In case anyone hadn't decided on the KC Star yet

[DJ's left nut]

They're doubling down and hiding behind an 'editorial board' byline so nobody has to put their name on this shit.

https://amp.kansascity.com/opinion/e...mpression=true

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?

[Mecca]

Originally Posted by Hammock Parties

Fails to mention that Espinal ALSO lost custody, was investigated, admitted on tape that “he gets whoopeed,” admitted in text “I did it. I hurt our son.” Worst piece to-date for the @KCStar. I’m actually stunned.

— Mind Rhino (@mind_rhino) July 12, 2019

As they continue to do what created this problem in the first place, use the information they want to use to shape the narrative to fit a news story they want to tell.

[siberian khatru]

Guys, editorials are unsigned because they represent the institutional opinion of the newspaper, through the collective efforts of the editorial board: https://www.kansascity.com/opinion/a...127478714.html. One member of the board (NOT any reporter, let alone Brooke Pryor) wrote the piece but with the input of the other members. That also likely included the publisher. The board might consult reporters on facts or background, but reporters otherwise have no say in writing the editorials.

[OnTheWarpath15]

Need DJ or one of the other resident Legal Eagles to respond:

Are there other possible reasons for a prosecutor to offer a plea bargain OTHER than because they don't have a terribly strong case?

I mean, if his guilt is so obvious, why are they offering him anything?

Sincerely,

Legal Dummy

[OnTheWarpath15]

Originally Posted by Marcellus

Yea but the whole he belittles her by calling her "bro" is a complete and total made up crock of shit.

Agreed.

[Marcellus]

Originally Posted by Eleazar

Hill didn't enter a plea that maintained his innocence. He entered a guilty plea.

I understand that CP will continue to look for ways around this, because we want to feel better about cheering for him, but those are facts. He admitted that he abused her.

Every post you make on the topic makes you look worse. Just stop digging.

[Hammock Parties]

Originally Posted by siberian khatru

Guys, editorials are unsigned because they represent the institutional opinion of the newspaper, through the collective efforts of the editorial board: https://www.kansascity.com/opinion/a...127478714.html. One member of the board (NOT any reporter, let alone Brooke Pryor) wrote the piece but with the input of the other members. That also likely included the publisher. The board might consult reporters on facts or background, but reporters otherwise have no say in writing the editorials.

That's great, buddy.

Heads need to roll.

[Mecca]

Originally Posted by Marcellus

Every post you make on the topic makes you look worse. Just stop digging.

You know what he's doing.....Duncan was smart enough to admit he ****ed up apologize and tip the **** out...this one not so much.

[mr. tegu]

This entire thing with the audio started to make him look more guilty regarding the more recent allegations. This is important because the full audio doesn’t make him look as bad with regards to that situation as they initially tried to make him look.

So now, they are going back to the 2014 incident as a last effort but that has already been gone over and resolved. It’s no longer relevant and certainly has nothing to do with any need to punish him. The majority of people, including the media, assumed the worst about that 2014 situation yet he still was able to move past it and be cheered for and supported as a player without contempt. Bringing it back up now is nothing but people pushing an agenda and grasping for something else since the recent allegations appear to have fallen through.

[Zap Rowsdower]

The paper isn't making much money. They want you to be outraged and click on their links.

[pugsnotdrugs19]

I got a QUICK response from Berg.

A quick snippet of my email:

You should be ashamed of your staff’s overall approach to this issue, and I will continue to advocate for the slow death of your production among other fans in the area until something is done to show accountability for these mistakes.

The response:

I understand your position and appreciate the feedback. That being said, I fully support all of our journalists and the tough work and topics that have to tackle everyday. Again, I respect your position and hope you will give us another shot in the future.

[Eleazar]

Originally Posted by OnTheWarpath15

Need DJ or one of the other resident Legal Eagles to respond:

Are there other possible reasons for a prosecutor to offer a plea bargain OTHER than because they don't have a terribly strong case?

I mean, if his guilt is so obvious, why are they offering him anything?

Sincerely,

Legal Dummy

Taking a case to trial is expensive and time-consuming. Most every person who is truly guilty pleads out. The state doesn't have the resources to go through the motions of a full trial for everything, and when the guilty party is willing to make a deal to resolve the matter, it's unnecessary.

[Mecca]

Lets not mention how many people who aren't guilty plead out for a good deal because of the sad fact that many innocent people go to jail everyday.

[Eleazar]

Originally Posted by Mecca

Lets not mention how many people who aren't guilty plead out for a good deal because of the sad fact that many innocent people go to jail everyday.

He could have decided not to contest the charges while maintaining his innocence. He didn't do that. He admitted guilt.

[mr. tegu]

Originally Posted by MVChiefFan

I’m starting to get nervous that this is going to blow up into such huge ordeal, that we won’t see Tyreek in a Chiefs uniform for more than this year. Instead of realizing the error of their ways, the media seems to be digging in their heels. I just hope it doesn’t become such a fight that the Chiefs and Hill part ways just to make it all stop. It’s all such a huge **** storm.

Hill is not going to be punished for the 2014 incident. It’s over and done with and won’t come into play despite the continued assault on Hill from the media. So we are back to just the recent stuff, which really isn’t much, hence the reason they are bringing up the 2014 stuff again. They are trying to justify their overall bad reporting.

[Marcellus]

Originally Posted by Eleazar

Taking a case to trial is expensive and time-consuming. Most every person who is truly guilty pleads out. The state doesn't have the resources to go through the motions of a full trial for everything, and when the guilty party is willing to make a deal to resolve the matter, it's unnecessary.

It could also be very simply that in a he said vs she said scenario he didn't want to take the risk of a trial and it go against him when a pregnant woman is on the stand crying.

It could also be that the DA put a deal in place that allows things to work out in the long run by clearing Hill's record if there are no other issues because they didn't feel like what happened was so egregious.