The NFL Fumbles the Ball

[doubtingt]

I actually think that Rice's reaction after the punch is more frightening and damning than the punch itself.

He does not react with any empathy, concern, or regret. He isn't even surprised that he knocked her out, and responds like you might expect a chilling sociopath to respond.
IOW, there is no way this was a one time thing where he just "snapped" for a second and for the first time. IF that were true, he would react as though someone else had just knocked her out and been protective, calling for help, and trying to revive her and determine her injuries, rather than what he did which was drag her like she was a cow carcass.

That's why the reaction to this new video is somewhat absurd. The original video already showed his callous disregard for his injured fiancee, and he admitted to hitting her and knocking her out. Hell, even if she had accidentally fallen in the elevator, his response in that original video would have revealed a dangerously unempathic character. I understand that seeing violence is more emotionally impactful than hearing about it. However, the NFL and everyone else's response to how Rice should be dealt with should have been based upon reason and the facts of the situation, not just a gut emotional response. Apparently, Rice described the incident that is seen in the current video rather accurately to the NFL and the Ravens, yet the NFL did next to nothing and the Ravens stood firmly behind him. So that combined with the apparent fact that they made no sincere effort to get this video, strongly suggests that their current reactions are mostly PR and they went out their way to find excuses not to do what was right until the video made that impossible.

BTW, had the other person been a close male friend of the same build as his fiancee, I think most people would still think his actions unwarranted and reasonable people (a small % of the population) would still think it criminal assault. However, the reactions would be far far tamer than it is now. OTOH, I think if we don't just focus on the punch but give more attention to what his disturbing lack of reaction reveals, then gender would matter somewhat less, because while the gender bias in who can punch whom is great, gender would seem to matter less in terms of showing zero concern for a severe injury you just caused someone you supposedly love.

 

[doubtingt]

She didn't attack him. She was backed up against the wall and he was leaning in yelling at her. She put up her forearm to get him to back off, and he cold cocked her in the face, knocking her backward. Then he stepped back and she walked toward him without any raised fists, then he punched her again with enough force to drop her to the ground.

She clearly hit him outside the elevator, and she clearly was aggressively moving toward him when he dropped her. There are also reports the full video shows her spitting in his face multiple times.

I am not here to defend the guy's actions, but there is a very strong case to be made she is the initiator of the violence.

No, none of her "hits" qualify even as "hits" let alone "violence", not because she is too weak to cause harm but because it is clear they were not attempts to inflict pain or to put any force in it. She waived her hand towards his chest with all the force that parents smack their kids hand when touching something they shouldn't.
Also, she only came towards him after he had already punched her in the face the first time.
The idea that she initiated it is as absurd saying that your best friend "initiated the violence" if he gives you a slight shove for calling him wuss, then you send him flying with a punch to the face. It was not just a difference is damage done due to strength, but a complete qualitative difference in the psychological nature of their respective actions. Beyond the most basic physics level that part of her body moved toward part of his body, there was nothing similar about their respective "hits".

 

[Starr]

She didn't attack him. She was backed up against the wall and he was leaning in yelling at her. She put up her forearm to get him to back off, and he cold cocked her in the face, knocking her backward. Then he stepped back and she walked toward him without any raised fists, then he punched her again with enough force to drop her to the ground.

She clearly hit him outside the elevator, and she clearly was aggressively moving toward him when he dropped her. There are also reports the full video shows her spitting in his face multiple times.

I am not here to defend the guy's actions, but there is a very strong case to be made she is the initiator of the violence.

While I do agree that this seemed to be at best a mutually abusive relationship, that doesn't excuse his behavior. There is a reason boys are taught it is not OK to hit girls, and it isn't sexism, any more than it is sexism that men can't have babies. It is simply a fact of our biological makeup that men are generally significantly stronger than women (and football players would be many times stronger still), and physical aggression that we might find acceptable toward another man, would be unacceptable when directed at a woman. That doesn't make it OK for women to attack men, but realistically, without a weapon, the threat she could pose was comparable to a pre-pubecent boy attacking you, while the threat he could pose to her is pretty obvious. I don't like people excusing her behavior, but what I see much more often (particularly on Reddit), is people excusing his behavior because of her behavior. Her behavior (from what little evidence we have) seems bad, but his was clearly much worse.

