Originally Posted by :
Now that the full 11-minute recording of Chiefs wide receiver Tyreek Hill and his now former fiancee, Crystal Espinal, talking about violence in their relationship has been aired, many fans are saying wow, this changes everything.
It does? That Hill, who didn’t know Espinal was taping him, denies ever hitting her or their son in what he thought was a private conversation is neither surprising nor exculpatory.
Abusers typically tell not only the police but friends, family, therapists, priests and even themselves they’ve never done anything wrong.
And if anything, the fact that Hill now says he didn’t hit punch or choke Espinal in 2014 makes him look worse rather than better. He pleaded guilty to those charges, publicly apologized, went through extensive therapy and declared himself reformed after probation. If he’s now back to saying that none of this ever happened, that’s not just a lie but a worrying one.
“I didn’t touch you in 2014,” he says on the tape. “And put that on everything I love, bro. That’s the real truth.”
That Espinal isn’t screaming at him that no, it’s not the truth, real or otherwise, is taken by some supporters as proof that he is innocent.
But why a woman who has been injured by him before and he’s threatening to hurt again might not do that should be obvious.
When she instead repeatedly asks him where her bruises came from if he never hit her, he doesn’t answer because there isn’t an answer that he likes well enough to repeat.
On Thursday, Espinal filed a petition in Johnson County seeking a paternity test for their newborn twins. She has full custody of them — they live with her — and she is asking for child support and only supervised visits for Hill. Her lawyer in the matter is legal counsel for SAFEHOME, a Johnson County group that supports survivors of domestic violence.
The NFL, meanwhile, seems ready to let Hill off with a brief suspension because the legal case against him isn’t going anywhere, but these things are still true:
Hill’s son was removed from his home after a child abuse investigation was launched. The Johnson County district attorney said the 3-year-old child had been hurt, but he didn’t have enough proof to prosecute.
On the tape, we heard Hill threaten the mother of his children with physical violence: “You need to be scared of me, too, dumb bitch.” He berates and belittles, calls her “bro” and “bitch” and of course, claims she ruined his life.
Denial of all wrongdoing is so standard in abuse cases that just a look at Thursday’s Star provides other examples, including that of Scott Hacker, the now former Parkville police officer charged with domestic violence after allegedly shooting his gun inside his home, throwing the woman who called 911 onto the couch, grabbing her by the throat and blaming her for “ending his career” by calling for help. Both before and after the cops arrived, he said he hadn’t shot the gun or touched her. But oops: A security camera in the living room apparently recorded the assault.
What Espinal was trying to get was the audio equivalent of that video.
If the NFL lets Hill back on the field this season, it will send the message that making threats and showing you’ve learned nothing from probation is no real problem, as long as you can run fast enough. The help he needs is not more denial, but just the opposite.
To the rest of you who are intent on seeing Hill as the victim, KCTV as a villain for not immediately releasing the full tape, and Espinal as a “manipulator” for wanting evidence to back her up in court, we could suggest some reading on the well-researched subject of abuse. But why, when you seem to prefer not to know?
Originally Posted by Halfcan:
I for one am looking forward to the Media Covering Reek every Sunday once the season starts. We will get gems like this,
"Yes, Reek scored the winning TD on a 60-yard bomb by Mahomes, but several female fans in the front row felt very, very uncomfortable with a former abuser being so close." Brooke Pryor KC Star
"Hill, who plead guilty to beating and choking his pregnant girlfriend in 2014, scored a 90 yard TD on a kickoff, 1 rushing TD on a jet sweep and another on a pass from Mahomes where he beat double coverage. Yes, he had a great day on the field, but that does not change anything for his victim. The scars remain." Bob Fesco
"Hill set the Chief record for yardage and TD's by a receiver today, but that does not expunge his history of violence towards women." Fatlock
"Reek broke the record for most yards by a Chief's receiver in a single game- but that does not lift all the doubts that he abused his son and broke his arm why terrorizing the babies mother." Liberal **** TBD
"Hill said after the game today, that defenses should worry how great the Chief's offense is--this is a horrific reminder of his chilling threats to his ex-girlfriend- "Bitch, you should be scared of me too." Hopefully, the NFL will take these new threats seriously and give Hill the suspension he deserves." TV 5
"Hill outclassed everyone on the field with his talent by helping the Chief's win the Superbowl, but that will never change the fact he is an abuser and could beat and choke another pregnant woman at any moment. Chief's would be wise to cut him before he repeats the murder / parking lot suicide of a past Chief's player." Jeff Rosen KC Star
That post, really is, though, why accountability needs to be served.
NOBODY in the media learned a fucking thing from the Kietzman sacrifice.
Kietzman was not fired for one comment. The guy spent MONTHS slandering Tyreek Hill based on a bunch of bullshit some criminals cooked up.
Because of that, when he stepped over the line, the social outrage was a death blow.
The Star and KCTV have doubled down in the wake of nothing but positive news for Tyreek Hill and it can go no further. They need to learn their lesson. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Hammock Parties:
we just have to wait for someone to say "hill beat the DB like he beats women" and another journalist is getting fired
brandon kiley: "i've been very uncomfortable with kc star's editorial board thoughts...and also with the way some others have responded to those thoughts"
Originally Posted by :
"people are very mad at KCTV and now want everybody fired...we can't just always call for people's jobs if they say something that we disagree with."
"KCTV did a poor job...and the interview that their director did on the locker room show was not good. that doesn't mean they should be fired. i disagree with the way the KC Star editorial board handled this situation...that doesn't mean everybody should be fired, or that i want people to stop subscribing to the kansas city star."
"so we gotta stop with the calling for jobs everytime we disagree with someone. if somebody does something reprehensible, they should lose their job. what the star did is what an editorial board is for."
Precisely why SHOULDN'T people use their dollar vote to show their disgust with not only the Stars poor performance but their decision to double down on same?
Kiley is flat fucking wrong. There's just no other way to put it. [Reply]
People should do whatever the fuck they wanna do as long as they aren't breaking the law.
If Barry Peraino calls the President of the Star every goddamn day demanding Rosen get fired I'll goddamn pay his telephone bill.
NOTHING anyone does in protest of this bullshit is going to come close to what the Star and KCTV5 have done with their platforms. They have POWER. INFLUENCE. And they ABUSED IT.
AND THEY FORGOT WHO RUNS THIS FUCKING TOWN. [Reply]
I like Kiley just fine, but he’s dead wrong here for certain.
We can’t pass along what the Star and KCTV5 has done as normal. This isn’t just something we disagree on. This is each company essentially performing defamation to a man — not just any man of course, but one who could very likely play a major role in Kansas City’s first SB in 50 years.
And they tried to fry the guy while not knowing the full story and/or withholding pertinent information for the public. This is not normal. These are fireable, despicable acts, IMHO. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Hammock Parties: brandon kiley:
So he thinks it's unacceptable to call for someone to be fired from their job because we disagree with them calling for a person to be fired from their job?
Got it. I appreciate his clarification that we're less important than his friends are. [Reply]
