Harbaugh: “Feel like we dodged a bullet with Vernon.”

SANTA CLARA — Here’s a transcript of Jim Harbaugh’s Wednesday press conference, courtesy of the 49ers’ P.R. department.

How’s the health of the tight end position?

“Still evaluating that, but I think as we going into this week, we’ll know more as the week progresses. Feel like we dodged a bullet with [TE] Vernon [Davis]. Hopeful that’ll be a healthy position by the end of the week.”

 

The one guy you brought in to the practice squad, was just the scout team, just for bodies to be able to practice?

“No, I wouldn’t say that. It’s never just that. Somebody that we’ve been looking at for a while and have valued as a player and was an opportunity to add him to the roster. Talking about [TE Xavier] Mr. Grimble?”

 

Has the district attorney’s office or the police department have been keeping you abreast of its DT Ray McDonald investigation? And when all the facts are finally made public, do you think the public will be surprised or shocked by any of the findings?

“To answer your question, no. They have not been keeping me abreast.”

 

What about the potential findings? Do you think it will shock or surprise the public at all?

“I don’t know. You’re asking me to speculate on what the findings will be and what people’s reaction will be. I don’t know that. I don’t know either of those two.”

 

Are there people in the organization who are more current and know more about what’s going on with Ray McDonald legally than you do?

“I don’t know that.”

 

I was just wondering if perhaps … It’s unfair to really ask you these questions. Perhaps, 49ers CEO Jed York or team president Paraag Marathe or a lawyer might come in after you and answer some questions, legitimate questions, that we have?

“I’m more than happy to answer the question. I think we exactly answered the gentlemen’s question. No, district attorney, his office has not been keeping me abreast. And to answer your question, I don’t know that. Just speaking on what your statement really is or your conclusion there, I believe that our position on the issue has been well-stated and we’re following that process.”

 

There’s no plans or discussions to put him on the exempt list like Minnesota running back Adrian Peterson or Carolina defensive lineman Greg Hardy?

“Again, same answer there. We’re following a process and our position is well-stated.”

 

Do you guys continue to remain in contact with the NFL on this matter?

“I am not in contact with the NFL on this matter.”

 

I don’t know if you’ve heard that the Vikings have now reversed course when it comes to Peterson and barred him from the facility. It just happened within the last couple of hours. I didn’t know if you have any thoughts on that?

“No, I don’t.”

 

Do you think it’ll affect anything that you guys do here?

“I don’t have any thoughts on it. I think it would be unfair for me to speculate.”

 

What’s the approach been like with Colin this week after, you know, the fourth quarter? It didn’t go his way or your way. How’s he sort of moving forward for the Cardinals?

“We all understand we’re in the bouncing-back business. That’s part of our job description. Nobody does it better than our team. Tough loss. Fortunately we’re a tough team.”

 

Some people would argue that it’s hard to have a quarterback who runs the ball a lot and is also a polished, pocket quarterback, that those are opposing ideas. What’s your response to that?

“I would disagree with that.”

 

With what?

“I believe you can be – both a mobile, running quarterback and a polished, pocket passer.”

 

You’re working on, presumably, turning Colin into both?

“I think he is that.”

 

Arizona head coach Bruce Arians referred to you as “Jimmy” a couple times. Do you have a relationship with him? Do you go back a ways with Arians or no?

“No, not really. Admire his work. I’ve had cordial conversations with him and respect him as a competitor. Does a heck of a job.”

 

He said that his running back, Andre Ellington, is dealing with a foot injury and that slowed him down a bit. When you watch Andre Ellington in these first two weeks, do you see a guy with a foot problem?

“No. I trust what they’re saying there. He’s a heck of a player. Very explosive out of the backfield, running the football, plays big, exceptional vision and hands. Tremendous football player.”

 

You said he plays big?

“Yeah, bigger than his size.”

 

Did you get any clarity from the NFL about the incident in which Colin Kaepernick was flagged for unsportsmanlike conduct?

“Yes.”

 

And —

“I think you can get the same clarification. I think you can call the NFL and get the same clarification. It’s really no different than what we talked about the day after the game. Colin says he didn’t say anything, and this person says what they say and somebody else heard something else. Therefore, there’s been no change. That’s what was originally reported and been no difference to what was reported.”

 

And you, of course, you feel confident that Colin did nothing wrong in that instance or what’s your stance on that?

