She wrote:Sorry, but we don't hear writing. We see it. And I don't accept "She wrote" as a fact-checked statement. And even if I knew she wrote it, I wouldn't know why she wrote it and how accurately it reflects her state of mind. But let's say it is accurate. She feels like a victim, a victim of everyone other than her husband, and she wants the people who see her as a victim of her husband to know that they are victimizing her.
I woke up this morning feeling like I had a horrible nightmare, feeling like I’m mourning the death of my closest friend. But to have to accept the fact that it’s reality is a nightmare in itself. No one knows the pain that the media & unwanted options from the public has caused my family. To make us relive a moment in our lives that we regret every day is a horrible thing. To take something away from the man I love that he has worked his ass off for all his life just to gain ratings is a horrific [sic]. THIS IS OUR LIFE! What don’t you all get. If your intentions were to hurt us, embarrass us, make us feel alone, take all happiness away, you’ve succeeded on so many levels. Just know we will continue to grow & show the world what real love is! Ravensnation we love you!
How much pressure was put on her to marry this man and to speak well of him now? So much is at stake for him. What deal, if any, was made with her? I don't see how it is even possible — even she were standing at a microphone and taking questions — to "hear" the "voice of Janay Rice."
पोस्ट्स
१२१ टिप्पण्या:
When the NFL brought convicted felon Michael Vick back to placate his fans I banned pro football from my house. Nothing I've seen since has encouraged me to lift the ban. And now this pile of stinky poop landed on my TV.
Taking away Rice's livelihood impacts her as well.
"Taking away Rice's livelihood impacts her as well."
Big time.
Women aren't interested in money?
Frankly, I was waiting for her to say something this manifestly obvious.
Did she appear the aggressor in the incident? Yes.
Did he use too much force to defend himself? Yes.
This video taped incident culminated in an excessive use of force to defend oneself, and says less about his history of domestic violence than hers.
The hyper-reaction is about ratings, ass covering and moral preening.
I blame Title IX. Sports goes PC.
I have no problem with the NFL booting a thug... it should happen more often. On the other hand, why was the criminal justice system so impotent?
As for the now wife... I bet the deprivation of income is her true motivation. Was she waiting for another beating so she could divorce the thug? What is a poor girl supposed to do now?
She had an enormous financial incentive to downplay the incident to the Ravens and the league. The Ravens and the league had their own reasons to believe her.
Now that the controversy has reignited, the Ravens and the league are feigning outrage and punishing Ray Rice (and his wife), supposedly for misleading them about the seriousness of the incident. Which is laughable given the ease with which they could have obtained the elevator video.
I don't know the first thing about the collective bargaining agreement, but I wouldn't be surprised if this sort of reevaluation/re-punishment isn't allowed. It shouldn't be, and if Ray Rice were to sue, I would be glad to see him prevail.
Everything I want to write on this subject is indistinguishable from trolling, so I'll only leave this gibberish to hint at my perplexed interpretation of this event within it's great social context.
This may be hard to believe, but some people are used to behaving this way to each other and they have trouble understanding why the rest of us think it's wrong.
Who can really say that they know what goes on in the head of another man or woman--or what goes on inside someone else's marriage? Ms. Althouse is less pios than that pontificating prevaricating pompous putz of a sportswriter for the Los Angeles Times, Bill Plaschke, who was on this story like white on rice this morning.
How many men, or women, in this country get diverted into a "treatment program" after being charged with a vicious domestic assault (which this action was)?
And how many jackasses get up and bray after release of a video such as this to prove their moral superiority. Save the faux outrage for the likes of Fauxcahontas.
This is an example of selective targeting. And if you don't believe me, go to any prosecutor's office and speak with the Deputy DA who handles domestic violence cases (of which there are way too many in this country). The stories will curl your hair.
She's a victim of no paycheck. Hope he saved his money.
Odd that a self-professed Christian cannot imagine she might have forgiven him. Even to the point of speculating she must have been pressured to marry him in the first place.
Why is it appropriate for any of us to make judgment on her motivations? She certainly looked like a victim on that videotape but their relationship is not bounded by one event.
During arguments with significant others sometimes words are exchanged that would, if caught on audiotape, make one or both parties look bad. And if any of us sat in judgment of the entirety of the relationship based on such an exchange, we should be ashamed of our haste.
