Mason Rudolph Threatens Myles Garrett With Legal Action

[Vic Mackey 46919]

The saga between the two is not over. Myles doubled down on the racial accusation with his interview with ESPN after being reinstated by the NFL. Mason and his attorney is threatening legal action and saying it is 100% false.

Myles Garrett on ESPN:

Rudolph's attorney

Rudolph's response

 

[Walden Ponderer 12639]

I'm shocked! Shocked! That an aggy would lie his ass off.

 

(Narrator: he was not really shocked.)

[Fastbreak 3948]

Why was this needed? He is already cleared.

 

"Sometimes crazy things happen in the heat of battle. I'm sorry I let it get that far. I've paid my dies and now I will try to get better,"

End of story

[closetohumping 17380]

Not really a mason fan but I hope he sues the fuck out of that dumbass

[Deej 76510]

aggy never lies, cheats, or steals...until they do, which is always 

[StruggleBus 3922]

The first thing I thought when I saw that segment with Garrett is that Rudolph should sue the fucking shit out him. 

 

[DougO 5239]

Sports Center interviewer was definitely rooting for it to go there as well.

[JFKFC 4878]

When it comes to lawyerings, all I know is Bird Law, so I appeal to the gentle readers of Surly. Can Garrett be legally compelled to take a polygraph examination as part of a civil suit?

[ButtFumble 5158]

1 hour ago, JFKFC said:

When it comes to lawyerings, all I know is Bird Law, so I appeal to the gentle readers of Surly. Can Garrett be legally compelled to take a polygraph examination as part of a civil suit?

not admissible on court

really only a few things can happen

1. he gets threatened with real legal action and capitulates to what is demanded of him (probably a full retraction, half assed apology, and legal cost to date) and done is done

2. he gets drug into court, gets on the stand and straight lies and the case goes nowhere

3. he goes to court and tries some type of "well that is what I think I heard in my head and SOMEONE said something like that" bullshit and then the case is decided one way or another

4. he is stupid enough to go to court and say he actually did not hear that and then tries some bullshit like "but I felt that is what he wanted to say or would have said if I did not get physically violent with him to stop it" and again the case is settled one way or another

5. he goes to court with the shit bag lawyers that pile of weird shit ellen musk used and admits he did not say it, but then says that he can say whatever the fuck he wants nannaie nannaie boo boo so sue me (and lose) and he ends up paying nothing but his own legal cost

6. I suppose the NFL could wise up and possibly get involved and do one of their own half assed investigations and decide of something was said or not and then try and force a lasting resolution before it goes to court (probably too late for that now since they were not smart enough to take that step before reinstatement and trying that step now will probably result in more "racist" shit from what looks to be a lying, self centered, violent, asshole)

[aggie08 21379]

6 hours ago, Fastbreak said:

Why was this needed? He is already cleared.

 

"Sometimes crazy things happen in the heat of battle. I'm sorry I let it get that far. I've paid my dies and now I will try to get better,"

End of story

Because Garrett already fucked himself by being a lying dipshit trying to get his suspension reduced when he originally met with the NFL (which, pretty clearly, he never would have made the allegations that he did had he known that his words wouldn't remain confidential).

The questions about why he made those claims and what was actually said--if at all--were inevitable. I suppose the "no comment, I just want to put this behind me" route would probably have worked over time (ya know, since telling the truth doesn't seem to be in his wheelhouse). But idiot gonna idiot.

[EastTexan 662]

5 hours ago, DougO said:

Sports Center interviewer was definitely rooting for it to go there as well.

Agree. Did not see interview. That's the way espn rolls. Stopped watching their bs programming years ago. Does not excuse dumb ass aggy.

 

[Chad 1728]

There were numerous players and officials within earshot of the incident, if the allegations were true someone would've come forward by now. Garrett pulled the race card to save face and justify his actions, he should've dropped the whole thing after his suspension was lifted. Tomlin backed Rudolph 100% yesterday :

Quote

Myself, personally, I was on the field immediately after the altercation and subsequently after the game. I got a lot of personal relationships within that organization, over there in Cleveland. At no point did anyone within that organization come forward and say, 'Mike, heads up, we got a situation here' or something of that nature that you would expect comes with those type of allegations. I fully support Mason Rudolph. We as an organization fully support Mason Rudolph and to be quite honest, we were hacked off at what we saw this weekend. Not specifically from Myles Garrett, he's been in the lane that he's in, but what was displayed by ESPN in that panel. The way that the situation was presented, I don't think was fair to Mason Rudolph and that's why I'm here.

