Joe Mixon's crib

[PatternMaster]

56 minutes ago, sparky151 said:

Mixon was acquitted because his lawyer successfully argued that the victim was more angry than scared when Joe showed her his gun. That argument won't get him very far in the court of Goodell.  

 

Mixon was acquitted because the lady was the one who felt slighted that Mixon supposedly cut her off, speed up to get beside him in traffic, and decided to flip him off...how you go from that to a victim is beyond me and the courts..which is why he was found not guilty. 

 

There is no evidence that Mixon had a gun, it's just the word of a person that has been to be unreliable at best and more than likely lying about how the situation unfolded. 

 

 

 

[Le Tigre]

"Beyond Reasonable Doubt" is a cornerstone of American criminal law, thank God. It is not (or at least shouldn't be) what opinions are...rather what hard facts in evidence are--far beyond what is simply implied. 

 

The civil case can be packed with opinion, hearsay, and third-hand indication--and likely will be. At least there, it will only be a question of how much money and not a person's incarceration.  

[|BlackJesus|]

Has a photo or name of this supposed "victim" surfaced? 

 

If we get to see Mixon in court, then why not her as well? 

[|High School Harry|]

19 minutes ago, BlackJesus said:

Has a photo or name of this supposed "victim" surfaced? 

 

If we get to see Mixon in court, then why not her as well? 

https://gray-prod.video.arc-cdn.net/wp-gray/20230816/64dd5115f39fe137088477ac/file_1920x1080-5400-v4/hd.m3u8

 

👆🏽Posted this earlier.  She is called Amber Meeks I think twice in the video.

Works as an asst mgr at one of the bars at The Banks.

Probably has a Facebook page if one would care to look it up.

[MOC]

1 hour ago, High School Harry said:

https://gray-prod.video.arc-cdn.net/wp-gray/20230816/64dd5115f39fe137088477ac/file_1920x1080-5400-v4/hd.m3u8

 

👆🏽Posted this earlier.  She is called Amber Meeks I think twice in the video.

Works as an asst mgr at one of the bars at The Banks.

Probably has a Facebook page if one would care to look it up.

Amazing what a simple search on the ole interweb can find. No "s" on last name. No pics and may not be the same person, but if so, is 44 years old, has an email address with Braxton Brewing (OTR) and lives in Elmwood Place? 

[sparky151]

4 hours ago, Jackie Treehorn said:

There is no proof that Mixon was actually carrying a gun. The way she described his gun did not match any gun that he owns according to police.

 

Her testimony under oath is evidence. What Mixon's lawyer says isn't. Mixon could have (but certainly wasn't obligated) taken the stand to dispute her testimony. 

 

Not taking the stand was probably a wise move in terms of keeping him out of jail. But the defense put on by his lawyer may hurt his chances of avoiding NFL punishment. 

[Jamie_B]

19 minutes ago, sparky151 said:

 

Her testimony under oath is evidence. What Mixon's lawyer says isn't. Mixon could have (but certainly wasn't obligated) taken the stand to dispute her testimony. 

 

Not taking the stand was probably a wise move in terms of keeping him out of jail. But the defense put on by his lawyer may hurt his chances of avoiding NFL punishment. 

 

That's a stretch. 

Her testimonial, and I will even be generous and say shes not lying, is her belief of what she saw. Without a video or another eyewitness it's simply her word which is not nearly enough to be considered "evidence"

 

Try removing your bias here.

[T-Dub]

4 hours ago, Jamie_B said:

 

 

I still haven't seen proof he had a gun, just her word about it, to which she could not identify the gun itself.

 

Yeah that was a surprise, I figured when they dropped and then refiled charges they had him on camera. Guess it was just CPD being thirsty. That part isn't surprising at all.

[Jamie_B]

8 minutes ago, T-Dub said:

 

Yeah that was a surprise, I figured when they dropped and then refiled charges they had him on camera. Guess it was just CPD being thirsty. That part isn't surprising at all.

I thought the same.

[IKOTA]

You know what the most unfortunate part of all this is? That Joe Mixon had to come out of pocket over $100,000 unnecessarily. There should have never been any charges filed against him based on the evidence or lack thereof.  Yet he had to pay lawyers who spent countless hours (well, I assume they counted every single hour lol) at $500 per. Absolute nonsense.  I was told they spent over 200 hrs on this case. 
 

I don’t like Mixon very much as a person, but this was an injustice done to him IMO. 

[-GoBengals-]

Just now, IKOTA said:

You know what the most unfortunate part of all this is? That Joe Mixon had to come out of pocket over $100,000 unnecessarily. There should have never been any charges filed against him based on the evidence or lack thereof.  Yet he had to pay lawyers who spent countless hours (well, I assume they counted every single hour lol) at $500 per. Absolute nonsense.  I was told they spent over 200 hrs on this case. 
 

I don’t like Mixon very much as a person, but this was an injustice done to him IMO. 

 

aside from me not seeing much not to like about him as a person, you are correct, he got fucked pretty hard on this, but most everyone in here was ready to dry him up over and over anyway.. they dont much care if he did anything wrong. 

[|Elflocko|]

2 hours ago, GoBengals said:

 

aside from me not seeing much not to like about him as a person, you are correct, he got fucked pretty hard on this, but most everyone in here was ready to dry him up over and over anyway.. they dont much care if he did anything wrong. 

wait, do you like him or not like him? I can’t tell…

[sparky151]

15 hours ago, Jamie_B said:

 

That's a stretch. 

Her testimonial, and I will even be generous and say shes not lying, is her belief of what she saw. Without a video or another eyewitness it's simply her word which is not nearly enough to be considered "evidence"

 

Try removing your bias here.

 

Uh, it was admitted into court by the judge. That's the very definition of evidence. Mixon could have taken the stand and denied her claims but that would have exposed him to cross-examination. So he relied on his lawyers to dispute her testimony. Statements in court by lawyers are not evidence. 

 

The judge didn't find her testimony convincing enough to meet the "beyond a reasonable doubt" standard and send Mixon to jail but that won't be the standard the NFL uses when considering whether to discipline Mixon or not. They will have the testimony of an eyewitness who says he had a gun. 

[Jamie_B]

12 minutes ago, sparky151 said:

 

Uh, it was admitted into court by the judge. That's the very definition of evidence. Mixon could have taken the stand and denied her claims but that would have exposed him to cross-examination. So he relied on his lawyers to dispute her testimony. Statements in court by lawyers are not evidence. 

 

The judge didn't find her testimony convincing enough to meet the "beyond a reasonable doubt" standard and send Mixon to jail but that won't be the standard the NFL uses when considering whether to discipline Mixon or not. They will have the testimony of an eyewitness who says he had a gun. 

 

Did I miss where there was a 3rd party eyewitness?

[sparky151]

It was Ms Meek, the alleged victim. Why do you think her testimony isn't evidence? The judge certainly admitted it without striking it for any deficiencies.

 

More to the point, Mixon wasn't required to take the stand at his trial but will be required to answer questions from the NFL. There is no 5th amendment protection from the league. 

[Jamie_B]

6 hours ago, sparky151 said:

It was Ms Meek, the alleged victim. Why do you think her testimony isn't evidence? The judge certainly admitted it without striking it for any deficiencies.

 

More to the point, Mixon wasn't required to take the stand at his trial but will be required to answer questions from the NFL. There is no 5th amendment protection from the league. 

 

 

  

9 hours ago, Jamie_B said:

 

Did I miss where there was a 3rd party eyewitness?

 

 

So no.

 

The judge also did not find her credible, as evident by the fact Joe was not guilty, but you think the NFL will? Doubtful.

 

 

[|High School Harry|]

https://www.yahoo.com/sports/joe-mixon-boycott-applies-specific-232440771.html

 

Joe Mixon: Boycott applies to specific reporters, not entire outlets

ProFootball Talk on NBC Sports

 

Bengals running back Joe Mixon decided not to speak to reporters on Sunday, his first availability after being cleared of menacing charges on Thursday. He also made it clear that there are four reporters to whom he will not speak, regardless of affiliation.

Although Ben Baby of ESPN.com listed four specific outlets — ESPN.com, the Cincinnati Enquirer, Sports Illustrated, and Pro Football Network — Mixon tells PFT that he's not boycotting any outlet. His problems are with four specific reporters, regardless of where they work.

Mixon listed the four reporters for PFT: Ben Baby, Kelsey Conway, James Rapien, and Jay Morrison.

The bulk of Mixon's frustration seems to be directed at Baby. In response to Baby's tweet explaining that Mixon said reporters had been "disrespectful" but that Mixon didn't elaborate on the reasons for his assertion, Mixon's agent, Peter Schaffer, tweeted this: "You know exactly why we don’t talk to you. You consistently look for the negative and always are putting the players down. We have given you ample chances to correct the situation and you refuse. You made your bed now sleep in it. Don’t tweet to people that you don’t know why."

Schaffer, speaking to PFT, pointed out that Baby already seems to be retaliating, by concluding his latest article with this gratuitous swipe at Mixon: "After reaching his first Pro Bowl in 2021, Mixon's success rate was 41.0% in 2022, which was slightly below the league average of 41.7% among players with 150 or more carries, per NFL Next Gen Stats data." [Editor's note: What does that even mean?]

Mixon intends to cooperate with reporters generally. But he does not intend to answer questions from those four specific reporters, regardless of which outlet they're affiliated with.

 

**** Ben Baby and... Kelsey Conway!!!  Are you kidding me?

[|BlackJesus|]

24 minutes ago, High School Harry said:

there are four reporters to whom he will not speak... Mixon listed the four reporters: Ben Baby, Kelsey Conway, James Rapien, and Jay Morrison.

