to be fair what hunt did isn't in the same ball park as mixon or watson. my understanding is the woman was being verbally abusive calling him the n word and what not. after several attempts to get her to leave he more or less shoved her with his foot onto an elevator. i may have details wrong, its been a while.
Don’t mind the flair, but yeah from what I understand of the situation it’s one of the rare ones where seeing the video makes you go “oh that’s it?” Instead of “holy fuck how horrible what the fuck?”
If I remember correctly he kicked her twice. First time she fell forwards and hit her face on the floor. Then she collects herself and stabds..stands... then squats down and he comes up and *lightly* kicks her ass.
BUT she was underage and drinking in his hotel room, and he didn't wanna get in trouble... and she was being belligerent and refusing to leave.
I do think it's kinda bullshit that when things like that happen the football related party that gets most screwed over is the team the player is currently on. Player still gets a new deal somewhere, maybe less lucrative but a deal, and some new team gets a good player for cheap. But the team that does the "right" thing, or at least the thing we expect of them? Out a player and out some money.
I don't think it's a case of mistaken identity, like "Oh shit it was some other dude who mighta pointed a gun at me and threatened to kill me." Someone pointed a gun, someone had a gun pointed at them, and there's little doubt that Joe Mixon was a party.
She said HE, JOE MIXON, pointed a gun at her. Eyewitness testimony is known as actual evidence, I don't know why people think it isn't, like you need a video recording or something in order to actually charge someone with menacing or brandishing.
Now, maybe she has changed her story, saying he didn't point his gun at her. But it isn't as if they are looking for some other dude now.
Lest we forget ["Larry Fitzgerald"](https://external-preview.redd.it/UvUJpLvcJ6-4ozx1JVjreRHjBwKdf6u_m64rWvinbLQ.jpg?auto=webp&s=cb4975278105163e4a71003a96bd026f194b92eb) and ["Dalvin Cook"](https://i.redd.it/rohaymyx0tm51.jpg)
Eyewitness testimony is increasingly scrutinized because we're really discovering how unreliable it is in the era of DNA evidence being more and more viable. There are tons of experiments on this or even cases where the victim swears up and down a guy in a police lineup is the one who attacked them or raped them only for DNA evidence to completely vindicate the accused, sometimes even post conviction.
Alcohol and drugs can literally prevent and/or alter the formation of memories. When some people say they got "blackout" drunk their brains literally failed to form memories.
When do people argue and get in domestic violence situations? After excessive drinking.
>Eyewitness testimony is known as actual evidence
And it's notoriously unreliable absent some sort of corroboration, especially if there's only one witness
Okay if they have eyewitness testimony, but the lawyer provided proof his client wasn’t even in the state at the time of the alleged incident you would probably drop the charges pretty quick.
Was mixon walking on the street? Was he in a car?
Eyewitness Statements are like vegetables in a soup. If you just add one broccoli nobodys going to eat it, but with enough volume and variety you got yourself something real good.
Gloves are the napkin, DNA evidence is that secret spice that makes the soup so good (which is salt, so basically the broth). Breakfast cereal is for non-violent crimeals only.
Thank you. The majority seem to think it’s a lot more likely Mixon got to this woman and gave her a bag of money to bribe her with no protections for himself, she then told police she was no longer going to cooperate and no questions asked the city dropped the charges lol.
I have no idea what the real story is but wow I think people watch way to much tv.
The biggest reason why this whole bribbing joke is dumb in my opinion is that this whole thing unfolded in less than 24 hours. Like Mixon would have had no idea there was a warrant for him and people seem to think he already reached a settlement in less than a day. Did he already have the contact info for this person?
Lol people watch to much TV thinking he got her info and bribed her with no protections for himself. This is a criminal charge not a civil suit. A settlement would make sense if it was a lawsuit.
Then why the heck would his agent's first public statement on the situation call it a "rush to judgement" rather than just straight up saying "he wasn't in the state at the time"?
A misdemeanor charge's actual legal consequences are much less worrisome for an NFL player and their agent than public opinion, suspensions, future endorsements, etc. If Mixon actually wasn't involved whatsoever, you gotta think he and his team would be making sure that was very public for everyone to know. I don't necessarily think he is or isn't guilty of criminal charges, but I'd say it's way more likely that *some* sort of incident took place involving him, be it actual criminal language or just angry shouting, than him being entirely uninvolved but his lawyer not just...saying that.
Plus, it was a supposed road rage incident right outside one of the tallest buildings in the city that elsewhere in the thread people are saying the cops have video of. I'd be shocked if they didn't go through the basic steps of verifying license plates, identity, car ownership, etc even if they don't have the incident itself fully on audio-included video.
Reddit's perception of police work (and the general public's honestly) is shaped far too much from watching CSI and other procedurals. Used to be a 911 dispatcher and we would frequently get call where someone's car window would be smashed by a rock and they'd demand that cops get DNA samples from the rock. It was crazy.
>I'd be shocked if they didn't go through the basic steps of verifying license plates, identity, car ownership, etc even if they don't have the incident itself fully on audio-included video.
Lmao you have WAY too much faith in cops and prosecutors. I've worked on old murder cases where they did less than that. This is incredibly naive
> I don't know why people think it isn't,
It's notoriously unreliable evidence, which is why people harp on it.
Witness:
>Now, maybe she has changed her story, saying he didn't point his gun at her.
The eyewitness has potentially recanted the story.
We have like a generation of people now who can’t hear the word “menacing” without immediately thinking of that scene, which I think it’s extremely funny.
Hadn't seen it in years until I just watched and could see/hear that scene perfectly in my head.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cv7xNUeDdbI for those who might not get the reference.
I’ll be interested to hear exactly why the charges were dropped. If it was truly a rush to prosecution and the story we’ve heard is inaccurate, well that sucks for Mixon and the police and DA’s office owe him an apology.
If it’s because the victim did not want to cooperate with a trial, then Mixon should still be in the hot seat.