 

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap3000001102218/article/mike-tomlin-took-offense-to-garretts-recent-claim

[Saint Tacky 1609]

3 hours ago, ButtFumble said:

not admissible on court

The parties could always stipulate it being admissible.  It would need to have probative value for both. 

[SwanderedTalent 5761]

I like how the accusation is supposed to excuse the behavior as a proportional response. 

[Bartles 769]

Rudolph kind of has to see this through. Garrett's career will be fine either way, Mason probably isn't long for the NFL and especially not if he lets an accusation like that float out there.

[aggie08 21379]

37 minutes ago, Chad said:

Garrett pulled the race card to save face and justify his actions

That's the funny part: when he pulled the race card, he wasn't even trying to save face. It was in a private meeting with the NFL that he assumed--and hoped--would never go public. He just lied to a few old men in a room to hopefully keep his suspension minimal, and keep the paychecks flowing.

[Leanderman 2263]

The crack defense lawyers from a and m  law school will defend him until every cent he has is gone.

[Thiefery 4960]

Mason needs to see this through.  He's a walking concussion and took a helmet to the head.  He most likely won't have a long career as mentioned earlier... and with this hanging over him?

[JFKFC 4878]

Can Mason's attorney go to the NFL, and say, "We'll sue Garret, or you guys can pay him a settlement,  your choice." 

Or is that some form of extortion?

[Huckleberry 32684]

Regardless of extortion possibilities, why would the NFL agree to that?

"Give us a settlement or we'll sue Myles Garrett."

"Okay, enjoy your lawsuit."

[JBJ 3647]

25 minutes ago, JFKFC said:

Can Mason's attorney go to the NFL, and say, "We'll sue Garret, or you guys can pay him a settlement,  your choice." 

Or is that some form of extortion?

Threats of civil action are not extortion. 

If Mason's lawyers threatened to press a criminal assault/battery case, then that would be extortion.

[MotownHorn 1724]

Aren't there like 1,000 microphones on the field, or pointed at the field? Wouldn't one of them have picked up the slur if it was actually said?

[Homesickhorn 2201]

It's already been said before, but I'd like to reiterate it.  Aggy doesn't meh, bleh, or tolerate those who meh bleh bleh.

[Js1 85056]

5 minutes ago, MotownHorn said:

Aren't there like 1,000 microphones on the field, or pointed at the field? Wouldn't one of them have picked up the slur if it was actually said?

NFL said player mics are muted after the ball is snapped.  So no audio from a player's mic.  

[Dennis Taylor 18679]

Stealing an honor code about not lying, cheating, or stealing is one of the most aggy things ever when you think about it 

Edited February 18, 2020 by Dennis Taylor

[Junior Miller 1502]

There's no evidence either way here and there never will be. No one can say what Rudolph did or didn't say when he was sacked and only the both of them were on the ground. No one was right next to them in that moment. 

There's zero grounds for a case here because there's zero proof of anything either way and no way to obtain proof if neither of them was mic'd for the game. 

I'm inclined to think Garrett made it up to save face but when you ardently support political racism as Rudolph does you get no benefit of the doubt. I think they're both shitty people. 

[aggie08 21379]

1 minute ago, Js1 said:

NFL said player mics are muted after the ball is snapped.  So no audio from a player's mic.  

And other ambient noise mics (like ones worn by referees) don't record.  I'm guessing that Garrett's attorney (or PR guy) knew this full well before having Garrett basically say, "the mics will prove me right."

[pacman 7309]

Geez, Garrett is an idiot.

[aggie08 21379]

2 minutes ago, Junior Miller said:

There's no evidence either way here and there never will be. No one can say what Rudolph did or didn't say when he was sacked and only the both of them were on the ground. No one was right next to them in that moment. 

There's zero grounds for a case here because there's zero proof of anything either way and no way to obtain proof if neither of them was mic'd for the game. 

I'm inclined to think Garrett made it up to save face but when you ardently support political racism as Rudolph does you get no benefit of the doubt. I think they're both shitty people. 