“I don’t have a stance. I could only imagine. I don’t have a stance because I don’t know, I didn’t hear it. But Colin’s always been truthful 100 percent of the time.”

 

Are you preparing for Cardinals QB Drew Stanton? What do you see out of him and his play?

“Yeah, we have to. We have to prepare for both.”

 

And what do you see out of Drew?

“We’ve had discussions about Drew before and we respect him as a player. I think he’s a fine football player.”

 

Does it make it more difficult having to prepare for two guys instead of just one?

“Yes. They’re both very good quarterbacks. The kind of injury that [Cardinals QB] Carson [Palmer] has right now, that could be two days, could be two weeks. It could snap right back to being able to play, so, we have to prepare for both.”

 

What stands out to you about S Antoine Bethea and the way he’s transitioned into this defense so far?

“It’s been seamless. From an on-field, from leadership off the field, on and off the field, it’s been very good.”

 

Is his leadership unique in the sense that he’s new to a team, like a guy coming in and being a veteran back there with you guys losing so many guys up front? Is that part of it unique?

“It’s been very similar to [former 49ers S and current Cleveland Browns S] Donte Whitner. I’ll make a rare comparison, but both have those qualities. It’s been seamless having Antoine.”

 

DT Justin Smith, the way he’s played these first two games, does he look revitalized to you? Does he seem to be playing at a top level? Not to say he hasn’t in the past.

“Yeah, that would be my answer, too. I’ve never see him not play at a top level and that continues.”

 

Why do you think he still has that drive after all these years? What’s driving him? Is it the lack of LB Aldon Smith being next to him or just wanting to be a leader of that defense?

“It’s just who he is. Great talent, great execution, great effort. He’s a football player in every sense of the phrase. What drives someone to be great rather than just good? Books have been written on it. He is at the highest quality.”

 

As a former quarterback yourself, what do you glean from the fact that Colin’s passer rating numbers are so much better when he’s actually blitzed than when he’s not blitzed? All three of his interceptions came on non-blitz plays. Do you glean anything from that that he’s reacting better when the blitz is coming? What do you see?

“I don’t see the difference in his play, whether he’s blitzed or not blitzed.”

 

What have you seen from TE Derek Carrier and his development to this point and where he’s made the most strides?

“Very positive. Where he’s made the most strides is he can play the game. He understands his role, his ability and now getting the experience to go out and do it. He’s done several times. And he’s gotten better and better and better. I think that’s been probably the most positive thing is the improvement he makes every time that he steps on the field.”

 

Getting back to McDonald for a second, are you in any way influenced at all by the public outcry by victims, advocates, as well as politicians and fans, who are criticizing you for not benching McDonald?

“Influenced? We’ve been very clear on what we’re basing our decisions on, the principles that we’re basing them on, and the information and the facts that are being gathered and respect for the process.”

    1. Big game. Will be interesting to see who steps up. Was it Lemonier who recorded a safety with the Cards last year? Either way, he needs to show up. Would love to see Tank and Dial in there.
      Did Cook suit up last game and is he likely to suit up for this one?

      Kap needs to step up. Johnson should be thrown to also.

    1. They have questions (some legitimate), and Harbaugh is the only person the team is putting out there. I don’t think York, Marathe, and Baalke are doing him any favors by not stepping up for those questions. It’s been a while since someone on the management side took questions. It’s time for an update.

      1. I call BS. They’ve made their position clear, and there’s no point in asking anymore questions until the police report their findings….

        1. Agreed regarding any q’s about their position on this. They’ve already stated their position. But I see no harm in them asking a question along the lines of where the investigation is up to, and if any resolution is forthcoming.

        2. Razor: SF made a statement 2 weeks ago but the landscape is changing daily. So everything is subject to change. The new language uttered by all owners is: “we want to do the right thing.”

          Approximately 48% of the entire NFL viewership is women. They control the purse strings and they are making phone calls to the NFL sponsors and Congress. The public is astute on how you get the NFL’s attention. And we know it’s all about money and the NFL brand. Tried to tell ya’ll this last week but you just didn’t get it. Due process won’t cut it any more.

          Don’t know how current this info is:

          y Rice may never again play in the NFL, but a dozen other players with domestic violence arrests are still suiting up on Sundays.