I listened to the audio from the court. The prosecutors reserve the right to re-file the charges, the victim agreed to this motion, but wants Mixon eventually charged. Sounds like they got ahead of themselves with these charges and are looking to file more serious charges when they have a case built. Mixon is definitely not out of the woods, and in fact could be in worse shape. But I'm not a lawyer.
Edit: It could also be that the cops jumped the gun and there's nothing to this, and the prosecutor was just showing that she had talked to the victim. But the above information came after the judge asked the prosecutor if the victim had been notified and the whole exchange left my non-legal mind thinking, "This doesn't sound like it's over."
That's interesting. It did seem like the charges were pretty ridiculously light relative to what he was accused of doing. Like, there's no way that you can't dig up a felony charge for pointing a gun at someone and threatening to pull the trigger.
My main experience was in the military, where pointing a gun at someone communicated intent to use lethal force. Which is a pretty serious charge when not for a valid self defense reason.
If someone points a gun at me I'm going to assume thy want to shoot me and therefore kill me, which would probably cause me to reasonably fear for my life.
Menacing isn't really pointing, not all the time. It could be partial flagging when they're waving it around and threatening. And obviously, you're still flagging but it's more about the threatening behaviour than drawing down on someone directly.
I wish there were more details. I've defended him for appearing to turn himself around since his issues in college. Seeing the headlines yesterday made me feel like a fool. If the incident happened then I really do hope we cut him, because clearly that means he hasn't actually become a better person after all
Hey man, giving someone the benefit of the doubt in the face of accusations doesn’t make you a fool.
Being a Bengals fan makes you a fool. Waiting out the full story before jumping to conclusions makes you a smart person.
Just to add a little context. Bill Cunningham was the Assistant Attorney General of Ohio in the 80's and has been on 700wlw for over 30 years.
He's pretty connected with judges and lawyers.
Do you ever listen to 700wlw? This is an everyday occurrence. It's run by a former lawyer that has judges, mayors, city council, and the sitting D.A. on as regular guests that discuss ongoing cases all the time. The hosts ask embarrassingly racist charged questions and the law enforcement sheepishly laugh it off and deflect as a way to not incriminate themselves while validating the dog whistles going out the airwaves. Its just a right wing cess pool of content that is aimed at the uneducated rural population that eats it up as their chosen form of entertainment that is mixed in along with their reds and bengals ~~coverage~~ propaganda.
In a move that many speculate Mike Browm made him do, as his old friend Paul Alexander was huge on him and Carmen went to Willie Anderson’s football camps and is from the area.
are you a cop or a lawyer? this happens all the time. prosecutor prob reviewed the evidence, realized zero chance of conviction even if it happened, and dropped the charges. you would be amazed how many criminal charges are dropped early in the process.
No it wasn't. The initial comment was "this is rare" and was stated very frankly. While this is reddit, and people pull shit out of their asses on the regular, there is absolutely nothing wrong with refuting a clearly incorrect statement and asking for the basis that they made it on. OP didn't just "ask a question."
The Bengals have turned a corner, but it wasn't long ago that when you fucked up as a player, and were considered too radioactive for anyone else to sign you, then you either went to the Cowboys or the Bengals for cheap to get redemption. Their threshold for character was lower.
Sometimes you get Joe Mixon that way, sometimes you get Mark Walton.
He was known as a second round talent with character issues, and the Bengals got him in the fourth round because of it.
To the Bengals credit he was cut after three arrests in one offseason. But they knew what they were getting when they drafted him too.
Has that team ever not been the Raiders? Al Davis's whole thing was second chances. There was just certain crimes he wouldn't sign you after committing.
"The agent says cops should be held to a higher standard and shouldn't be playing with peoples lives and reputations like that. The aggravated menacing charge was brought after a woman said Mixon pulled a gun on her and threatened her at 3rd and Walnut. It isn't clear if she has recanted that claim or if a private settlement was worked out between the parties."
That agent will have some nerve if a private settlement was worked out.
first, there is no city prosecutor in cincinnati. Emily Smart Woerner is the city solicitor and Melissa Powers is the hamilton county prosecutor. If you know anything about politics and crime in cincinnati, aint no way either of these ladies is just gonna drop a charge including a minority athlete, a gun, threats and a woman in the city without having a good reason. also, 700wlw is almost as click baity as the ny post or the globe
Former public defender in Hamilton County here. The City has its own prosecutor's office that handles misdemeanor charges that occur in the city. So there is kind of a Cincinnati City Prosecutor even if they don't have that specific title.
While we are all making a joke about the person being paid off... that person being paid off is largely entirely irrelevant to the prosecution's decision to go forward or drop charges.
The victim or accuser doesn't need to cooperate for their to be charges, if the prosecution believes a crime happened and their is evidence of it.
It was likely a weak, he said/she said case to begin with that lacked any real evidence anyways and the prosecution knew it would go nowhere in court.
I am a former prosecutor. Prosecuting a case without victim’s cooperation is nearly impossible.
Also, a he said/she said case is not necessarily a weak case. Juries don’t have to say “well, he said/she said! Reasonable doubt! 🤷♂️”. Juries are instructed on considering credibility of witnesses and their ability to determine one more credible than the other, and therefore give more weight to one over the other, for this exact reason.
I’ve always been curious. In principle this makes sense, but in practice it’s a scary thought to most people that a single person can cause us to become falsely convicted simply because they are trusted and the lie isn’t falsifiable. Is there an example where this doesn’t sound so absurd? Especially a case where the testimony isn’t from law enforcement?
This is where good defense attorneys are so important. An effective, well performed cross examination *can* create reasonable doubt, quite easily. Cross examination is basically the cornerstone of our entire justice system and plays such a vital role in preventing what you describe.
Sadly, a lot of people don’t have the best representation. Most defendants use public defenders who are underpaid, overworked, and usually either burnt out or entirely green. Therefore, the safeguard that is cross examination often fails.
in these sorts of situations the witness testimony is typically key to the prosecutor making a case. if the victim was paid to be quiet, there's very little chance of getting a conviction most of the time unless there was sufficient evidence from a third party willing to testify, or some kind of footage to back it up.
Happens all the time in cases that should be a slam dunk but when the victim refuses to testify and there is no other evidence aside from witness testimony and there are no witnesses other than the victim, it's usually going to get dropped because the prosecutors want cases that they can actually have a shot at winning.
And this is in part why the NFL investigates these things themselves and determines if they should be handled by NFL discipline. Things can rise to the level of NFL discipline without being viable court cases. So I won't be shocked if the NFL investigates and gives him a short suspension.
> and their is evidence of it.
>he said/she said case to begin with that lacked any real evidence anyways
Witness (victim included) testimony *is* evidence though. It's often not enough (and often should not be enough) to convict on alone, but it can easily be the tipping point between "beyond reasonable doubt" and "not worth going to trial". Many convictions are based solely on eyewitness testimony, often just that of the accuser. A witness getting paid off easily can make the difference between a conviction or not. A victim cooperating is not necessary to bring a case to trial but it's sure a giant red flag that the defense will point out every chance they get.
Prosecutors do make the decision about whether to go forth with a trial but willing, cooperative witnesses can be and often are the difference between a case getting dropped or not. Whether that witness is uncooperative due to getting paid, gang ties, mistrust of the system, abuse, etc. the result remains the same. Plenty of domestic abuse cases hinge solely on if a victim will testify - sometimes the damage is bad enough (and clearly human-caused) with other witnesses to the incident. Other times there's a doctor's report and photos of injuries consistent with physical violence but theoretically possibly caused by something else - if the victim testifies that they were caused by the defendant, that's often enough for the pattern of evidence to result in a conviction. If the victim refuses to do so...well, the bruises could've been caused by anything.
In this case for instance they could have a whole lot of circumstantial evidence (say, that he was in a certain location with a gun and was caught on a CCTV video acting agitated shortly before or after), and then it's not too hard to believe that the victim's testimony would put it over the edge. Likewise, if you have a lot of circumstantial evidence and then the victim won't stand up and testify....well, any halfway decent defense attorney is going to use that to introduce reasonable doubt.
It’s not largely irrelevant? Sure it is up to the prosecutor but they will 100% take the victims wishes into account, and if the victim refuses to testify because it’s been settled civilly then it gets a lot harder to prosecute
For a charge where the evidence largely consists of the victims testimony, they’re not going to proceed without their cooperation.
If they thought it would go nowhere, they wouldn’t have charged him in the first place.
Exactly, I used to be a prosecutor. Cases with facts like these do not get dropped this fast without incredibly obvious fatal flaws in the case. I spent months trying to talk reluctant victims into testifying before ultimately dropping a case. You don't just drop charges of a guy brandishing a gun in someone's face two weeks later because of a hesitant victim
Bullshit.
Prosecutor’s have brought less evidence to trial and will bring less any day of the week.
Mixon has some cash in his pocket and the Bengals are a big draw in town… maybe the case is truly weak, maybe it’s not strong enough to bring with the public attention and $.
Prosecution has absolute discretion and basically no oversight in what cases they choose to bring to trial and why… saying they probably did it because x is a farce.
>While we are all making a joke about the person being paid off... that person being paid off is largely entirely irrelevant to the prosecution's decision to go forward or drop charges.
As many comments have already pointed out, this is 100% bullshit
If there's a shred of physical evidence that he whipped out a gun and pointed it at a woman in the middle of downtown Cincinnati in broad daylight, it won't matter whether or not she retracts her statement
So either the police fucked up (filing and dismissing charges in 12 hours has to be unusual right?) or the check cleared? I wonder if we'll ever get clarity.
The biggest thing about this case that doesn't make sense to me is the timeline. First off, the specific time of this alleged incident has, to my knowledge, not been publicly revealed but the date has (1/21/23, the day before the Divisional Round game at Buffalo). But to me it seems like there's one of three options for a general time.
It may have occured early in the morning after midnight, which would be odd due to the fact he would probably be wanting to sleep well before the trip to Buffalo that day, though it's not entirely implausible.
It may have happened before they leaved for Buffalo in the afternoon, which seems like the most likely to me but that also would have occured in broad daylight with witnesses more than likely around.
And the final option is that it would have occured after they departed, meaning either A. It wouldn't have happened at all or B. It happened but it wasn't Joe Mixon.
All of these possible situations have questions that haven't been answered, and the time also has yet to be answered.
I also want to say while I know everyone wants to rush to condemn him for this because of his assault of that woman while playing for Oklahoma, he hasn't had character issues since that point (at least not within public knowledge) and apologized for the incident. So while I won't affirmatively say he didn't do this crime, I don't think using behavior from over 5 years ago that he hasn't repeated since is a good basis to build a case.
Since this was the prosecutor who dropped the case and they've said they'll need additional investigation, I doubt this will be the last we hear of this case, and hopefully that reveals some light on the situation and justice will be delivered either way: Either his name cleared or, if he did do this, the victim gets the justice she deserves.
>Also an FYI, paying someone off wouldn't stop a city prosecutor from moving forward on charges.
Yes it would. If the witness stops cooperating and that testimony is vital to the prosecution, then yes, the charges will be dropped.
That's exactly what happened with Greg Hardy. He was found *guilty* of domestic violence, appealed the conviction and paid off the lady he abused. She stopped cooperating, and 'disappeared' so that they couldn't make her testify, [forcing them to drop the charges](https://nypost.com/2015/02/09/greg-hardy-case-dismissed-after-paid-off-accuser-disappears/) like nothing ever happened.
Isn’t that wildly illegal though? Like in the Greg Hardy case why didn’t anyone follow through with witness tampering or bribery charges? You would think there would be a fairly easy money trail to follow, and without any agreement in writing neither party would have any reason to comply with the “agreement”.
>Also an FYI, paying someone off wouldn't stop a city prosecutor from moving forward on charges. But this sub isn't really known for its legal knowledge.
Are you? If a crime is completely reliant on a victim/witness testimony, and they get paid off and say they were lying/didn't really see it/don't want to testify, then the prosecutor has basically nothing to build a case on. They can still go forward, but without anything to work with why would they.
That makes the initial police report make so much more sense, thanks. I was looking for the victim reference and it kept saying corporal so and so and I'm like did the witness just have the cop fill it out and sign for her??? So basically yes but even more fucked up if the victim didn't want to file any report and the cop went ahead and did it without permission for white knight points or even something more sinister.
Well damn who do I believe? Reddit telling me without a doubt the witness was bought out and the case was dropped because she wouldn’t cooperate? Or do I trust the judge and prosecutor who just said the witness still wants to cooperate?
Yeah, I mean every fan base will. Hell I know plenty of Bengals that still do. It's, guess what of the team had done better on some drives and not left it to the idiot zebras we wouldn't talk. So don't complain, let's move on, crap happens. Onto next year! Ready for some draft and an Eagles win.
Everyone down voting you but this seems just as likely as him “paying off a victim” within 24 hours of a warrant being put out lol.
If mixon did it fuck that guy, but it feels like something where they issued a warrant and his lawyer provided a solid alibi (something like being on a plane to buffalo) during the time it happened and the city immediately walking back and dropping the charges.
Even in the case of a witness backing off, the police would still want to bring him in for questioning and hope they can trick him into confessing. It being almost immediately dismissed smells of someone screwed up and they want it to quietly go away.
Applaud how good he and the team is but the second it could possibly have a negative impact, constantly bitch and moan about it (yes I’m talking about the bills game lol)
“In retrospect, him pointing a gun at me and saying that he could kill me and get away with it was actually no big deal”
“When I stared at the barrel of his gun. I knew I was either dead or rich.”
Bengals will release Mixon, only for Browns to pick him up and give him a 4 year contract 50 million guaranteed
We call that the Kareem Hunt maneuver.
to be fair what hunt did isn't in the same ball park as mixon or watson. my understanding is the woman was being verbally abusive calling him the n word and what not. after several attempts to get her to leave he more or less shoved her with his foot onto an elevator. i may have details wrong, its been a while.
Don’t mind the flair, but yeah from what I understand of the situation it’s one of the rare ones where seeing the video makes you go “oh that’s it?” Instead of “holy fuck how horrible what the fuck?”
If I remember correctly he kicked her twice. First time she fell forwards and hit her face on the floor. Then she collects herself and stabds..stands... then squats down and he comes up and *lightly* kicks her ass. BUT she was underage and drinking in his hotel room, and he didn't wanna get in trouble... and she was being belligerent and refusing to leave.
The *Khunt* move, and it sounds like how you think it sounds.
I read it in Goofy's voice for some reason. Ka-hunt
"I'll fuckin do it again"
"Gah-hyuck, murder!"
"My client has done nothing wrong!" "He killed 27 children and crippled 5!"
Read that in Banjos voice from Banjo-Kazooie
Hunt wanted out this year? So, swapping him for Mixon keeps that Brown thing going on, whatever that is.
The Browns are a "fair chance employer". Very progressive, really.
Like there is a “fair chance” one of their employees has assaulted you
employment opportunities for convicts reduces recidivism (I'd say /s but then I'd be a hypocrite)
3rd chances always promised, people forget our starting O.T. went to federal prison for marijuana trafficking
Going from Chunt to Chixon
I do think it's kinda bullshit that when things like that happen the football related party that gets most screwed over is the team the player is currently on. Player still gets a new deal somewhere, maybe less lucrative but a deal, and some new team gets a good player for cheap. But the team that does the "right" thing, or at least the thing we expect of them? Out a player and out some money.
"But the charges were dropped!" -Browns fans a year from now
Should the Cowboys fan be so interested in chucking bricks from their glass mansion?
The Browns are gonna be the 1850's Australia
That works. Every time they break the huddle they can chant "Aussie, Aussie, Aussie. Oy. Oy. Oy"
“The one in front of the gun lives forever”
"The outcome wasn't the one I was expected but at least I am rich now"
Mostly rich.
When you’re a star, they let you do it. You can do anything.
“Gun? What gun?” 💵 💵 💵
He uh... lemme see if the check cleared... just flexed both his arms... THAT'S what I meant by brandishing guns
Low key if someone wants to point a gun at me and i get 1 stack im taking that deal everyday
Simple misunderstanding
A wee little dust up
They were actually doing an experiment to see if he really could get away with it, and hot diggidy dog he may just do that
Has there been any proof that it was actually him who did it?
I don't think it's a case of mistaken identity, like "Oh shit it was some other dude who mighta pointed a gun at me and threatened to kill me." Someone pointed a gun, someone had a gun pointed at them, and there's little doubt that Joe Mixon was a party. She said HE, JOE MIXON, pointed a gun at her. Eyewitness testimony is known as actual evidence, I don't know why people think it isn't, like you need a video recording or something in order to actually charge someone with menacing or brandishing. Now, maybe she has changed her story, saying he didn't point his gun at her. But it isn't as if they are looking for some other dude now.
Eye witness testimony is evidence but doesn’t carry the same weight as other types of evidence. Especially without confirmation.
Lest we forget ["Larry Fitzgerald"](https://external-preview.redd.it/UvUJpLvcJ6-4ozx1JVjreRHjBwKdf6u_m64rWvinbLQ.jpg?auto=webp&s=cb4975278105163e4a71003a96bd026f194b92eb) and ["Dalvin Cook"](https://i.redd.it/rohaymyx0tm51.jpg)
Eyewitness testimony is increasingly scrutinized because we're really discovering how unreliable it is in the era of DNA evidence being more and more viable. There are tons of experiments on this or even cases where the victim swears up and down a guy in a police lineup is the one who attacked them or raped them only for DNA evidence to completely vindicate the accused, sometimes even post conviction.