If Rudolph had said something, you can bet that Garrett would have led with that in the media aftermath.  No way he'd protect a racist who said what Garrett's alleging while his own character was (rightfully) getting dragged through the mud.  Instead, he apologized to Rudolph; then, in a meeting that he thought to be private, accused Rudolph of racial slurs way after the fact.  When that made it into the news, his response was essentially, "Shit, that wasn't supposed to go public."  In short, he fucked.

As it wouldn't be a criminal case, Rudolph's camp doesn't need to meet the "beyond any reasonable doubt" criteria.  They don't need proof.  They just need to show that it's more likely than not that Garrett is lying.

[Gene Parmesan 3992]

So in a civil slander case or whatever this would be, and there is no definitive evidence one way or the other is it just a stalemate, or is the jury instructed to go with the side they believe more?  I know civil trials don't have the high standard of proof.

[TwiceHorn 31184]

2 minutes ago, Gene Parmesan said:

So in a civil slander case or whatever this would be, and there is no definitive evidence one way or the other is it just a stalemate, or is the jury instructed to go with the side they believe more?  I know civil trials don't have the high standard of proof.

The burden of proof generally in a civil action is preponderance of the evidence, which basically boils down to whom do you believe.  There are no ties.

['stache 21743]

11 minutes ago, Junior Miller said:

There's no evidence either way here and there never will be. No one can say what Rudolph did or didn't say when he was sacked and only the both of them were on the ground. No one was right next to them in that moment. 

There's zero grounds for a case here because there's zero proof of anything either way and no way to obtain proof if neither of them was mic'd for the game. 

I'm inclined to think Garrett made it up to save face but when you ardently support political racism as Rudolph does you get no benefit of the doubt. I think they're both shitty people. 

There are microphones all over the field. The NFL listened and said there was no proof. There were several people on the field near them at the time. Nobody else heard it. The accusation came days later in the face of a suspension. Rudolph's lawyer says he Garrett apologized (statement against interest?) and is now doubling down again. I think a jury can find by a preponderance of the evidence that Garrett is lying, even with the heightened "public figure" standard. Yeah, it's not open and shut, mostly because of the heightened standard, but fuck Garrett. I hope a big time lawyer takes the case on contingency and refuses to settle.

[Gene Parmesan 3992]

2 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

The burden of proof generally in a civil action is preponderance of the evidence, which basically boils down to whom do you believe.  There are no ties.

Would Rudolph have to prove damages?  I would imagine the jury would believe Rudolph more as no one really believes Garrett's side, but I don't really know if he's been damaged because pretty much nobody believes the story.  It would be one thing if the Steelers cut him over this or something. 

[TwiceHorn 31184]

1 minute ago, Gene Parmesan said:

Would Rudolph have to prove damages?  I would imagine the jury would believe Rudolph more as no one really believes Garrett's side, but I don't really know if he's been damaged because pretty much nobody believes the story.  It would be one thing if the Steelers cut him over this or something. 

You pretty much always have to prove damages of some sort.  Some states have a defamation per se, which is defamation so bad or of such a character (accusation of a criminal act) that damages are presumed.  But even with that, you need to put on some proof of damage and an amount of compensation.

['stache 21743]

3 minutes ago, Gene Parmesan said:

Would Rudolph have to prove damages?  I would imagine the jury would believe Rudolph more as no one really believes Garrett's side, but I don't really know if he's been damaged because pretty much nobody believes the story.  It would be one thing if the Steelers cut him over this or something. 

There are tons of mouth breathers in Cleveland and Steelers haters elsewhere who believe him. There can be a piles of social media posts as evidence. And damages don’t need to be exact in this type of case. An expert of some sort can estimate a dollar figure for reputations damages. The jury can award it, or more, or less. And I doubt Garrett’s attorney would argue “but nobody really believes my client” because it would just support the plaintiff if anything.

 

It’s not an easy case but fuck that fat fuck, drag him through the process, and I think it can be won.

[kevwun 15595]

If you try to kill someone with your helmet because they called you the n-word, you are probably going to tell everyone that immediately instead of a week or 2 later.

[Doc Reeves 6434]

Aren’t fucking QBs recorded? They should have mic audio from this shit.

 

[Jacob McCandles 202]

19 minutes ago, 'stache said:

There are tons of mouth breathers in Cleveland and Steelers haters and aggy elsewhere who believe him. There can be a piles of social media posts and posts on TexAgs as evidence. And damages don’t need to be exact in this type of case. An expert of some sort can estimate a dollar figure for reputations damages. The jury can award it, or more, or less. And I doubt Garrett’s attorney would argue “but nobody really believes my client” because it would just support the plaintiff if anything.

fify

[Tex Long 4326]

48 minutes ago, Junior Miller said:

when you ardently support political racism as Rudolph does

Dang. Musta missed this up-thread. What are the sources for that?