 

[hurtinbuckaroo]

I am not sure that what Ray Rice did has any bearing on his job; in fact, he may have a good case for unlawful termination. Employment law (and union contracts) have long recognized that conviction of certain crimes do raise legitimate employment issues (e.g. if a bank hires a teller and he/she is found out to have been convicted of embezzling at another job, it is lawful to terminate the teller). But Rice's momentary domestic abuse is irrelevant to his observable and verifiable job conduct as a running back. Much of this will hinge on Maryland employment law, union agreements, and the terms in his contract.

And the terms of his contract, as well as the union agreements, allow the team and/or the league to suspend or terminate him for behavior unrelated to the performance of his job on the field. The relevant part of his job in this case is being part of the NFL "brand". He doesn't get paid $8 million/year because he can carry a football, he gets paid because the NFL has convinced tens of millions of people to watch him do it, and has convinced advertisers to spend huge amounts of cash for the privilege of reaching those people. I cannot be certain that Maryland law would offer him any protection, but I suspect not. I don't think a judge would waste five seconds on this.

As I write this, the NFL is arranging for everyone with a Ray Rice jersey to trade it in for something less objectionable (no, not recycled Aaron Hernandez jerseys ).

 

[dismal]

She clearly hit him outside the elevator, and she clearly was aggressively moving toward him when he dropped her. There are also reports the full video shows her spitting in his face multiple times.

I am not here to defend the guy's actions, but there is a very strong case to be made she is the initiator of the violence.

No, none of her "hits" qualify even as "hits" let alone "violence"

It's hard to take you seriously after this.

 

[dismal]

She clearly hit him outside the elevator, and she clearly was aggressively moving toward him when he dropped her. There are also reports the full video shows her spitting in his face multiple times.

I am not here to defend the guy's actions, but there is a very strong case to be made she is the initiator of the violence.

While I do agree that this seemed to be at best a mutually abusive relationship, that doesn't excuse his behavior. There is a reason boys are taught it is not OK to hit girls, and it isn't sexism, any more than it is sexism that men can't have babies. It is simply a fact of our biological makeup that men are generally significantly stronger than women (and football players would be many times stronger still), and physical aggression that we might find acceptable toward another man, would be unacceptable when directed at a woman. That doesn't make it OK for women to attack men, but realistically, without a weapon, the threat she could pose was comparable to a pre-pubecent boy attacking you, while the threat he could pose to her is pretty obvious. I don't like people excusing her behavior, but what I see much more often (particularly on Reddit), is people excusing his behavior because of her behavior. Her behavior (from what little evidence we have) seems bad, but his was clearly much worse.

A) I didn't say what he did was OK
B) Girls I would hope are taught not to hit boys too. Add this to the list of reasons why they shouldn't.

 

[Tom Sawyer]

A) I didn't say what he did was OK
B) Girls I would hope are taught not to hit boys too. Add this to the list of reasons why they shouldn't.

Not just girls. Pretty much everyone should avoid getting into physical fights with NFL running backs. They are a lot stronger and tougher than you. If you ever find yourself in a situation where you have to come to the decision "I am going to hit Ray Rice in the face", you have made a bad decision. You will lose that fight.

 

[ZiprHead]

How 'bout them Lions though. WooT!

 

[doubtingt]

No, none of her "hits" qualify even as "hits" let alone "violence"

It's hard to take you seriously after this.

It's hard to take you seriously, after you equate all forms of attempted contact with "violence".

Imagine you and I are friends and I catch you looking at my girlfriend, and I nudge you with my elbow to say "Hey, stop oogling my lady".
Would you call that "violence"? If you reacted by saying "Hey, don't hit me!", most onlookers would laugh and say "Come on! He didn't "hit" you!", because while in a technical sense of physics it might have properties of a "hit", it is qualitatively different than what reasonable people mean by one person hitting another in the context in which knockout level violence is occurring.