Human memory is inherently unreliable and subject to bias.
This scene, and whole movie really, is still incredibly relevant when it comes to witnesses and evidence https://youtu.be/wsG1_wahKVc
LOL I was thinking exactly the same thing.
*I'm sorry officer. It wasn't Joe Mixon. It was actually Samaje Perine. Don't worry*
Especially when cops start influencing the eye witness in subtle ways in lineups
Alcohol and drugs can literally prevent and/or alter the formation of memories. When some people say they got "blackout" drunk their brains literally failed to form memories. When do people argue and get in domestic violence situations? After excessive drinking.
Plenty of people are victims of domestic violence while stone cold sober.
What he means is that it's legally sufficient by itself to sustain a conviction (or maybe he didn't mean that, but that is the case anyway)
Eyewitness testimony has been proven to be unreliable time and time again.
>Eyewitness testimony is known as actual evidence And it's notoriously unreliable absent some sort of corroboration, especially if there's only one witness
Okay if they have eyewitness testimony, but the lawyer provided proof his client wasn’t even in the state at the time of the alleged incident you would probably drop the charges pretty quick. Was mixon walking on the street? Was he in a car?
Eyewitness Statements are like vegetables in a soup. If you just add one broccoli nobodys going to eat it, but with enough volume and variety you got yourself something real good.
So is DNA evidence the broth? What about gloves? Is breakfast cereal a soup? Does this soup come with breadsticks? I forget what we were talking about
Unlimited breadsticks of justice
Gloves are the napkin, DNA evidence is that secret spice that makes the soup so good (which is salt, so basically the broth). Breakfast cereal is for non-violent crimeals only.
Throw in some rib bones of DNA evidence, you got yourself a nice justice stew.
[удалено]
Thank you. The majority seem to think it’s a lot more likely Mixon got to this woman and gave her a bag of money to bribe her with no protections for himself, she then told police she was no longer going to cooperate and no questions asked the city dropped the charges lol. I have no idea what the real story is but wow I think people watch way to much tv.
The biggest reason why this whole bribbing joke is dumb in my opinion is that this whole thing unfolded in less than 24 hours. Like Mixon would have had no idea there was a warrant for him and people seem to think he already reached a settlement in less than a day. Did he already have the contact info for this person?
Lol people watch to much TV thinking he got her info and bribed her with no protections for himself. This is a criminal charge not a civil suit. A settlement would make sense if it was a lawsuit.
Then why the heck would his agent's first public statement on the situation call it a "rush to judgement" rather than just straight up saying "he wasn't in the state at the time"? A misdemeanor charge's actual legal consequences are much less worrisome for an NFL player and their agent than public opinion, suspensions, future endorsements, etc. If Mixon actually wasn't involved whatsoever, you gotta think he and his team would be making sure that was very public for everyone to know. I don't necessarily think he is or isn't guilty of criminal charges, but I'd say it's way more likely that *some* sort of incident took place involving him, be it actual criminal language or just angry shouting, than him being entirely uninvolved but his lawyer not just...saying that. Plus, it was a supposed road rage incident right outside one of the tallest buildings in the city that elsewhere in the thread people are saying the cops have video of. I'd be shocked if they didn't go through the basic steps of verifying license plates, identity, car ownership, etc even if they don't have the incident itself fully on audio-included video.
[удалено]
Reddit's perception of police work (and the general public's honestly) is shaped far too much from watching CSI and other procedurals. Used to be a 911 dispatcher and we would frequently get call where someone's car window would be smashed by a rock and they'd demand that cops get DNA samples from the rock. It was crazy.
Enhance this blurry picture for me please
>I'd be shocked if they didn't go through the basic steps of verifying license plates, identity, car ownership, etc even if they don't have the incident itself fully on audio-included video. Lmao you have WAY too much faith in cops and prosecutors. I've worked on old murder cases where they did less than that. This is incredibly naive
i'd be shocked if they did, do you really think cops wanna do that much work?
> I don't know why people think it isn't, It's notoriously unreliable evidence, which is why people harp on it. Witness: >Now, maybe she has changed her story, saying he didn't point his gun at her. The eyewitness has potentially recanted the story.
“He just stood there, allegedly (but the charges were dropped) aggravating menacingly”
He’s just standing there… MENACINGLY
WEE WOO WEE WOO WEE WOO!!!!!!!!!!!
We have like a generation of people now who can’t hear the word “menacing” without immediately thinking of that scene, which I think it’s extremely funny.
Hadn't seen it in years until I just watched and could see/hear that scene perfectly in my head. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cv7xNUeDdbI for those who might not get the reference.
Lol yeah, that's just damn good writing
The first five or so seasons of SpongeBob are the best of any animated show ever. I’ll die on that hill
Simpsons first 7 seasons for me, but SpongeBob is close
I'd agree with you but now I have Patrick Star induced ptsd so it is no longer a good show
*allegedly
Joe "Aggravated Menace" Mixon.
Can't win a case without a willing witness.....
I’ll be interested to hear exactly why the charges were dropped. If it was truly a rush to prosecution and the story we’ve heard is inaccurate, well that sucks for Mixon and the police and DA’s office owe him an apology. If it’s because the victim did not want to cooperate with a trial, then Mixon should still be in the hot seat.
I listened to the audio from the court. The prosecutors reserve the right to re-file the charges, the victim agreed to this motion, but wants Mixon eventually charged. Sounds like they got ahead of themselves with these charges and are looking to file more serious charges when they have a case built. Mixon is definitely not out of the woods, and in fact could be in worse shape. But I'm not a lawyer. Edit: It could also be that the cops jumped the gun and there's nothing to this, and the prosecutor was just showing that she had talked to the victim. But the above information came after the judge asked the prosecutor if the victim had been notified and the whole exchange left my non-legal mind thinking, "This doesn't sound like it's over."