Finally, I cannot understand how a feminist would argue that another woman's voice is somehow not her own in a case observed from some great distance. Wouldn't it be nice to be able to make such penetrating observations from such a safe distance as here. Or, put another way: Feminism, taking away the agency of other women since before it was cool.
Disgusting.
whats worse- releasing nude photos (last weeks story) or the release of this video?
If she said it was a personal matter and should remain between her and her husband, we face a difficult situation. How much do the rights of two individuals get overrun by satisfying public opinion? If they had a similar incident or "physical relationship" behind closed doors perhaps some of the more physically punishing sadomasochistic practices that are celebrated in art and the extreme left, where does society have a right or responsibility to intervene?
Ken B: "Odd that a self-professed Christian cannot imagine she might have forgiven him. Even to the point of speculating she must have been pressured to marry him in the first place."
It's possible that she was pressured to marry him AND that she has truly forgiven him.
That being said, I take her at her word.
"THIS IS OUR LIFE!"
Translated as "This is my Money !"
The prediction here is that within two years he will find forgiveness and a big contract. She will forever be regarded either as a doormat or a gold digger.....If you look to find a moral in this tale, you will find only vertigo and nausea.
I wonder whether Janay also has a job, and if so, where?
Rice hasn't seen the sequel.
Ask Mike Tyson ! Except Rice is small beans compared to Tyson.
It's not surprising she'd feel this way--she forgave him after the incident, refused to press charges, and went ahead and married him. Whether it was for his money or genuine love isn't for us to speculate, but she's chosen to be with him and so now this new media storm (and the possible end to his livelihood and career) is obviously painful for her.
However, the public's and the NFL's disgust and condemnation of Rice isn't dependent on his wife feeling the same way. It's a shame for everyone involved, but this is what can happen when you assault someone--you can throw your career away.
Unless you're a Kennedy. Football fans have higher moral standards than Masshole Democrats.
This writing seems to me clearly the writing of an anguished, confused, not terribly well-educated person, or else the work of a highly-skilled writer counterfeiting the same. I'm curious who Prof. Althouse thinks did write this missive.
Her timing is bad. He already had five years in the league, and 27 years old. Most running backs don't get more than four years, or play beyond 28 years of age.
Other than that.....TMZ saved her a few concussions, and some dental work.
She threatens to end the entertainment the public is having.
Can this be recast as more entertainment and save the story for another day of public entertainment?
Somebody needs to teach Rice the aggressive advantages of a good prose style.
@sydney,
This may be hard to believe, but some people are used to behaving this way to each other and they have trouble understanding why the rest of us think it's wrong.
Oh, Lordy, are you right on target with that statement!
Take a gander at the comments in this article (mostly from women) & see what these women think is acceptable behavior towards their squeezes!
If she said it was a personal matter and should remain between her and her husband, we face a difficult situation. How much do the rights of two individuals get overrun by satisfying public opinion?
All celebrity contracts used to have a moral turpitude clause. Now that there are no morals, I suspect not.
I bet there are now: "conduct that embarrasses you, the team or the NFL, and cost us money" clauses
"If she said it was a personal matter and should remain between her and her husband, we face a difficult situation."
IMO, if that's what she says her wishes should be respected.
Ann Althouse said...How much pressure was put on her to marry this man and to speak well of him now? So much is at stake for him.
This should be "So much is at stake for them.
I share your skepticism, but on the other hand if I choose to substitute my take on the matter and assume she should react the way I would aren't I guilty of renforcing my beliefs on her and not respecting her decisions (or even, you know, her decisions as a woman)? Remember, at the heart of liberty is the right to define one's own concept of existence, of
meaning, of the universe, and of the mystery of human life so who the hell am I to judge one way or the other, right?
There is the possibility that this was the first occurrence. There is also the potential for him, and her, to change behavior patterns, even if it's not the first time.
I do note that I haven't seen anything in the media yet about him being raised by a single mother, and how that may have been a factor in him exhibiting this behavior. Of course, that wouldn't meet the desired narrative that the media is trying to fit this into.
Anyone want to buy a lightly used Ray Rice jersey?
And will the NFL now begin to address the concussion issue as it affects the wives/girlfriends/baby-momma's of NFL players? Many of these women are sustaining concussions during the course of their relationships with NFL players.
Also interesting that the NCAA has nullified the Penn State sanctions.