          Ray McDonald and Chris Cook of the San Francsico 49ers, Tony McDaniel and Kevin Williams of the Seattle Seahawks, Brandon Marshall and Santonio Holmes of the Chicago Bears, Greg Hardy of the Carolina Panthers, Dez Bryant of the Dallas Cowboys, Erik Walden of the Indianapolis Colts, Donte Whitner of the Cleveland Browns, Randy Starks of the Miami Dolphins and Frostee Rucker of the Arizona Cardinals have all been arrested for domestic violence or related charges since 2005, according to a USA Today database that tracks players’ arrests since 2000.

          Some fought the charges and won. Others accepted blame, served short suspensions and returned to the game. The rest are still waiting for their day in court, the focus of intense new scrutiny as America’s most powerful sports league faces growing criticism over its handling of players’ off-the-field conduct.

          Entire article:
          http://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/nfl-controversy/still-playing-12-nfl-players-have-domestic-violence-arrests-n204831

          1. “Due processs won’t cut it anymore”
            I hate people like you.
            Today is constitution day. Do yourself a favor and actually read it and while you’re at it, read the admendments too.
            Man hater! Ds

            1. Once again someone is throwing the constitution and “due process” (of law) out there without understanding. Both the constitution and due process of law are processes of the judicial process.

              The actual definition of Due process is: a fundamental, constitutional guarantee that all legal proceedings will be fair and that one will be given notice of the proceedings and an opportunity to be heard before the government acts to take away one’s life, liberty, or property. Also, a constitutional guarantee that a law shall not be unreasonable, Arbitrary, or capricious.

              The 14th amendment extends those rights to the bill of rights.

              Please do us all a favor and take a minute to actually understand what you’re trying to reprimand someone with. Best to keep it to just football.

              1. Matt,

                You do realize that the NFLPA uses the term due process as well. Eric Winston, the lead player representative, spoke about how they are unwilling to give up due process for the players during an interview yesterday w/Mike and Mike on ESPN Radio when discussing the Ray Rice appeal.

              2. Matt…
                I’ve stated on here before the difference in law, and the constitution. And the difference in a private corporation and their “laws” that can throw out any constitutional right as a private entity.
                Although my constitution coo meant may have been written for a different topic. It was a jab at Mary because it’s constitution day and some of her comments in the past. I’m very aware of the constitution and state and federal laws. And how they’re two different entity’s.
                I understand you may not have read earlier comments from before, but maybe you should ask before making assumptions.

              3. Due Process (in the proper name sense) refers to the constitutional guarantee found under the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments (for the record, the Fourteenth Amendment, through the doctrine of incorporation, extends the Bill of Rights to apply to the states; It does note extend anything to the Bill of Rights) and under various state constitutions. Due Process can take the form of substantive due process or procedural due process.

                However, one should not rely on dictionaries for an “actual” definition as there is no such thing as “actual” definitions – there are ranges of meaning for all terms, including terms of art. It is a failing of our literate but undereducated society that people slavishly follow mere guide books that not only often do not agree with each other in terms of “actual” meaning but that also blatantly ignore the complexities of lexicosemnatics and polysemy.

                But I digress. Due process as a concept, not as the constitutional guarantee, extends to a variety of legal matters. For example, a collectively bargained agreement may require due process under the agreement, as the collective bargaining agreement between the NFLPA and the NFL does. As such, due process may also refer to practices under such agreements, and not following said processes would be unlawful and subject to damages specified in the contract and/or civil legal proceedings.

                So while it is not appropriate to invoke the constitutional protections of Fifth and Fourteenth Amendment Due Process in the current context with respect to the actions of NFL and the team, it is equally inappropriate to claim that the concept of due process is inapplicable to the collective bargaining agreement as the agreement contemplates and incorporates said concept.

              4. Jack, the media has coined the phrase and now everyone uses it inappropriately. In that context, due process is applicable because collective bargaining is part of the judicial process.

                JPN, maybe I wasn’t clear in my statement. To use your argument, the term actual could mean existing now. Current. A current definition of the term Due process of law is in existence. How it is read and interpreted does not take away from the fact that it has an actual (factual) definition.

                While I understand your argument that words and meanings of words change over time, the constitution uses amendments and the Supreme Court to give an actual definition.

                The same argument could be applied to a green light. The light color in context of a stop light means go. Now go could mean any ranges of speeds from 1-infinite. The speed can be interpreted but the actual definition of GO still exists.