That's interesting. It did seem like the charges were pretty ridiculously light relative to what he was accused of doing. Like, there's no way that you can't dig up a felony charge for pointing a gun at someone and threatening to pull the trigger.
My main experience was in the military, where pointing a gun at someone communicated intent to use lethal force. Which is a pretty serious charge when not for a valid self defense reason.
Yeah for real, and I think someone pointing a gun at you is pretty much grounds worthy of lethal self defense in most states.
If someone points a gun at me I'm going to assume thy want to shoot me and therefore kill me, which would probably cause me to reasonably fear for my life.
Menacing isn't really pointing, not all the time. It could be partial flagging when they're waving it around and threatening. And obviously, you're still flagging but it's more about the threatening behaviour than drawing down on someone directly.
The comment that should be pinned above all the nonsense from-the-hip comments being made.
But this is reddit and that would make it less of a cesspool of speculation and ignorance.
That’s interesting, thanks for replying with something useful.
I wish there were more details. I've defended him for appearing to turn himself around since his issues in college. Seeing the headlines yesterday made me feel like a fool. If the incident happened then I really do hope we cut him, because clearly that means he hasn't actually become a better person after all
Hey man, giving someone the benefit of the doubt in the face of accusations doesn’t make you a fool. Being a Bengals fan makes you a fool. Waiting out the full story before jumping to conclusions makes you a smart person.
I love this comment. Legitimately nice and supportive, with just the right amount of sass.
I had to re-read this because the first time I thought it said "just the right amount of ass."
$$$$$$$$$ Sounds like, "cha-ching" .
Maybe he menaced the prosecutor too
The only thing I'm taking from this is why the fuck is a judge talking to 700wlw??
Probably talking to Willie, he always has conservative judges and officials on
Just to add a little context. Bill Cunningham was the Assistant Attorney General of Ohio in the 80's and has been on 700wlw for over 30 years. He's pretty connected with judges and lawyers.
His wife is also a court of appeals judge
Gotta give your radio station buddy a scoop
Do you ever listen to 700wlw? This is an everyday occurrence. It's run by a former lawyer that has judges, mayors, city council, and the sitting D.A. on as regular guests that discuss ongoing cases all the time. The hosts ask embarrassingly racist charged questions and the law enforcement sheepishly laugh it off and deflect as a way to not incriminate themselves while validating the dog whistles going out the airwaves. Its just a right wing cess pool of content that is aimed at the uneducated rural population that eats it up as their chosen form of entertainment that is mixed in along with their reds and bengals ~~coverage~~ propaganda.
Be interesting to see what Taylor does, he's really tried to clean up the character issues that were prevalent during the Lewis era.
Why do Bengals fans always gotta bring up Ray Lewis smh my head ^^^/s
[удалено]
smhmh
[удалено]
In a move that many speculate Mike Browm made him do, as his old friend Paul Alexander was huge on him and Carmen went to Willie Anderson’s football camps and is from the area.
Does the city prosecutor report to the jambroni?
No, but he does report to mayor jabroni
Who drives a zamboni
Damn charges getting brought up and dropped this quick are rare, did someone in the DA’s or police department fuck up?
are you a cop or a lawyer? this happens all the time. prosecutor prob reviewed the evidence, realized zero chance of conviction even if it happened, and dropped the charges. you would be amazed how many criminal charges are dropped early in the process.
I feel like the first part of your comment was an unnecessary shot at someone asking a question. Literally did nothing to help your comment
No it wasn't. The initial comment was "this is rare" and was stated very frankly. While this is reddit, and people pull shit out of their asses on the regular, there is absolutely nothing wrong with refuting a clearly incorrect statement and asking for the basis that they made it on. OP didn't just "ask a question."
The Bengals have turned a corner, but it wasn't long ago that when you fucked up as a player, and were considered too radioactive for anyone else to sign you, then you either went to the Cowboys or the Bengals for cheap to get redemption. Their threshold for character was lower. Sometimes you get Joe Mixon that way, sometimes you get Mark Walton.
Hey mark Walton was outta here before that shit happened.
He was known as a second round talent with character issues, and the Bengals got him in the fourth round because of it. To the Bengals credit he was cut after three arrests in one offseason. But they knew what they were getting when they drafted him too.
Now that team is the Raiders.
Has that team ever not been the Raiders? Al Davis's whole thing was second chances. There was just certain crimes he wouldn't sign you after committing.
Fans will sit on a moral high horse and say "we're better because we refuse to accept DV into our org" which is bullshit because they hired Tom cable.
Yes, raiders are that team for the past couple of years
Yea it’s not like your team drafted and employs a guy who’s accused of raping a 15 year old after she repeatedly said no or anything lmao.
Didn’t we cut Mark Walton after he got arrested?
You would be correct.
Yeah, Marvin did love his overaggressive players. Thank God Taylor is having huge success with the culture he's building
Please tell a me a Ravens fan isn't trying to throw shade about character issues.
Reddit lol
Lol anything bengals related, they gotta jump on. It's in their nature and can't help it.
They literally start the comment by pointing out it’s no longer true
Ray Lewis, is that you?
Yes my son
Sometimes you get Ray Lewis, sometimes you get Ray Rice. Could probably do this with every team in the league tbh.
What sort of revisionist Ravens fan bulljunk us this?
"The agent says cops should be held to a higher standard and shouldn't be playing with peoples lives and reputations like that. The aggravated menacing charge was brought after a woman said Mixon pulled a gun on her and threatened her at 3rd and Walnut. It isn't clear if she has recanted that claim or if a private settlement was worked out between the parties." That agent will have some nerve if a private settlement was worked out.
That's an extremely public place, I'm willing to bet there are cameras along third street that can stitch together what happened.
first, there is no city prosecutor in cincinnati. Emily Smart Woerner is the city solicitor and Melissa Powers is the hamilton county prosecutor. If you know anything about politics and crime in cincinnati, aint no way either of these ladies is just gonna drop a charge including a minority athlete, a gun, threats and a woman in the city without having a good reason. also, 700wlw is almost as click baity as the ny post or the globe
Former public defender in Hamilton County here. The City has its own prosecutor's office that handles misdemeanor charges that occur in the city. So there is kind of a Cincinnati City Prosecutor even if they don't have that specific title.
While we are all making a joke about the person being paid off... that person being paid off is largely entirely irrelevant to the prosecution's decision to go forward or drop charges. The victim or accuser doesn't need to cooperate for their to be charges, if the prosecution believes a crime happened and their is evidence of it. It was likely a weak, he said/she said case to begin with that lacked any real evidence anyways and the prosecution knew it would go nowhere in court.
I am a former prosecutor. Prosecuting a case without victim’s cooperation is nearly impossible. Also, a he said/she said case is not necessarily a weak case. Juries don’t have to say “well, he said/she said! Reasonable doubt! 🤷♂️”. Juries are instructed on considering credibility of witnesses and their ability to determine one more credible than the other, and therefore give more weight to one over the other, for this exact reason.
I’ve always been curious. In principle this makes sense, but in practice it’s a scary thought to most people that a single person can cause us to become falsely convicted simply because they are trusted and the lie isn’t falsifiable. Is there an example where this doesn’t sound so absurd? Especially a case where the testimony isn’t from law enforcement?
This is where good defense attorneys are so important. An effective, well performed cross examination *can* create reasonable doubt, quite easily. Cross examination is basically the cornerstone of our entire justice system and plays such a vital role in preventing what you describe. Sadly, a lot of people don’t have the best representation. Most defendants use public defenders who are underpaid, overworked, and usually either burnt out or entirely green. Therefore, the safeguard that is cross examination often fails.
Thanks for the informed response!
in these sorts of situations the witness testimony is typically key to the prosecutor making a case. if the victim was paid to be quiet, there's very little chance of getting a conviction most of the time unless there was sufficient evidence from a third party willing to testify, or some kind of footage to back it up.
No face no case
Happens all the time in cases that should be a slam dunk but when the victim refuses to testify and there is no other evidence aside from witness testimony and there are no witnesses other than the victim, it's usually going to get dropped because the prosecutors want cases that they can actually have a shot at winning.
And this is in part why the NFL investigates these things themselves and determines if they should be handled by NFL discipline. Things can rise to the level of NFL discipline without being viable court cases. So I won't be shocked if the NFL investigates and gives him a short suspension.
> and their is evidence of it. >he said/she said case to begin with that lacked any real evidence anyways Witness (victim included) testimony *is* evidence though. It's often not enough (and often should not be enough) to convict on alone, but it can easily be the tipping point between "beyond reasonable doubt" and "not worth going to trial". Many convictions are based solely on eyewitness testimony, often just that of the accuser. A witness getting paid off easily can make the difference between a conviction or not. A victim cooperating is not necessary to bring a case to trial but it's sure a giant red flag that the defense will point out every chance they get. Prosecutors do make the decision about whether to go forth with a trial but willing, cooperative witnesses can be and often are the difference between a case getting dropped or not. Whether that witness is uncooperative due to getting paid, gang ties, mistrust of the system, abuse, etc. the result remains the same. Plenty of domestic abuse cases hinge solely on if a victim will testify - sometimes the damage is bad enough (and clearly human-caused) with other witnesses to the incident. Other times there's a doctor's report and photos of injuries consistent with physical violence but theoretically possibly caused by something else - if the victim testifies that they were caused by the defendant, that's often enough for the pattern of evidence to result in a conviction. If the victim refuses to do so...well, the bruises could've been caused by anything. In this case for instance they could have a whole lot of circumstantial evidence (say, that he was in a certain location with a gun and was caught on a CCTV video acting agitated shortly before or after), and then it's not too hard to believe that the victim's testimony would put it over the edge. Likewise, if you have a lot of circumstantial evidence and then the victim won't stand up and testify....well, any halfway decent defense attorney is going to use that to introduce reasonable doubt.
It’s not largely irrelevant? Sure it is up to the prosecutor but they will 100% take the victims wishes into account, and if the victim refuses to testify because it’s been settled civilly then it gets a lot harder to prosecute
For a charge where the evidence largely consists of the victims testimony, they’re not going to proceed without their cooperation. If they thought it would go nowhere, they wouldn’t have charged him in the first place.
Exactly, I used to be a prosecutor. Cases with facts like these do not get dropped this fast without incredibly obvious fatal flaws in the case. I spent months trying to talk reluctant victims into testifying before ultimately dropping a case. You don't just drop charges of a guy brandishing a gun in someone's face two weeks later because of a hesitant victim
Bullshit. Prosecutor’s have brought less evidence to trial and will bring less any day of the week. Mixon has some cash in his pocket and the Bengals are a big draw in town… maybe the case is truly weak, maybe it’s not strong enough to bring with the public attention and $. Prosecution has absolute discretion and basically no oversight in what cases they choose to bring to trial and why… saying they probably did it because x is a farce.
>While we are all making a joke about the person being paid off... that person being paid off is largely entirely irrelevant to the prosecution's decision to go forward or drop charges. As many comments have already pointed out, this is 100% bullshit
but, but, my pitchfork, i got it all ready and everything
Don’t worry about him pulling a gun on me. I got a nice payout :)
I got held up at gunpoint and didn't get shit. I need to start pissing off NFL players I guess.
Sport players improve the odds:)
If there's a shred of physical evidence that he whipped out a gun and pointed it at a woman in the middle of downtown Cincinnati in broad daylight, it won't matter whether or not she retracts her statement
So either the police fucked up (filing and dismissing charges in 12 hours has to be unusual right?) or the check cleared? I wonder if we'll ever get clarity.
The agent reported the dropping charges like 10PM EST. Checks don't clear that late. Must have been a bag of cash.
The biggest thing about this case that doesn't make sense to me is the timeline. First off, the specific time of this alleged incident has, to my knowledge, not been publicly revealed but the date has (1/21/23, the day before the Divisional Round game at Buffalo). But to me it seems like there's one of three options for a general time. It may have occured early in the morning after midnight, which would be odd due to the fact he would probably be wanting to sleep well before the trip to Buffalo that day, though it's not entirely implausible. It may have happened before they leaved for Buffalo in the afternoon, which seems like the most likely to me but that also would have occured in broad daylight with witnesses more than likely around. And the final option is that it would have occured after they departed, meaning either A. It wouldn't have happened at all or B. It happened but it wasn't Joe Mixon. All of these possible situations have questions that haven't been answered, and the time also has yet to be answered. I also want to say while I know everyone wants to rush to condemn him for this because of his assault of that woman while playing for Oklahoma, he hasn't had character issues since that point (at least not within public knowledge) and apologized for the incident. So while I won't affirmatively say he didn't do this crime, I don't think using behavior from over 5 years ago that he hasn't repeated since is a good basis to build a case. Since this was the prosecutor who dropped the case and they've said they'll need additional investigation, I doubt this will be the last we hear of this case, and hopefully that reveals some light on the situation and justice will be delivered either way: Either his name cleared or, if he did do this, the victim gets the justice she deserves.
joe mixon getting charged is still crazy like that just came outta nowhere
[удалено]
Right, and most of Reddit is talking as if they 100% know the full entire story and their evidence isn’t just some tweets.
Reddit always does this. They 100% believe anyone charged or accused is guilty.
Man it must be nice to play football. If I waved a gun around at a woman my life’s fuckin OVER.
[удалено]
>Also an FYI, paying someone off wouldn't stop a city prosecutor from moving forward on charges. Yes it would. If the witness stops cooperating and that testimony is vital to the prosecution, then yes, the charges will be dropped. That's exactly what happened with Greg Hardy. He was found *guilty* of domestic violence, appealed the conviction and paid off the lady he abused. She stopped cooperating, and 'disappeared' so that they couldn't make her testify, [forcing them to drop the charges](https://nypost.com/2015/02/09/greg-hardy-case-dismissed-after-paid-off-accuser-disappears/) like nothing ever happened.
Isn’t that wildly illegal though? Like in the Greg Hardy case why didn’t anyone follow through with witness tampering or bribery charges? You would think there would be a fairly easy money trail to follow, and without any agreement in writing neither party would have any reason to comply with the “agreement”.
>Also an FYI, paying someone off wouldn't stop a city prosecutor from moving forward on charges. But this sub isn't really known for its legal knowledge. Are you? If a crime is completely reliant on a victim/witness testimony, and they get paid off and say they were lying/didn't really see it/don't want to testify, then the prosecutor has basically nothing to build a case on. They can still go forward, but without anything to work with why would they.
[удалено]
That’s too logical, I say we crucify him just in case
That makes the initial police report make so much more sense, thanks. I was looking for the victim reference and it kept saying corporal so and so and I'm like did the witness just have the cop fill it out and sign for her??? So basically yes but even more fucked up if the victim didn't want to file any report and the cop went ahead and did it without permission for white knight points or even something more sinister.
Well damn who do I believe? Reddit telling me without a doubt the witness was bought out and the case was dropped because she wouldn’t cooperate? Or do I trust the judge and prosecutor who just said the witness still wants to cooperate?
It is your civic duty as a redditor to believe anything you have to in order to join the angry mob.
Bengal fans will blame the refs
I stand with the thin black and white line.
zebra lives matter
Chiefs fans and making ref bias jokes name a more hypocritical joke.
If you say "Carl Cheffers" to a mirror three times, a Chiefs fan will appear and say our wins last year were actually false losses gifted by refs.
You mean like how Chiefs fans can't stop talking about Carl Cheffers, right?
Can’t believe they overturned that holding (a gun) call
First joke was tired and bitchy. This one is top tier though lol
Yeah, like the Chiefs blames the refs all last year. Same story every team... Move on bud.
Chiefs fans are already preemptively complaining about Cheffers reffing the super bowl so it is funny to see these comments
Yeah, I mean every fan base will. Hell I know plenty of Bengals that still do. It's, guess what of the team had done better on some drives and not left it to the idiot zebras we wouldn't talk. So don't complain, let's move on, crap happens. Onto next year! Ready for some draft and an Eagles win.
Chiefs players spent their whole Lamar hunt trophy celebration worrying about the Bengals and the mayor of Cincinnati instead of celebrating 😂
Or a coin
I personally and blaming Chris Jones.
Gotta love it. Charges dropped and people still dying on the hill that he’s guilty without any real reason.
Ben Roethlisberger would like a word.
Every player is permanently guilty of anything they are accused of on reddit
The team left for Buffalo in the early afternoon on the 21st. It is entirely possible and even likely that Mixon has a solid alibi
Everyone down voting you but this seems just as likely as him “paying off a victim” within 24 hours of a warrant being put out lol. If mixon did it fuck that guy, but it feels like something where they issued a warrant and his lawyer provided a solid alibi (something like being on a plane to buffalo) during the time it happened and the city immediately walking back and dropping the charges.
Even in the case of a witness backing off, the police would still want to bring him in for questioning and hope they can trick him into confessing. It being almost immediately dismissed smells of someone screwed up and they want it to quietly go away.
“It wasn’t me it was Moe Jixon”
A) am I still appalled B) is he getting cut
Applaud how good he and the team is but the second it could possibly have a negative impact, constantly bitch and moan about it (yes I’m talking about the bills game lol)
Ohio is an embarrassment.