember exactly what I said, but what I intended was that regardless of what he DID admit to, he did NOT admit to a criminal act. 
And the presumption of innocence is his, therefore until we can prove otherwise, by golly he’s innocent. 

In the eyes of the legal system, absolutely.

But I have seen enough to think he is a bad guy and I my choice would be to not have him on the team.

[Frobby]

4 minutes ago, Philip said:

I think that the only danger here is that the prosecutor will fall sway to the “me too” movement. The court of public opinion has no idea what it’s talking about but if it screams loudly enough and threatens to vote the district attorney out in the next election if he doesn’t “do the right thing” a lot of people will take the path of least resistance, file charges anyway, and let the chips fall where they may.

During the Cuomo Scandal, at least two people who were both friends of the governor, and founders or directors of a abuse assistance organization, were forced to resign when it came out that they had helped Cuomo prepare for his public defense. My reaction was “WTF?” They helped him because they believed he was innocent, and what is wrong with that? And yet each of these two women publicly fell on their swords in apology. I can’t understand why they didn’t just say,” hey, I think the guys innocent.”

Because they’re not allowed to think that he’s innocent, that’s why, and if that is the prevailing attitude these days then God help the USA.

Over 95% of federal indictments result in convictions.   Know why?   Because prosecutors don’t like to bring cases they might lose.  I think in this case, with the prior judicial finding that Bauer did not exceed the limits the woman set, there wouldn’t be much political blowback from a decision not to prosecute.   That said, there might be evidence that was not presented in the restraining order case that would allow the prosecutors to bring a stronger case than the plaintiff’s lawyers did.   There’s no way to know, unless a case is brought.

[HowAboutThat]

17 minutes ago, SteveA said:

In the eyes of the legal system, absolutely.

But I have seen enough to think he is a bad guy and I my choice would be to not have him on the team.

Oh I don’t want him on the team either, as I said in another comment. I think the topic went off on a tangent.

[Aristotelian]

Apologies, I misinterpreted Philip's.statement and derailed the thread.

[Jammer7]

3 hours ago, SteveA said:

   Point 1:   I never said they were crimes.   Is committing a crime the ONLY reason you would not want someone on your team?  

   Point 2:   I don't think it is as clear cut as that.   Even with consent, some things are not necessarily legal.   I can write up a contract saying I give you express 100% permission to kill me.   And after you do so, you can still be arrested for murder.

Steve, I know that I replied to you, but that post was for several folks to help define what constitutes a crime. Killing a human being is quite a different matter. In a criminal proceeding, it IS as simple as that. To be guilty, the state prosecutor has to prove the state’s case “beyond a reasonable doubt.” If Bauer can somehow show the alleged victim likes to have violent sex, and encouraged or endorsed him to do this things to her, is he guilty of any crime? Is that not a reasonable doubt? Crimes against persons, such as violent crimes, are specific intent crimes. They require the state to prove that the alleged suspect specifically intended to harm the alleged victim without the consent of the victim through an unwanted act. 

Let me give you an example. When a bench clearing brawl occurs, and guys punch each other. Why does no one go to jail? Because no victim complains, no crime. But if a player wrote out a sworn complaint against a player, there would be possible charges filed. In the NFL, for example, it is understood that you are consenting to getting hit. There is no crime there. Boxing, MMA, etc…

There are some freaky sex folks out there, maybe a lot more than people think. Probably many active professional athletes. There is often victims of remorse the day after sex. They say they were raped, but the story ended up being that they were not because they gave consent. The mere allegation can ruin lives, even if it is proven completely false. I have seen this up close for decades. However, that is not to say that rape does not happen, because clearly it does. In my experience, the majority of reports are not true. 

That said, I do not want him in Baltimore. Too much controversy around him, and it takes away from the team focus. Talented dude, but no thanks. 

[Jammer7]

3 hours ago, Can_of_corn said:

Someone that is unconscious cannot give consent.

That may be true. She could give consent before hand. It may be unlikely, but it could happen. For instance, strangulation/asphyxiation is a common act where the alleged victim wants the sex to continue even though they lose consciousness. This kind of thing is shocking for most people, but it is out there. 

[Jammer7]

3 hours ago, Aristotelian said:

She did not consent to being punched in the face at least per the accusation. 

I understand. Maybe she is truthful. But is not uncommon for people to have remorse after an act such as these. I do not claim to know all of the ins and outs, excuse the terrible pun, of this case. Bottom line, there is a reason US citizens are presumed innocent until proven guilty. Maybe he did it, or maybe the alleged victim has $$$ in her eyes. We’ll see. 

[Can_of_corn]

9 minutes ago, Jammer7 said:

That may be true. She could give consent before hand. It may be unlikely, but it could happen. For instance, strangulation/asphyxiation is a common act where the alleged victim wants the sex to continue even though they lose consciousness. This kind of thing is shocking for most people, but it is out there. 

And given that you can change your mind at any point and stop giving consent losing the ability to give consent is the same as no longer giving consent.

Once you lose the ability to say yes you are saying no.

[OriolesMagic83]

Let's assume that what Bauer did was legal (I think there are good arguments both ways).  Is violent, assaulting sex something you want your players engaging in?  Sports entertainment figures are public figures and are thought of as role models and reflections of their communities.  Baseball has a morals clause that would seem to cover situations like this.  Bauer could be found innocent and still never play baseball again.  Just ask Ray Rice.

[Can_of_corn]

3 minutes ago, OriolesMagic83 said:

Let's assume that what Bauer did was legal (I think there are good arguments both ways).  Is violent, assaulting sex something you want your players engaging in?  Sports entertainment figures are public figures and are thought of as role models and reflections of their communities.  Baseball has a morals clause that would seem to cover situations like this.  Bauer could be found innocent and still never play baseball again.  Just ask Ray Rice.

This is tougher for me.

As long as the behavior isn't actionable it's none of my business what they do.

Twenty years ago we could replace the words violent, assaulting with gay and plenty of folks would agree with you.  (and yes I know that consensual homosexual sex is technically actionable in certain situations)