                The same applies to the word One. The interpretation doesn’t sacrifice it’s meaning. Unity, a single entity, a number. Regardless of the definition, the word illustrates single. It can be used in countless applications, but it’s factual definition is singular.

                Further, citing the collective bargaining agreement as an example to retort due process of law in the argument illustrates that you did not understand my statement. Collective bargaining is a judicial process. That would make Due Process of law applicable per the definition.

                The fact that I read something and interpret it differently than you do doesn’t void that literature of it’s true and actual meaning. If that were the case, Supreme Court rulings would be appealable infinitely to ascending entities.

                Perhaps, legally, it should have read (The interpretation of) Due process of law does not apply to a suspended player who still receives pay during an investigation. If that argument held water, a player would have legal cause to sue a QB for not throwing him the ball. He could sue another player for jumping off sides. He would be entitled to sue a referee whose judgment voided him the gains he made. He could sue for opportunity costs. Due process of law is a judicial process and guarantee meant to protect the constitutional rights of an individual.

              5. No Matt. It’s the teams, players and league that keep bringing up due process. The media has panned it for the most part.

              6. Matt,

                I agree with you that the reference to the constitution given above your first comment does not pertain, but concepts of due process do pertain to the collective bargaining agreements with respect to processes established within said agreements. What I mainly had issue with was your use of a definition that was limited and, thus, inadequate.

                The due process protection under the 5th Amendment pertains criminal proceedings. The due process protection under the Fourteenth Amendment extends due process to any state action (hence the “before the government acts” language in the definition you cite) . However, these constitutional/governmental aspects of due process are not the only use of the term due process. It is not a matter of interpretation – it is a matter of usage.

                To further complicate the discussion of due process, you are labeling things as judicial processes that are not such. A judicial process is a proceeding carried out by a court or tribunal with the power to decide the matter. Constitutional due process provisions apply to such proceedings, both legal and administrative. Collective bargaining is NOT a judicial process. Collective bargaining between enterprise and its labor is a contractual matter governed by contract law (and to an extent, the Fourteenth Amendment, with respect to economical due process). Such contracts may include due process requirements, but those are governed by the contract and by labor law, not the constitution, unless the collective bargaining agreement is with a governmental entity, of course. (An aside – you labeled the Constitution as a judicial process; the U.S. Constitution is not a judicial process either. It is the law that enables and constitutes the government, and it provides the framework and the limitations for judicial processes under that government.) Thus, the due process under the collective bargaining agreement is a different usage of the term than due process of law with respect to government actions.

                In a collective bargaining agreement that includes an adjudicative process, due process pertains to following the agreed upon practices under the controlling documents. Specifically with respect to the collective bargaining agreement between the players and the NFL, the agreement incorporates a quasi-judicial proceeding for disciplinary matters. These proceedings must follow the due process stipulated in the agreement or such proceedings are unlawful as a breach of the agreement. As such, due process in this context is not as guaranteed under the constitution, but under the controlling documents of the collective bargaining agreement. Thus, it is correct to state that the collective bargaining agreement requires due process and that said due process is not in the context of constitutionally governed due process. Further, it is correct to state that deactivating a player requires adherence to the due process requirements of the collective bargaining agreement, not the due process rights protected under the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments, as said constitutional requirements pertain to governmental action.

                Finally, with respect to causes of action for lack of significant on-field opportunities, no argument presented above would allow a player a cause of action for lack of targets or other on-field issues. Due process, as contemplated under the collective bargaining agreement, pertains to team and NFL disciplinary action against a player, not on-the-field action.

                Now, if one were to claim that due process as contemplated under the collective bargaining agreement might allow a player a cause of action for lack of process and lost opportunity if he were set as inactive by a team for non-football reasons, that would be an interesting issue, one that is, at present, unlitigated. However, if the team and/or the NFL actually follow the process agreed upon in the collective bargaining agreement and discipline a player prior to the completion of a criminal judicial process, that is due process with respect to NFL or team action. In this context, the term due process does not involve constitutional rights or the criminal proceedings. As such, it is both accurate to say that the constitutional protections of due process do not pertain and to say that the league and teams must follow due process when disciplining players.

            2. OMG you need to go to anger management and I know I’m not the first woman who has said this. Try to stop yourself from reading anything I write, b/c honestly I never read anything you say.