If Michael Sam's boyfriend hit him and then Michael Sam knocked him out, would Michael Sam be banned from the NFL? If so, why?
It's easy to deprive Janay Rice of any real agency in our consideration, but maybe we should resist the temptation to do so.
If the NFL thinks that the brief, but violent, episode caught on that video is anywhere near the more brutal end of the domestic violence spectrum it is more deluded that usual.
More likely, it is cynically calculating that most of the lengthy beatings, whippings, cigarette burning and associated sexual assault that is part of any sever domestic violence will simply never be caught on tape.
Wasn't the feminist position back during the Anita Hill testimony, "Women do not lie about these things!"?
Has the word "racist" been used yet?
White owner
White coach
White commissioner
Black Player
Black Wife
Gotta Be!
What was that sayin about a Black Thing?
Jim: "If Michael Sam's boyfriend hit him and then Michael Sam knocked him out, would Michael Sam be banned from the NFL?"
Michael Sams boyfriend is white.
Therefore, no. It would be politically impossible to ban Sam for hitting him.
Plus, per crack, we already know that blacks never attack whites anyway, so Sam striking his boyfriend would apparently violate the Space-Time Continuum as well.
Just leave her alone! I am sure he will have many alternative career paths in front of him. He got a great education at Rutger. Didn't he? He certainly has lots in savings. Right? I think he gets around 25M. That should last the two of them a lifetime. Easy.
Opinh Bombay said...
Wasn't the feminist position back during the Anita Hill testimony, "Women do not lie about these things!"?
No.
The feminist position, as it always has been, is that liberal women do not lie about these things, except when it hurts liberal politicians (Clinton/Willey) then, yes they do, but generally no, they don't. Except when the feminists need them to be lying, then whatever.
"principled"
I hope that clears that up.
Remember, what do you get when you cross a "feminist" and leftist?
A leftist.
In many cultures within our multicultural society, it's a man's moral duty to beat his wife when she is disobedient or steps out of line. The problem here is that Janay Palmer wasn't Rice's wife when he clocked her, so Rice needs to man up and accept the consequences and not issue expiating statements in his wife's name.
"I blame Title IX. Sports goes PC"
I've been following sports for over sixty years and even back then most of the sportswriters were liberals trying to prove that they were superior to the athletes. What really ruined sports for me though was NBC and their coverage of the olympics a few years ago with their airing of all those touchy-feely stories of personal tragedies and perseverance so as to appeal to the female viewer. Those touchy-feely stories are ubiquitous on sports TV today.
Drago, good points all. I'll rephrase. If Martina Navritalova are riding in an elevator and her girlfriend hit her, and Martina knocked out, not up, the GF; does Martina lose her gig on tennis channel?
Well if this whole NFL thing falls apart for them, as it looks like it will, they always join crack on the Reparations Train.
Woot Woot! All aboard! Next stop Permanent Poverty!
"This should be "So much is at stake for them."
My point is, he had tremendous motivation to make a deal with her. He faced not just the loss of his career, but prison time, which he deserved. We know his stake. Hers isn't automatically adhered to his.
She might have separated herself from him, and she could have sued for her injuries and gotten money that way. But I assumed she was offered enough, in money and affection, that she gave him the cover that helped him as much as it did.
At this point, she is performing under whatever interest has developed for her.
Feminism and the gradual dismantling of the rules of chivalry continues to confuse everyone and wreak societal chaos. If you refuse to be the gentler sex, ladies, pretty soon the men will see no point in self-restraint.
This whole imbroglio will be solved with a "Beer Summit." Obama will invite Janay and Ray (or "Ray-nay" as the tabloids will call them) to the Rose Garden to drink Miller Lite, the president will talk a lot about himself, give them CD recordings of his speeches, and all will be right with the world.
That comment was was re: the Jezebel comments
She had forty million reasons to marry him and now thanks to TMZ she just lost twenty million reasons to divorce him. Maybe she should sue TMZ.
If indeed he has 25M and they do not have a pre-nup she should waltz down to the courthouse and stake her claim to 12.5M Easy as can be because feminism
".....At this point, she is performing under whatever interest has developed for her. .."
What's the interest of everybody else? Whose interest should be primary?
I don't think there's much of a distinction between one's written words and one's "voice" as commonly used.
