If AB had recording of her admitting to lying about it so she could sue him, his dumbass would've already made a video with the recording and uploaded it. [Reply]
My understanding is that neither the league, nor the #Patriots, knew about the potential lawsuit for WR Antonio Brown before he signed in New England. Asked about that today, Bill Belichick said: “I’m not going to be expanding on the statements that have already been given.”
Originally Posted by CasselGotPeedOn:
If AB had recording of her admitting to lying about it so she could sue him, his dumbass would've already made a video with the recording and uploaded it.
This is one of the truest statements I have seen on this board! [Reply]
Originally Posted by MAHOMO 4 LIFE!:
Brown will play, I mean there starting safety is federally charged with Cocaine possession and he still played. The Patriot Way is doing whatever you can to win
errr...bit different. There is a criminal investigation there, based on the cocaine found in the player's property (not on or with the player). That is constructive possession, not actual possession. Chung may be able to successfully argue that it was there without his knowledge. I dont' know that for certain, of course, but it is very possible.
His arraignment or whatever is in November. Nothing will happen until then.
More importantly, the NFL has a detailed and complex program/rules around PEDs and other banned substances. It is far more difficult for the Commish to punish someone at his whim for things involving that kind of stuff.
The AB situation is far more amorphous and easily within "conduct detrimental", so he has more leeway to do as he likes pending further developments. [Reply]
Drew Rosenhaus on @SportsCenter re: Antonio Brown: "I wouldn't be doing this interview if I didn't believe Antonio. These allegations are false. He denies everyone of them. I'm very confident his legal team has facts that will prove this."
Originally Posted by Amnorix:
errr...bit different. There is a criminal investigation there, based on the cocaine found in the player's property (not on or with the player). That is constructive possession, not actual possession. Chung may be able to successfully argue that it was there without his knowledge. I dont' know that for certain, of course, but it is very possible.
His arraignment or whatever is in November. Nothing will happen until then.
More importantly, the NFL has a detailed and complex program/rules around PEDs and other banned substances. It is far more difficult for the Commish to punish someone at his whim for things involving that kind of stuff.
The AB situation is far more amorphous and easily within "conduct detrimental", so he has more leeway to do as he likes pending further developments.
Also, I don’t recall Chung ever really being in the news much before this. Brown can’t seem to stay out of it.
I think we would all agree that rape is much worse than possession of a drug. Not saying Brown is guilty, but his allegation is far worse. [Reply]
Originally Posted by :
The wide receiver is also facing claims of rape from a personal trainer, which he says are completely false. In fact, he says that they are just simple attempts at extortion, per private DMs that have surfaced on Twitter.
Saturday morning, a series of messages between Brown and an unnamed individual appeared on Twitter in which the mysterious figure says that she has audio from the trainer that would help Brown prove his innocence. During the long exchange, the Raiders wide receiver says that he will pay for this information in cash and asks for it to be emailed to him for his records.
However, the proof is allegedly locked up and safe at another location.
While this interaction could be on the "up and up," there are some factors that make it appear to be slightly shady. For example, Brown is shown asking for the identity of this mysterious lady during the conversation, but she will only say that her name is Janet. Additionally, he asks to video chat, but she declines due to being in a car with other people.
Finally, Janet also alludes to the Oakland Raiders having knowledge of these rape claims and wanting to leak the information to the world. According to the conversation, a security guard could be the source of potential rumors.
So if that story already exists three days before the suit is filed, and there's no validity to the suit, then why go ahead sue?
I mean shit, that could be real, or AB could have asked somebody to text him and given them a script. Who the **** knows. [Reply]
Originally Posted by smithandrew051:
If that’s accurate, why would she go through this?
Was she not aware of the audio? Did the other girl record her without her knowledge? Obviously, that would still destroy her case.
I would think Brown would’ve just told her that he has the audio and she wouldn’t even pursue a lawsuit. He seems like enough of a loud mouth. It would be better for him if this never went public at all.
I think he told her in those e-mails that were leaked.
I think because those were kinda hard to read. Something about ABs babymama tricking her to give evidence. [Reply]