              1. How about you take your supposed Seahawk fan self to a Seahawk Blog. NOBODY wants to read your garbage anymore DS. Do you need that much attention? Check yourself into the nearest Mental Home. You know you’re not wanted here, and yet you continue to show up. Whats that say about your character? SERIOUSLY!

          2. Mary,

            Apparently due process will cut it in the case of Ray McDonald. The Niners hav’nt budged and McDonald will not get charged. Sorry DS!

      2. Why does the media keep treating the Ray McDonald issue like it’s the same as the Ray Rice, Peterson, and Hardy issue? Rice was officially charged and punished according to law enforcement and, while it took a while for the whole explicit truth to come out, we all know what happened. Peterson has been officially charged with the crime. Hardy has been convicted and is appealing. McDonald has only been arrested but he has not been CHARGED yet, so charges may or may not come. To compare all these situations to McDonald is like comparing apples and oranges. Now if he’s charged with something, then yes: the team needs to take some kind of action. But until that process plays out with law enforcement, their investigation, and the DA, it’s best for them to sit tight.

          1. Mary:

            So USA Today publishes a list of players accused of domestic violence and somehow this is news? The landscape is not changing daily. What is going on is a concerted effort to damage the image of football. Anheiser Busch came out with a statement yesterday. Who are they kidding? I wonder if those sharp reporters at USA Today could compile a list of how many of the NFL rap sheets are commited under the influence of ABs product?

            How many scuffles where there at stadiums this last weekend? Is the NFL or the individuals who act like donkeys responsible.

            Please…too many people grandstanding and not looking at their own contribution to the problems in our society.

            McDonald should get a fair hearing of his position. The 49ers made their position clear. Nothing more to say until the authorities make a move. Any other position would either harm McDonald or his fiancé (presuming he is indicted).

            Let’s just be patient and not go off on a mob (media) generated lynching.

          2. Claude, I’m not against due process, I’m just against the fact that due process takes a year or never. I think you will see some changes are coming. Wait and see like everybody else.

            1. Mary:

              Neither Calistoga Red’s comment nor mine in response was about due process. They were about lumping McDonald together with Rice, Hardy and Peterson when there are stark differences between those cases and McDonald’s.

              You either don’t understand how McDonald’s case differs from the others, are willfully ignoring those differences, or are trolling. Under any of those scenarios, it doesn’t make sense to engage you in further conversation.

              1. Oh Claude: Of course I know how the 2 cases differ. We’ve all had Janai Rice’s video knockout burned into our memory and yet Ray got no jail time.& was only going to get a 2 game suspension from the NFL until public outcry.

                McDonald we don’t know so much about. But there are 2 police reports and at least one arrest for domestic violence. I want to see how it all plays out. Hell, you don’t know anything abt McDonald, except he’s on your team.

                You know who I think Harbaugh is really angry with? (good interview Grant) Aldon Smith! He missed 5 weeks last year due to off the field probs and now 9 weeks this year. Major liability! SMH.

        1. And maybe it’s because some people don’t inderstand how police procedures work. It’s rare that an officer will not arrest somebody when called for a domestic dispute. But I guess when someone gets their news from tmz and woman’s lib websites. They think what they’re told. If there is an arrest. You’re guilty, because the police are the final say and due process
          (Which has nothing to do with the constitution..Matt lol) gets thrown out of the window. Who needs it,When two others have been charged with the same charge? I guess some people believe that all men are women beaters because they grew up in bad neighborhoods and got rich at a young age.

  1. I respect the niners even more. Nothing like having a backbone, whether right or wrong, but taking a stance. They said what they were going to do. What question need to be answered? How about the local media go ask the local prosecutors what’s taking so long.

    1. Yep. Any questions the media have should be directed to the police department. As soon as the prosecuting attorney decides whether or not to pursue charges, that’s when the 49ers will make their next move…..

      1. I think the Ray Rice matter effectively rebuts your position. The team has an independent obligation to inquire into the incident.

            1. I agree in part with Claude. Conducting a private investigation would not undermine the process.

              On the other hand, I do not believe the team is under any obligation to conduct its own investigation beyond talking to the player. The NFL, under the Personal Conduct Policy, is obliged to conduct its own investigation if it is to pursue discipline, but I cannot find an obligation on the team if the team is willing to wait for law enforcement and/or the NFL to conduct their investigations.