In fact, I'm sure it's quite common to talk about a writer's "distinctive voice." They're not talking about his actual vocal cords.
And we hear all the time about how diseases that destroy speech "haven't silenced so-and-so's voice."
And in fact, Merriam-Webster has as meanings for voice:
* "wish, choice, or opinion openly or formally expressed"
* "instrument or medium of expression"
So while your more general point that we aren't hearing her true voice due to all the various incentives lined up for her is fine, your point about language is just flat wrong, objectively.
You seem to be a bit schizophrenic about language -- oftentimes digging into meaning and etymology, but other times making up absolutely bizarre interpretations that are directly counter to established usage.
Ray Rice and #WhyIStayed has been twitter trending 1 and 2 for over 24 hours.
It's really struck a chord with the chattering class.
(The most obvious example that comes to mind is the infamous "crazy-ass cracker" vs "crazy ass-cracker" musing)
No one knows the pain that the media & unwanted options from the public has caused my family.
Don't perform your silly fistfights in public.
"I knew Jake LaMotta, Mr. Rice, and you are no Jake LaMotta!" to paraphrase slightly.
One never knows, from outside, what's going on in a marriage, or indeed in any relationship between two adults.
But we (I) can speculate.
They might be turned on by drama, or really look forward to reconciliation sex.
If the DA does not see fit to press charges, then why should the NFL take action (unless there's some clause in the contract You cannot hit women ever). This is a PR stunt, just like the NCAA's sanctions against Penn State. The League (or the NCAA) asks itself: How can we get the PC hordes off our back and make it look like things have changed?
Result: Hands are washed.
Jim said...
Drago, good points all. I'll rephrase. If Martina Navritalova are riding in an elevator and her girlfriend hit her, and Martina knocked out, not up, the GF; does Martina lose her gig on tennis channel?
Hmmm.
A couple follow up questions:
A) is the knockoutee a person of color?
If so, yes.
B) Did the knockoutee instigate the confrontation?
If yes, see A.
C) No need for C).
why was the criminal justice system so impotent?
When I was an assistant district attorney, in charge of prosecuting misdemeanors, one of the things that surprised me was how nobody went to jail. The misdemeanors were small punishments anyway. There were four classes of punishment
30 days
60 days
90 days
120 days
And everybody got probation. It was always probation. We don't have enough jail space for all the people who are convicted of crimes. I was prosecuting 150-200 cases a day. This was in Salisbury, North Carolina, a very small town.
The only way you got sentenced to jail in district court was multiple DWI, or you violated your probation.
Couple of other things surprised me. There is a crime called Assault by Pointing a Weapon. You point a gun at somebody's face and threaten to kill them, that's a misdemeanor. You won't go to jail for it, at least in North Carolina. You'll get probation, and counseling too.
And there was a crime called Assault on a Woman. It was a very gendered crime. Only men could be convicted of it. If a man hit a woman, it was Assault on a Woman. 120 days in jail. And nobody went to jail.
If a man hit a man, or a woman hit a man, or a woman hit a woman, it was Simple Assault. 60 days in jail. And nobody went to jail.
A very, very, very big exception would happen if you could not make bail. If you can't make bail, you are sitting in jail waiting on your trial date. Sometimes people would sit in jail for a longer time than they could serve on the sentence. You might be sitting in jail waiting for your trial on Simple Assault (60 days) and three months could pass before your trial.
When I goggled "unwanted options" auto complete gives me "unplanned pregnancy options".
Google is such a kidder.
I hear "white priviledge" all over the place. Stephen A. Smith tried to explain this to you White people and you wouldn't listen. It's only what Attorney General Holder called for several years ago. He got punished for his efforts. Racism!
What we have is some people trying to protect their interests from an incident they couldn't control, the Ravens and the NFL. And Rice the perpetrator is now trying to limit the damage he has done to his career. Sportswriters, mostly liberal are doing what they always do which is to behave excessively. While I can't relate to Janay Rice, her motivation it seems is to limit the damage to herself.
And everybody got probation. It was always probation.
Well, I had just got out from the County Prison
Doing 90 days for non-support
Tryin to find me an executive position
but no matter how smooth I talked
They wouldn't listen to the fact
that I was a genius, the man said
"We got all that we can use"
Now I got them Steadily depressing,
low-down mind-messing Workin' at the Car Wash Blues.