 

This is not a good look for Mixon. So if Conway asks him questions on the sidelines is he just going to ignore her? He should be a professional. The city prosecutor and police screwed him, not sports reporters. 

[T-Dub]

 

So after being exonerated, instead of taking the opportunity to move forward he's going to throw more gas on the fire?

 

He may not have waved a gun at someone, IDK, but something ain't right with this dude.

 

I say again, Go Chris Evans.

[-GoBengals-]

On 8/18/2023 at 11:22 PM, Elflocko said:

wait, do you like him or not like him? I can’t tell…

lol holy shit.

 

i like him.

[UncleEarl]

Woof.  The old adage of "don't pick a fight with someone who buys ink by the gallon" applies here.  

[|High School Harry|]

[PatternMaster]

Joe needs a new agent and he needs some help with healthy conflict resolution. Joe isn't gonna win beefing with the media, especially with the shooting on his property trial that hasn't occurred yet. 

 

He needs to understand that the media is a tool to be manipulated into getting your message across and enhancing your personal brand, not talking to them like a sulking teenager doesn't help you achieve those goals and it makes you look childish, especially if they are reporting on facts...which they are.

 

Joe is probably frustrated because this offseason has been awful, from being forced to take a pay cut, to the bullshit menacing charge, and the shooting on his property....he's needs a vacay. 

 

[Arkansas Bengal]

Court case complete, Bengals' Mixon focuses on being 'leader'

• 
  Ben Baby, ESPN Staff WriterAug 21, 2023, 06:11 PM ET

CINCINNATI -- Cincinnati Bengals running back Joe Mixon conveyed a sense of gratitude at training camp Monday.

 

In his first news conference since the end of last season, and since a judge ruled Mixon not guilty of aggravated menacing, Mixon said it was a "great thing" to have his contract situation and criminal case behind him.

 

When asked if he had any regrets about making headlines off the field or what happened over the course of the offseason, Mixon said it's a "blessing" to be with the Bengals for another season.

 

"At the end of the day, I'm going to keep it to football questions," Mixon said. "But it's a great thing for everything to be pretty much over with and to be able to hone in on being the best teammate that I can possibly be, being the leader and the captain that I am around the team."

Mixon's comments came one day after he announced a boycott of certain reporters for coverage he deemed to be disrespectful.

 

The seventh-year running back also detailed his restructured contract that allowed him to remain with the Bengals.

 

After the front office repeatedly stressed uncertainty about Mixon's roster status for 2023, the Bengals and Mixon agreed to a new deal in which Mixon's salary cap charge was lowered from over $12 million to $8.5 million for this year, according to Roster Management System.

On Monday, Mixon was asked about why it was important for him to restructure his deal.

 

"We see the Super Bowl window," Mixon said. "As long as we keep everybody together, we're right there. Hopefully these guys get their deals done."

 

The Bengals' 2020 draft class is eligible for contract extensions. Linebacker Logan Wilson received a four-year deal worth up to $37.25 million. Quarterback Joe Burrow and wide receiver Tee Higgins are the others who have been in discussions regarding a deal.

In his opening comments, Mixon cited his relationship with team president Mike Brown since the Bengals took him in the second round of the 2017 draft.

 

"I can't ask for a better relationship from owner to player standpoint," Mixon said.

Mixon is looking to enjoy similar success that he had in 2021, when he reached his first Pro Bowl. In 2022, he averaged 58.1 yards per game after averaging 75.3 yards the previous season.

 

On Friday, Bengals coach Zac Taylor was asked what will make the upcoming year a successful one for Mixon. Taylor said the primary concern is that the offense is among the best in the NFL.

 

"How many rushing yards a game and how many passing yards a game we have does not matter to me," Taylor said. "We just want to be one of the top scoring teams in the league, do a great job possessing the ball when we need to and keep our defense off the field, controlling the game that way."

 

Mixon, who is under contract through the end of the 2024 season, said he wants to finish his career in Cincinnati and wants to extend his time in the NFL for as long as possible.

 

"I'm just going to try to do whatever I can to be what I am to my teammates and to the fans and try to do whatever I can to be that positive role model in this locker room," Mixon said. "Because that's what matters."

 

https://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/38235326/court-case-complete-bengals-mixon-focuses-being-leader

[T-Dub]

The organization is pushing way too hard with him.  Just let him play football, he doesn't need to be Superman or cure cancer. It's like they're in full damage control spin mode over what turned out to be nothing.

 

Suspect the whole unresolved Nerf War incident may have them shook.  That one's not just some road rage accusation, a kid actually got shot.  Felonious brother in law blasting away in Joe's back yard with an AK he should've never had access to is going to be a lot harder to excuse.  Said it before but even without any legal consequences it raises the question of WTF made them react that way.  

 

Either way I think they'd be better off not putting the spotlight on him right now.