              1. JPN:

                I agree that the team is not obligated to conduct an investigation under either the law or the CBA. In this case, however, where York, Baalke and Harbaugh have all declared publicly that perpetrators of domestic violence have no place on the team, the team had better conduct a legitimate investigation of its own or risk losing all credibility. This is especially true when (a) it allows McDonald to play for due process reasons, (b) the NFL botched the Ray Rice investigation so badly, and (c) the criminal consequences for first time offenders (I am assuming McDonald is a first time offender) can be nonexistent, even when the act in question is particularly violent.

              2. Claude,

                I will concur that the team should conduct its own investigation for the reasons you put forth, but that does not constitute an obligation on the teams part.

            2. By poisoning the investigation in process with their own findings and beliefs. Some of which would only be known by police investigators…..

              1. Razor:

                I’m confused. Are you talking about “their own findings and beliefs” or information that “would only be known by police investigators”? Those two things would seem to be mutually exclusive.

                Either way, your concern only addresses one or two of the questions I proposed (the 4th and/or the 8th). Change the 4th question to “Based upon what you have learned so far, do you feel justified in letting McDonald continue to play?”.

              2. Both. Quite possibly, the most credible information maybe coming from the police, with a caveat of not making it public until the process is completed.

                Again Claude, actions speak louder than words….

              3. Razor:

                If you’re talking about information the police shared with the 49ers under the caveat that the 49ers not share it, then the 49ers would be justified in not answering the questions. That doesn’t address the first 7 questions, all of which seem legitimate to ask in light of the team’s position.

                … actions speak louder than words

                Perhaps, but asking questions about the investigation that prompted those actions seems reasonable and doesn’t undermine the process, as you suggested it would.

              4. I take it you want to know the details of their investigation that prompted their decision to field the man in light of their no tolerance policy?

              5. Yes, based upon the positions they have taken, I think they have an obligation to demonstrate that they have conducted a thorough and legitimate investigation. They can do that without having to reveal anything the police told them under the caveat you described.

              6. When Colin Kaepernick and Quinton Patton found themselves in the midst of an investigation potentially involving a sexual encounter/assault, the 49ers did not blink. They listened their players, did their own digging, and believed what their players had to say. I can only imagine this case is similar. Were you holding them to the same obligation then Claude? I am proud of the 49er organization for having the courage of their convictions and stand up for the law and due process….

              7. Razor:

                From almost the very beginning, the publicly available information suggested that nothing happened in Florida. This case is a little murkier, and there hasn’t been a lot of information made available to the public.

                I am proud of the 49er organization for having the courage of their convictions and stand up for the law and due process…

                Those are nice platitudes, but they don’t actually address anything I have written tonight. If you have read my comments on this subject, you know I have supported the 49ers’ position regarding due process. At some point, however, the team has to show that it’s actually looking into the matter, especially when it has stated very strongly and very publicly that it will not tolerate domestic violence.

                And then there is the unfortunate timing of this incident. It may not be fair to the 49ers or Ray Mcdonald, but it happened in the midst of the Ray Rice clusterfudge. The NFL and the Ravens performed shoddy investigations. That’s not the 49ers’ fault, but to drive home the points that (1) Ray McDonald is not Ray Rice (or Greg Hardy or Adrian Peterson) and (2) the 49ers are not the Ravens (or the league office), both the 49ers and McDonald would be well-served by the team addressing relevant questions about the legitimacy of its investigation.

                Doing so would do nothing to undermine the police investigation, which I thought was your objection. You seem to be taking a different tack at this point. In any case, it seems clear that you’ve settled into your position, so I won’t waste any more of your time or mine trying to persuade you otherwise.

              8. “I think they have an obligation to demonstrate that they have conducted a thorough and legitimate investigation.”

                I just do not see this as an obligation. It is not an ethical obligation, as no code of ethics covers an NFL team’s dealings with the public; and it is not a legal obligation, as no law requires the revelation (the law does, however, require privacy on personnel matters). It does not fall under fiduciary responsibility, as the team does not stand in that relationship to the public. So, the only source of obligation would be moral, and I for one, as I have expressed before, do not believe in moral obligations.

              9. “At some point, however, the team has to show that it’s actually looking into the matter, especially when it has stated very strongly and very publicly that it will not tolerate domestic violence.”

                Change this to “At some point, however, the team should show…” and I would agree.