[Horn80 6074]

Randolph should hire an expert polygraph tester and share the results with media, then demand for Garret to do the same.  

[Junior Miller 1502]

17 minutes ago, kevwun said:

If you try to kill someone with your helmet because they called you the n-word, you are probably going to tell everyone that immediately instead of a week or 2 later.

Unless he was told not to because the NFL is known to  cover up everything they possibly can. Remember he didn't leak this himself it was someone in the NFL office if I'm not mistaken. 

Like I said there's no evidence he said it but since he  ardently supports racism you can't rule it out. 

Either way nothing will come of this. Garrett will play next year and racist Rudolph will be in thebX XFL soon

[Huckleberry 32684]

2 minutes ago, Junior Miller said:

Unless he was told not to because the NFL is known to  cover up everything they possibly can. Remember he didn't leak this himself it was someone in the NFL office if I'm not mistaken. 

So no bells went off in your head when you wrote these two sentences back-to-back?

[closetohumping 17380]

Not sure how rational this is but I hate Garrett for this shit

[Beau Vine 53964]

texags has a real conundrum here.  Do they support the QB who is merely accused of putting an uppity n****** in his place?  Or do they support their alum?

Let's go to the tape:

Quote

Myles sticking with the n word excuse. Must be getting advice from the same people advising Jussie

Quote

Yea- but the "I've never used a racial slur" is a bit too much. Zero chance that's true.

Quote

I am going to guess the Venn Diagram of people comparing him to Jussie, those who use the N word with a hard R, and those who post on Forum 16 is almost just 1 circle.

Quote

Exactly my point. Denying that he said it in this circumstance is one thing. Denying that he has ever used any racial slur defies belief and puts the specific denial in question.

Quote

I normally like Clay's takes but he's either being obtuse or asinine. Anyone watching could see that Mason tried to take Garrett's helmet off first and then tried to kick him in the groin not once but twice. After all that he tried to reengage after the fact. If anyone should press charges it's Myles.

Quote

You've got a 230lb man who's lost his mind running at you with (2) 300lb guys trying to hold you back, what he did was justified. Rudolph could have easily kicked the side of a knee, hello ACL surgery.

Give Garrett a medal.

Quote

Unpopular/non PC take here: I wonder if Myles has any songs on his playlist that contain the evil dreaded N word? Surely his downloads are clean.

1. Mason is a poon.
2. I'm pretty sure he has black teammates. If he said "the word" he's not important enough for them to cover for him.
3. Even if Mason said IT that's no excuse for Myles to Hulk Rage.
4. The N word is likely heard hundreds of times a day in every NFL locker room.
5. The Browns suck and Myles needs to get out ASAP.

 

[Horn80 6074]

19 minutes ago, Doc Reeves said:

Aren’t fucking QBs recorded? They should have mic audio from this shit.

 

That would have to be coughed up under Discovery, along with depositions for all near the incident at the time as to what they heard.

[South Austin 52037]

Did Myles Garrett tell Mason Rudolph that his grandmother was Dutch?

[aggie08 21379]

2 minutes ago, Huckleberry said:

So no bells went off in your head when you wrote these two sentences back-to-back?

The NFL to Garrett: "We want you to wear it. Take the reputation hit all on your own. The last thing we want is to out a racist."

The NFL the next day: "Fuck it, let's fuck them both."

[PilotsError 2280]

No one's ever accused Junior Miller of being the sharpest tool in the shed.

Or being anything other than a worthless cunt.

[Moby Ric 2058]

Garrett is so fucking retarded playing the race card on this.  What white QB in the NFL who has to work with black athletes everyday is going to use that language?  He would get killed by his own teammates. Garrett has no actual proof of this at all and still he doubles down.   Juicy would be proud. 

[Junior Miller 1502]

32 minutes ago, Huckleberry said:

So no bells went off in your head when you wrote these two sentences back-to-back?

Not everyone who works in an office is toeing the company line. You know that. If that was the case nothing would ever leak. It's called a leak because it's not supported by the company brass. 

Edited February 18, 2020 by Junior Miller