Do you mean to tell me that the song is wrong? Or were things different in the 70s? :)
Hmm. Working at a Car Wash. Future job for Mr. Rice? Who needs a good running back? Kinda curious to see who will pick him up. Someone will, you know it.
Just got a post on my FB feed that the Ravens are having a Rice jersey return policy - and that details would follow.
Ouch. That's gotta hurt.
The Janay writing shows me that she does not understand the nature of being a public figure, or being connected with one.
Your videos are belong to us!
Rice should have been prosecuted, not diverted.
We don't need the mediaswine or the NFL as moral arbiters of our time. If his team wanted to impose sanctions, fine, but the NFL is full of miscreants.
AA: "But I assumed she was offered enough, in money and affection, that she gave him the cover that helped him as much as it did."
A fair point and probably true, but devoid of any self-respect on Janay's part.
I know at least one woman (and there are hopefully many) who in the same circumstances would have been out of that relationship before you could blink.
A far fewer number of women would not wipe him out financially in retribution.
This is the society we live in.
Could be that if Rice had a white GF and knocked her out - the liberals and progressive jews that run most US media would have never allowed such an elevator video to air.
It violates "The Narrative".
It's not possible to hear her voice. She is a woman. Women are always victims. She can't possibly be speaking her mind, or have forgiven her husband, or want to move past this situation.
We have to do what's right for her. We know best. And yes, we may destroy your life in the process, but shhhhhhh, it's for your own good.
We must destroy her life to save it.
>>Just got a post on my FB feed that the Ravens are having a Rice jersey return policy
Soon, they will be airbrushing him out of the team pictures as well.
Ray Rice's estimated net worth is $14 million. His last signing bonus was $15 million.
Either should be enough to keep her in ice packs and to dispel the notion that she is doing it for the money.
>>Maybe she should sue TMZ.
Oh, you know this is coming....
Doing 90 days for non-support
Oh yeah, I forgot another way you could go to jail. Contempt of court!
We didn't prosecute people for non-support, that was a civil thing. But judges would put people in jail all day if they thought their orders were being disobeyed.
I had a judge once order the bailiff to sniff all the people in the courtroom and find out who was stinking the place up with b.o. so the judge could put him in jail. You think I'm kidding.
Just heard on radio that this is a failure of the criminal justice system, that Ray could have been prosecuted solely on the basis of the video whether or not J. wanted it. Am wondering (1) if this is actually true, and (2) what are the chances of successful prosecution when the victim is a hostile witness for the prosecution?
And the only reason stinky didn't go to jail is because the bailiff refused to go around sniffing people.
That judge was an idiot. You'd be amazed how many judges are idiots. The overwhelming feeling I had as a citizen--and my advice to anybody who will take it--is stay the hell out of the judicial system. You don't want to get sucked into that nightmare.
Also, bring a book.
She has a valid point. It is her marriage and her life, and it is not the Grievance Board of the War on Women's to throw away.
The Professor's point is whether she said that freely or not. Which implies that if she did say it freely, then the NFL and its media circus should let the Rice family alone.
AA said
My point is, he had tremendous motivation to make a deal with her. He faced not just the loss of his career, but prison time, which he deserved. We know his stake. Hers isn't automatically adhered to his.
I think Birlels first two paragraphs at 10:59 am are a bit more realistic.
One reflexive, closed fist punch during a drunken argument deserves prison time? What if she had accidentally poked him in the eye and blinded him as she came at him? Prison for her?
What if the punch did not knock her out?
It would be interesting to hear the audio of the situation. Was it a tearful, heartfelt "Oh baby, I'm so sorry, what have I done, please forgive me" or Bitch I'm gonna get you in the room and beat your ass so your Mom can't recognize you, just like I did the last time"?
"She feels like a victim, a victim of everyone other than her husband, and she wants the people who see her as a victim of her husband to know that they are victimizing her."
It is possible that she has actually forgiven him. It is also possible that this incident, violent as it was, isn't characteristic of him.
Whether the possible is fact I have no idea. Would we be more satisfied or convinced if she went on "Meet The Press" and let Chuck Todd question her about why she "wrote" this. Her point is that she is being forced to relive something she had put behind her. Why is it assumed that she does not mean it?
Fact is, we don't know.
Regardless of any one individual circumstance, most of the time, domestic violence is a very serious matter. Hitting once and only once is the exception, not the rule. Escalation is the real pattern.
That's one of the reasons we have drastically reduced our tolerance for it, as we have learned that. The fact that Rice is famous means that what happens to him sends a message, has a real impact on how other people react when similar things happen to them.
If he is given a pass because Janay, for whatever reason, decides to accept being hit, that sends a message to the women out there who are in abusive relationships: It can be worth it, there are valid reasons to tolerate your man hitting you and knocking you unconscious, then dragging your unconscious body around like so much meat, without trying to get medical help for you.
That's a bad message to send. Most victims of domestic abuse are in fear already, rationalizing that their life would be worse without the man, sufficiently worse that it's worth being a punching bag.
Janay was undoubtedly happy to tag along with his fame and wealth. But with that fame comes some responsibility. Her actions impact the lives of others. That may be a sad fact of modern life, but it is a fact nonetheless. In return for the wealth and fame, she has to accept that her actions will be evaluated and judged and commented upon.
"At this point, WHAT DIFFERNCE DOES IT MAKE?" -- HRC, abuse defender
There is a danger, to women, of the punishment being made to severe. That increases the pressure to make a deal. We want women to come forward, without their feeling that by doing so that they will lose everything.
Will the indefinite suspension be a lifetime ban, or something less? How long is Ray Rice advised to wait before he asks to be rehabilitated? If he does go to jail, there's the old paid his debt to society argument.
He could offer to do a community service ad on domestic violence. That would be an interesting spot to write:
Ray, speaking to men, asking them not to commit violence against women. Janay, speaking to women, what would she say?
If this is the life she, an adult American woman, chooses for herself, is she not allowed to have it?
What choices are women allowed to make about their own bodies and relationships?
C'mon now. A brother can't let hisself be disrespected! I think I heard Lil Wayne say that.
In the famous words of Kanye, "I ain't sayin she a gold digger, but she ain't messin with no broke ....."
C'mon now!
Just heard on radio that this is a failure of the criminal justice system, that Ray could have been prosecuted solely on the basis of the video whether or not J. wanted it. Am wondering (1) if this is actually true
yes, happens all the time
and (2) what are the chances of successful prosecution when the victim is a hostile witness for the prosecution?
In this case? 100%. You've got video evidence. We can see the crime take place.
Haven't you ever known a co-dependent? Janay screams co-dependent to me.
They're in this together and she is a willing victim.
"In this case? 100%. You've got video evidence. We can see the crime take place."
I was wondering that myself--in that case, why would the prosecutor not go forward with this one? Seems like a slam dunk against a high profile abuser.
Janay may have many reasons for staying with this guy, but unless the real reason is "he saw the light after this incident, has reformed himself, and is now on a straight and narrow path and will never hit me again" then all the more reason to throw the book at him. This guy could easily father some children who would not have the means Janay had to get out of that abusive relationship.
I see the big hashtag today is women explaining why they stayed in abusive relationships. It's understandable that a victim can feel trapped or be mentally broken by the abuse, but the prevalence of that mentality--sticking with the abuser--just illustrates why domestic violence is such a difficult thing to eradicate.
In North Carolina, a police officer can only arrest you for a misdemeanor if he witnesses it. So if a cop happened to see this tape, he could arrest you. If not, there would be no arrest.
The other way a complaint is filed is when a victim comes forward and files a complaint.
why would the prosecutor not go forward with this one?
Was there an arrest? Did anybody file a complaint? If not, prosecutors never heard about it or saw the tape.
When I was in high school, I had a friend whose mother, when she got mad, regularly slapped and hit his father. And she was mad quite a lot. He pretty much just took it, until once he snapped and punched her and she fell down the stairs and broke her leg. He spent a couple of months in jail and they divorced a bit after he got out. I'm not saying their relationship was like the Rices', but I wouldn't be surprised, either.
"Was there an arrest? Did anybody file a complaint? If not, prosecutors never heard about it or saw the tape."
Rice was arrested, but accepted a deal to get counseling.
http://q.usatoday.com/2014/05/20/ray-rice-avoids-prosecution-in-assault-case/
Probably not unusual in cases where the victim isn't pushing for charges or even cooperating with the prosecution.
A longer look at the video shows that she threw the first punch; he then coldcocked her with one punch.
Two drunks fighting in an elevator. What is a prosecutor going to do with that in front of a jury?