              10. JPN:

                Would you accept “must do in order to maintain credibility”?

                As to whether or not the team has a moral obligation, I think Harbaugh’s comments (and maybe those of Jed York) on domestic violence contain moralistic elements. As such, I don’t think it would be inappropriate to impose upon the team a related moral obligation.

                As to your general disbelief in moral obligations, we’ll have to agree to disagree.

              11. “Would you accept ‘must do in order to maintain credibility’?”

                I agree that credibility is the issue here.

                As for moral obligations, we will need disagree.

    2. What question need to be answered?

      I don’t know. I have a few.

      What’s the status of your investigation?
      To whom has the team spoken about the incident?
      Do you believe you have enough information to make an informed decision about what happened and about Ray McDoanld’s culpability?
      If so, what is your conclusion?
      If not, what other information do you need, and what steps have you taken to acquire it?
      Who conducted the investigation on behalf of the team?
      Has the team been in contact with the police/DA’s office?
      If so, what have you learned?

      1. I could be wrong but I’m feel pretty confident that the police will NOT give out any updates on an investigation that is ongoing. Therefore, the niners will not be able to get any information. The police will everything close to their chest bc any information given out will give McDonald and his lawyer time to shred it. As razor said, I’d direct all questions to police and prosecutors

        1. Actually, once charges are filed, the prosecutor is obliged to provide the defense with all the evidence that will be used at trial. That is all the time the defense attorney will need. Not discussing the status of the case nor revealing that evidence at this point now is more a matter of protecting the privacy of the victim.

          As a general principle, the police can and often will give updates on ongoing investigations when so doing will help them with their investigations. They can and will also withhold information if that information is otherwise unknown and may be instrumental in identifying a perpetrator. However, that is likely not the case here, and it is more a matter of due diligence and privacy.

    3. I am curious about something. Several people have implied or stated this investigation is taking a long time. How much time do you think such investigations routinely take? Do you have a frame of reference in mind, or does it just seem like they should be done quicker? And no, this is not a rhetorical question. I am genuinely curious.

      To me, the time frame to date seems reasonable given the number of potential witnesses and the nature of scheduling interviews. Further, I do not believe the time frame is indicative of the strength of the case/the likelihood of charges. Investigations where time is not of the essence can be ploddingly slow as they often are not worked with the same resource allocation as more time sensitive investigations.

      1. Would it be safe to assume in your mind, that the investigation is 60% completed and that no “red flags” have arisen up to this point?

        1. Without knowing the resources allocated or the exact number of people to be interviewed, I am not sure. It could be fairly well along, or it could be in the preliminary interview phase (the phase in which the investigators determine which witnesses to schedule for more in-depth interviews). The issue with a crime like what is alleged is that the physical evidence is often non-conclusive as to the causes of the observed injuries, so corroborating testimony is necessary.

          What we can reasonably conclude is that the postponement of the hearing does indicate the investigation is still in process. However, that does not mean that much either as those hearings are initially set based on first available after arrest, not the state of the investigation. Sometimes the charges are entered by the first scheduled hearing (usually when there is compelling evidence available at the time of arrest); sometimes, it takes longer, especially when working with a large number of potential witnesses rather than just physical evidence. I would not be surprised to see the investigation and then the prosecutorial review process take a few more weeks, especially if it is not being worked as a priority.

        1. Actually the typical US TV drama has about 42 minutes of content. There has to be some kind of setup of the story and a minute or two to wind down. Say 38 minutes to determine guilt. The typical blog fan can make an “irrefutable” determination based on preconceived points of view well within the time it takes to post.

        2. Agreed, Jack, and I think that is part of the problem with the public’s frustration with real investigatory procedures.

          But it is worse than just that. Lawyers and judges talk about the CSI effect on jurors – how jurors expect real evidence to matchwhat they see on TV. It rarely does, but the expectation it will can casue issues at trial.

    4. Exactly!!!! It’s actually the righ thing to do. Why contribute to a trend that could hurt future players?
      What IF…. A week before the Super Bowl ck is accused of hitting his girlfriend? And this is a girlfriend with the knowledge of being able to hurt him by lying because she’s upset? He is supposed to miss the biggest game of his life until due process proves him Innocent?
      These are things that morons like Mary who have never reached her longtime goal will never understand, on top of what the judicial system was set up for in America. What a trash bag.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *