Major league shortstop Jose Reyes was charged with a "domestic incident" last fall. After all the evidence or, more specifically, lack thereof, was examined -- the PROSECUTORS moved to dismiss the charge. Yet it is widely speculated Reyes might still get slapped with a 30 suspension by the league.
This is not only wrong -- it's outrageous. One of the fundamental tenets of the American legal system has always been a "defendant" is innocent until proven guilty. In Reyes' case, he wasn't even tried, much less convicted of anything. Hence, 2+2 = 4 logic dictates he remains innocent.
So how could the Commissioner and his merry band of kangaroo court stooges justify punishing an innocent man? It shouldn't matter what they THINK might have happened -- as in he got arrested so he must be guilty of SOMETHING -- the only relevant point is they are substituting their judgment for that of the legal system, which was specifically designed by our forefathers to deal with such matters.
If that example isn't preposterous enough, consider pitcher Aroldis Chapman's "case". He was vaguely implicated (see "person of interest") in a similar scenario. Chapman quickly found himself slapped with the same 30 game suspension by the baseball overlords. The problem? He was never even CHARGED!!! That would beg the obvious question...... What kind of tyrannical sports hierarchy allows for speculation alone to be sufficient cause to hand down punishment as they see fit? It's insane. Is this America or some third-world totalitarian regime?
We all remember the big snafu over steroids and human growth hormone that enveloped baseball a few years back. Some guys were proven to be "dirty" and punished accordingly. Fair enough. But consider the two main "headliners" -- as in Barry Bonds and Roger Clemens. A swarm of investigators spent countless millions of taxpayer dollars trying to nail these guys. The "arm-chair" prosecutors sitting at home in the "court of public opinion" were almost unanimous in their verdict. Guilty. The allegations were everywhere. The various media couldn't wait to buy into it hook, line, and ratings. But then a very strange thing happened. Neither was ever convicted of ANY "performance enhancing drug" charge. After all of THAT, Bonds and Clemens still remain innocent.
But few are willing to face the obvious. Prosecutors never, EVER, apologize when they get it wrong. It's not in their DNA to do so. And the media is no better. It's certainly no secret they move from one witch hunt to the next while peddling their sometimes snake oil. They are quick to sensationalize, even fabricate, to drop the hammer of guilt on their target of the day. Whatever sells, and conscience/ethics be damned. The truly sad thing is -- they know the gullible public will eat it up, because it's what they WANT to believe as well. Yet oftentimes, such allegations turn out to have no basis in truth.
Baseball writers to this day continue to deny Bonds and Clemens their more than rightful places in the Hall of Fame. This is solely attributable to them continuing to cling to their original knee-jerk reactions when allegations of wrong-doing first surfaced years ago. Guy was accused? Must be guilty. Never mind juries that heard all the evidence disagreed and found them to be innocent. Such actions on the part of writers not only smack of "yellow journalism", but even cowardice. Properly raised children will dutifully admit culpability when they're caught saying or doing something wrong. And it takes a man or a woman to fess up when their wrongful words or actions as an adult are similarly exposed. The only way the media ever "retracts" anything is when they're staring down the gun of a lawsuit they know they will probably lose. Begrudgingly, they might print a small blurb on Page 9 as a "correction". Or run a short ad in the wee hours of the morning when they know the viewing audience is at a minimum. But make no mistake. They have no sense of fair play, let alone the collective conscience of righteous people. It's not in their DNA either.
Tom Brady got banged over "Deflategate". The NFL commissioned a persecutor, one Ted Wells, to find something, ANYTHING, to show Brady's complicity. In the end, after millions more were spent, Wells came back with a tome worthy of a James Michener novel. His conclusion? It was "more likely than not" that Brady had something to do with it. Maybe. If it even happened in the first place. Bang went the Commissioner. Four game suspension. No concrete proof, mind you, not even a "preponderance of the evidence" -- except in Wells' mind. But the kangaroo court swiftly ruled again. Have I mentioned outrageous?
It took a federal court judge to finally see through what was a flimsy transparent case to begin with and set aside such an arbitrary punishment of a man who might very well have been totally innocent all along. No proof means no conviction, which means you can't bang somebody just because you THINK he may have done something wrong.
Certainly, many people will disagree with the hypotheses set forward above. The cops are always right, wars are always justified, and the media would never mislead the public for their own personal gain. If someone is accused of a crime -- they must be guilty. Excuse me if I strongly disagree.
These are the same folks that never stop to consider what it would be like if it happened to THEM.
Anybody can accuse anybody else of anything, but it doesn't mean they committed a crime. The Duke lacrosse sexual assault scandal several years back is a shining example of how wrong the "system" can be at times. Some black female dancer accused the white team of committing all manner of sexual atrocities on her at a party. People marched in the streets demanding justice. The usual race baiters were out in force preaching from their self-anointed pulpits. Reporters who should have known better jumped on the bandwagon and wrote scathing articles denouncing the culture of the whole university as being elitist, male dominant, and even condoning white supremacy. Those poor boys were fed through the meat grinder every which way, their reputations destroyed until finally -- FINALLY -- the truth came out through proof-positive DNA evidence. The district attorney himself was found to have concealed evidence that would clear the boys, and subsequently disbarred. That wasn't good enough. He should have been prosecuted and thrown in the same prison he was attempting to put those innocent kids in. HE was guilty, not them. Yon dancer was found to have several samples of DNA in or about her nether regions, but none matched any of the lacrosse players. It was all a fantastic lie, which she finally copped to. The "defendants" were innocent all along. But how do you unring THAT bell? She faded into oblivion and incredibly was never held accountable for the false havoc she had wrought on others. SHE was guilty -- not them. The preachers and reporters quickly moved on to their next "story". THEY were guilty -- not them. The always innocent boys will forever remain stigmatized in the public eye by ignorant people, and how did they explain that on their resumes when applying for a job? The unfairness was outrageous.
So the next time you read or hear of some Commissioner, prosecutor, or bimbo making allegations of "criminal" behavior -- along with the media jumping on the bandwagon and demanding "justice" -- here's a thought ------
How about holding off on dropping the guilty gavel until it plays out to the end? Doing so prematurely is exactly the lemming behavior that the tyrants and persecutors continue to rely on.
While it's easy to judge others blindly, how would you feel if YOU were the innocent one snatched up and thrown into such a system and fed to the wolves?
And don't kid yourself. It can happen. It does all the time all over the country -- most of which are injustices we never hear about. But to those people -- it's very real. Not right by any means -- but definitely real.......