He's willing to take a plea. She's not going to cooperate on the stand (since she married him after all this).
What are you going to do Mr. Prosecutor? Plea bargain, he's off to counseling. Next case.
"What are you going to do Mr. Prosecutor? Plea bargain, he's off to counseling. Next case."
Pretty much--I suspect if Janay was a man and not married to Rice, and didn't wish to prosecute, we'd hear very little about this. It's still a crime either way--in self-defense you don't have a license to go beyond what is necessary for defending yourself (if someone slaps you, you can't break their arms and legs). But Janay not pushing this is absolutely why this was pled out.
"Just got a post on my FB feed that the Ravens are having a Rice jersey return policy...."
My first thought was this reminded of a gun buy-back program.
Rice was arrested, but accepted a deal
90% of my cases were plea deals. It's very, very common to plead guilty.
Just heard on radio that this is a failure of the criminal justice system, that Ray could have been prosecuted solely on the basis of the video whether or not J. wanted it.
He was prosecuted. He was arrested, which means he had to bail out and get an attorney.
Prosecutors charged him with a felony under New Jersey law. You can see a discussion of assault charges in New Jersey here. A felony is a year in prison.
The toughest proof is that the punch caused "serious bodily injury." You would have to prove concussion, I would think, or some injury. And that would be difficult. There are spousal privileges, and doctor-patient confidentiality. So how do you prove concussion or some other serious bodily injury without this testimony?
Cops and prosecutors often over-charge so they have room for plea deals. I'm not sure the prosecutors could prove this felony. And I haven't even mentioned the self-defense aspects.
You can see how North Carolina divides up its assaults here. In my state, I'm pretty confident this would be a misdemeanor charge. And you can get jail time for a misdemeanor. Particularly if the press is watching! But as a general rule, everybody got probation.
So I am not at all surprised that he got probation in this case, or a bunch of counseling. That's routine. That's what everybody gets.
What mccullough said.
I think it's kind of weird how we now expect sanctions to be applied outside the judicial system. We want universities to prosecute rapes and we want football teams to adjudicate assaults. It's not only strange, I think it's a horrible idea.
Ann Althouse said...She might have separated herself from him, and she could have sued for her injuries and gotten money that way. But I assumed she was offered enough, in money and affection, that she gave him the cover that helped him as much as it did.
At this point, she is performing under whatever interest has developed for her.
Well, yes, that's true but I'm not sure what it shows. "She's acting in her own interest" is a given if you assume she's rational. "Her interests have changed based on a deal she struck (sorry!) with him" is probably a safe assumption, too, although we don't have much evidence. What does any of that prove, though?
As an experiement, try substituting "decided to abort a fetus" with "decided not to pursue charges for assault" in a similar situation and ask yourself if it would be ok or socially accceptable to second-guess the woman's choice.
I blame Janay for having a glass jaw.
"I think it's kind of weird how we now expect sanctions to be applied outside the judicial system. We want universities to prosecute rapes and we want football teams to adjudicate assaults. It's not only strange, I think it's a horrible idea."
It's an absolutely horrible idea, and not just because those institutions are not equipped or qualified to adjudicate such matters, but also because they have obvious conflicts of interest. Would a school not feel pressure to treat star athletes or legacies better than typical students, even more so than the civil authorities? Would the NFL not have an incentive to keep a player in the field, producing revenue for their team and the league?
I counsel Miss Janay with patience. A year is a hiccup in the lives of NFL athletes who are thugs, and Baby Ray will have a job with some franchise next year when a fresh menu of moral outrages have been thoroughly wrung out in the media, effectively burying his story in the ancient past. In the meantime ... isn't some reality TV show runner already holding on the line for those two love birds?
I know it's not really the substantive issue here, but is no one else going to take issue with our hostess declaring that the only meaning of the word "voice" is "the sound that you make by vibrating air using your mouth and throat"?
@Doug -- Rice is a bit old for that, unfortunately for them both.
they have obvious conflicts of interest
Definitely. I think the Ravens suspended him not because of justice, or concern about her. I think they suspended him because of bad publicity. She's right to call bullshit.
Also I think she has a strong point when she implies that the public is entertained by this, that the media is publishing this for eyeballs and scandal-value.