 

[doubtingt]

How 'bout them Lions though. WooT!

Yeah, they look great, and surprisingly Suh didn't commit any violent assault this week.

 

[Nexus]

I am not sure that what Ray Rice did has any bearing on his job; in fact, he may have a good case for unlawful termination.

Ray Rice's job is to entertain. Its not actually to run, catch and throw a ball. So any behavior that affects his PR and hence the entertaining value of him and his employer does matter whether or not his running, catching, throwing is affected.

 

[ZiprHead]

How 'bout them Lions though. WooT!

Yeah, they look great, and surprisingly Suh didn't commit any violent assault this week.

Yeah, they really got to get a handle on those penalties. Too bad Rice didn't learn sooner too.

 

[doubtingt]

I am not sure that what Ray Rice did has any bearing on his job; in fact, he may have a good case for unlawful termination.

Ray Rice's job is to entertain. Its not actually to run, catch and throw a ball. So any behavior that affects his PR and hence the entertaining value of him and his employer does matter whether or not his running, catching, throwing is affected.

True. Of course the irony is that his job is to entertain by engaging in physical aggression, and the fact that he has been selected for and reinforced for this aggression his whole life, likely made him much more likely to do what he is being fired for, namely to react with physical violence during a conflict with his wife.

 

[laughing dog]

It is wrong for the law to place that burden of fine judgment on the party that did not initiate the violence.

So, if someone slaps you on the face, it is okay to pummel you to death? Ray Rice was much bigger and stronger than his fiance. His reaction was disproportionate to whatever you and some others feel initiated the violence.

I really find it disturbing there are people who are implicitly defending Rice's reactions with this "she started it" claim.

 

[Jayjay]

I actually think that Rice's reaction after the punch is more frightening and damning than the punch itself.

He does not react with any empathy, concern, or regret. He isn't even surprised that he knocked her out, and responds like you might expect a chilling sociopath to respond.

In his own words: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WJBkG_kyqxI&t=1m50s

"Sometimes in life you will fail, you know, but I won't call myself a failure. Failure is not getting knocked down, failure is not getting back up."

That's a classic.

I can kind of understand the wife's reaction, after all, getting punched once versus being a footballers wife and set for life. But now that he's suspended, what are they going to do? He's probably going to have a grudge towards his wife for "making him punch her" and now that they migth be out of public limelight he might do it again. A person who instinctively reacts with violence even towards his girlfriend/wife, has some deep issues that are goign to resurface sooner or later. I think that we haven't heard the last of Ray Rice and his fists of fury.

 

[dismal]

It's hard to take you seriously after this.

It's hard to take you seriously, after you equate all forms of attempted contact with "violence".

Imagine you and I are friends and I catch you looking at my girlfriend, and I nudge you with my elbow to say "Hey, stop oogling my lady".
Would you call that "violence"? If you reacted by saying "Hey, don't hit me!", most onlookers would laugh and say "Come on! He didn't "hit" you!", because while in a technical sense of physics it might have properties of a "hit", it is qualitatively different than what reasonable people mean by one person hitting another in the context in which knockout level violence is occurring.

*eye roll*

I didn't "equate all forms of attempted contact with violence". I equated her punching him and spitting in his face with violence.

 

[doubtingt]

It's hard to take you seriously, after you equate all forms of attempted contact with "violence".

Imagine you and I are friends and I catch you looking at my girlfriend, and I nudge you with my elbow to say "Hey, stop oogling my lady".
Would you call that "violence"? If you reacted by saying "Hey, don't hit me!", most onlookers would laugh and say "Come on! He didn't "hit" you!", because while in a technical sense of physics it might have properties of a "hit", it is qualitatively different than what reasonable people mean by one person hitting another in the context in which knockout level violence is occurring.

*eye roll*

I didn't "equate all forms of attempted contact with violence". I equated her punching him and spitting in his face with violence.

She did not punch him by any sane definition of the term.

 

[doubtingt]

In his own words: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WJBkG_kyqxI&t=1m50s

I was referring to his real and honest reaction in the moment shown on video when he rather casually dragged her body into the hall without appearing at all surprised or distressed by the result of his actions or concerned for her safety. His rehearsed and coached rationalizations in later press conferences don't do anything to reduce the suggestion of criminal pathology suggested by his reactions in the video.

 

[RavenSky]

Let me see if I am understanding what I am reading here... Please tell me that I am misunderstanding...

His fiancé deserved to be punched in the face so hard she was knocked out cold because

1. Her voice is "usually sharp and scathing... and it provoked him"
2. She allegedly hit him first... the original claim was that she hit him inside the elevator but now that we have video evidence that she didn't the claim has shifted to before they entered the elevator
3. She's a gold-digger

Have I missed any of the reasons listed in the last couple of days as to why she deserved to be punched in the face so hard she was knocked out cold?

Or have I missed (& please tell me this is the case) the irony/sarcasm tags in each of those posts.

The really scary part is that it wasn't Derec who said any of the above.

Couple of technical comments.
She did hit him first outside of elevator and just before she was knocked out she clearly attacked him.
As for "punched in the face so hard she was knocked out cold" you don't need to hit hard to knock out untrained person, very mild but "lucky" punch is all you need. And frankly I can't say he actually had intent to hit her.
What really looks bad on him is how unceremonious he behaved afterwards.
Did she deserve it? Of course she did not, but the way it looks she sure tried to provoke what happened.

It appears that they were already arguing and that she may have tried to slap him several feet away from the elevator, though it is not as clear whether she actually made contact. Either way, I'm not excusing it. He then followed her into the elevator, cornered her and appears to hit her, and she appears to shove him back. Again, not excusing either of them for getting physical. She then moves towards him. She does not "attack" him as you characterized it, and we do not know what, if anything, she intended to do. Apparently, just having a "sharp and scathing tone" is enough because that is when he punched her in the face with more than enough force to literally knock her off her feet. That was not any sort of "mild but lucky punch" and I'm not sure how anyone who has seen the video can suggest that he didn't intend to punch her in the face. He very clearly punched her face and knocked her out.

 

[RavenSky]

1. She was charged with a misdemeanor assault. Therefore, is she completely innocent in the situation?

charges against her were dropped, so yes

2. She admits some portion of blame. Is it your belief that she is lying or that she is suffering from Stockholm Syndrome?

She's acting like a typical battered woman in that regard. I don't know that she has a history of being abused by Ray Rice, and I am not suggesting that she has been. But the mere fact of her taking blame for what he did is classic battered-woman syndrome. So is staying with him afterward.

“First, I want to say thank you to all of those who have supported us throughout this situation. I do deeply regret the role that I played in the incident that night, but I can say that I am happy that we continue to work through it together, and we are continuing to strengthen our relationship and our marriage and do what we have to do for not only ourselves collectively, but individually, and working on being better parents for Rayven and continue to be good role models for the community like we were doing before this. I love Ray, and I know that he will continue to prove himself to not only you all, but [to] the community, and I know he will gain your respect back in due time. So thank you.”

I am willing to give someone a second chance after giving them an appropriate penalty for the first offense. I tend to be of the mindset to go somewhat lenient on the first offense (depending on the severity of the offense) and really crack down hard on the second offense, especially when the victim is herself willing to forgive and advocating for lenience. Such incidents, after the first offence, can really be a wake-up call for those individuals who committed the offense to seek help. While the OP was appropriate in pointing out how insane it was for the penalty for pot-smoking to be more severe than domestic violence, I'm not sure ending one's career is necessarily appropriate for this one incident. A second incident, sure. Several game suspension, sure. A few months in jail, sure. But how much more is appropriate after the first offense, given that the victim decided to marry him and is pleading for lenience, understanding and forgiveness? Should the victim's wishes play no part in the matter?

I don't actually disagree with you here. I personally think that the Ravens and the NFL have now over-reacted as much as they under-reacted initially. They created a public relations disaster for themselves with their minimizing the severity initially, and now Ray Rice (& his wife) are the scapegoats.

What I object to is any claim, and there have been many, that she is in any way whatsoever deserving of or responsible for that punch... and his callous behavior while she was still out cold.