Is this somehow more reprehensible than the knockout game? Sucker punching a 75 year old man into a coma gets far less attention and outrage than this. They seem to me to be equally disgusting and criminal acts.
They both speak to excessive violence in the Black community, but we can only speak freely of one because it encompasses domestic violence.
Also I think she has a strong point when she implies that the public is entertained by this, that the media is publishing this for eyeballs and scandal-value.
Yes.
And everyone else will move on to the next scandal as soon as one crops up in a few days, and she'll have to continue living the life everyone else tried to "fix" for her.
who was on this story like white on rice this morning.
Racist.
"Would the NFL not have an incentive to keep a player in the field, producing revenue for their team and the league?"
You can look at it another way. The NFL (and the Ravens) have an interest in banning the player in order to protect their own reputations. I continue to believe that if the video had come out right away, Rice would have been suspended for more than two games, but the Ravens would not have terminated his contact, and the NFL would not be leaving lifetime suspension as a real threat. They would be talking about possible rehabilitation.
Both the Ravens and the NFL are embarrassed at being seen as likely participants in a cover up. They can best protect themselves by being as harsh with Rice as possible. If you take Janay's recent statement at face value, they are also damaging her, and she was the victim here.
This is now a face saving exercise by the NFL and the Ravens. At this point they do not give a damn about Ray Rice or his wife. They want to save their own asses, and going with the mob which wants to permanently destroy Rice's career is the easiest path for them.
Ray Rice needs a good lawyer. He also needs a good union. And a good good friend. With the possible exception of Janay, none of these have appeared.
then why should the NFL take action (unless there's some clause in the contract You cannot hit women ever).
There are conduct clauses in every sports contract. It provides leagues a broad basis for ridding themselves of PR problems.
So, after reading what Althouse wrote, I am left with the conclusion that feminists don't give a shit what the actual players have to say. The feminists, like Althouse, no what's really going on. Perhaps what is attributed to Mrs Rice is what she actually wrote. But by God, people like Althouse know better! or, Mrs Rice must be a gold digger.
Birkel's right, why is it appropriate for any of us to make judgement on her motivations? or their marriage, even their relationship?
If your intentions were to hurt us, embarrass us, make us feel alone, take all happiness away, you’ve succeeded on so many levels.
True love never having to say you're sore.
"why is it appropriate for any of us to make judgement on her motivations? or their marriage, even their relationship?"
1) because we don't want our kids to grow up idolizing a football star who beats women
2) because when he finally beats her to death, the #WhyIStayed crowd will revert to their earlier #BlameAllMen campaign and accuse us all of being complicit in Teh Patriarchy that caused this
3) because women need to start being accountable for the decisions they choose to make, if they expect to be taken seriously as equals
And this was hardly the first time. Witness his demeanor as he calmly drags her out of the elevator - business as usual for him.
Surprised Crack didn't weigh in on this. I bet he's hit a few women in his day. But, then probably got hit back even harder!
"3) because women need to start being accountable for the decisions they choose to make, if they expect to be taken seriously as equals"
From the video, it looks like she was hitting him as they got into the elevator. I read recently that 70% of domestic violence is women hitting men and the men don't fight back. It looks to me that Rice treated her as an equal and held her accountable for her actions.
My larger point is, you have no idea if the Rices have received counseling, if their relationship is better now, what her motivations are. Yet, the simple motivation of greed is thrown out here in the crudest possible way.
What a bunch of self-serving assholes.
"It looks to me that Rice treated her as an equal and held her accountable for her actions."
You might be interested in reading Legal Insurrection's view of the law on this.
Short version: Legally, men ARE allowed to use force in self-defense from women, HOWEVER that force must be proportional.
If she shoves you, you may not respond with lethal force. And being knocked unconscious qualifies as "grievous bodily injury" under the legal definition of deadly force.
http://legalinsurrection.com/2014/09/legal-analysis-was-ray-rices-punch-to-wifes-head-lawful-self-defense//#more
"Surprised Crack didn't weigh in on this."
Crack is hiding out. He can't risk the obvious question of "why are black men still treating their women as slaves?"
Valenti, Marcotte et al can clutch their pearls all they want, the women in america that are oppressed are black women. By black men. They treat them like dogs.
And that really messes up Crack's "but racism!" narrative.
I just saw the video for the first time. She physically attacked him and he probably responded reflexively.
For this his life should be ruined.
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा