Has the statute of limitations run out for Peyton's sexual assault?

[cdumler7]

There are more actual witnesses to wrongdoing in that one article about Manning than to all cheating the Patriots are alleged to have done in the entire history of their franchise, excepting only the time a photographer was caught filming from an angle forbidden by a recent league memo. (That guy was seen by LOTS of folks.)

There are a whole lot of inferences, guesswork, and refusal to believe high school physics. But no actual witnesses.

So just like Defaltegate you have your word against another person's word.

 

[johnson]

To repeat -- he seems to have done bad stuff within the past few months.

And the figure is more like 15 years because of the book.

But otherwise, yeah -- in the interim he seems to have been pretty clean. All celebrities are obnoxious at their worst, and a lot of athletes dabble in PEDs, as he seems to have. Nothing jumps out for a long period that makes him worse than anybody else (assuming there wasn't yet something else that he covered up too).

His Dad is a tool. Eli is a complete DB. I've found myself fighting it but liking Peyton. I know he's a brand, but he sure sold it well.

 

[Breed]

To the question why was this brought up now.

Per the article

But when the documents were sent to me on Tuesday, two days after the Super Bowl

If the above is true. King just learned about it.

To the question is King doing this because Manning's white? Probably, in part. Regardless of that. Isn't the real issue whether or not its true?

As far as why didn't King give both sides of the story? He did. Manning's version of events is in his story.

 

[cdumler7]

To the question why was this brought up now.

Per the article


If the above is true. King just learned about it.

To the question is King doing this because Manning's white? Probably, in part. Regardless of that. Isn't the real issue whether or not its true?

As far as why didn't King give both sides of the story? He did. Manning's version of events is in his story.

You can't say he gave the whole side of Manning's story. I mean there is no mention of the affidavit that was signed by her that it was Manning just mooning her and that there was no contact of his genitals to her face. There is no mention of her changing her story 8 years after the actual incident took place. There is no mention of Manning's counter suit. So no he did not give both sides of the story.

 

[Oldschool739]

You can't say he gave the whole side of Manning's story. I mean there is no mention of the affidavit that was signed by her that it was Manning just mooning her and that there was no contact of his genitals to her face. There is no mention of her changing her story 8 years after the actual incident took place. There is no mention of Manning's counter suit. So no he did not give both sides of the story.

They're just Mad Bro !!!...Shaun King's super bro hero, got embarrassed in front of the world in the biggest game in sports and this is what they do, discredit the enforcer....
You can take the yo out of the hood but you can't take the hood out of the yo, ala Shaun King !!

 

[Breed]

You can't say he gave the whole side of Manning's story. I mean there is no mention of the affidavit that was signed by her that it was Manning just mooning her and that there was no contact of his genitals to her face. There is no mention of her changing her story 8 years after the actual incident took place. There is no mention of Manning's counter suit. So no he did not give both sides of the story.

OK. Part of Manning's version of him intending to moon a teammate, not put his dick and nuts on her head and face is in the article.

 

[cdumler7]

To the question why was this brought up now.

Per the article


If the above is true. King just learned about it.

To the question is King doing this because Manning's white? Probably, in part. Regardless of that. Isn't the real issue whether or not its true?

As far as why didn't King give both sides of the story? He did. Manning's version of events is in his story.

He also painted Naughright as the righteous amazing professional when she has been known to have a big time profane mouth just like Manning said she did and she has had quite a few lawsuits throughout the years especially against famous people.

 

[Breed]

They're just Mad Bro !!!...Shaun King's super bro hero, got embarrassed in front of the world in the biggest game in sports and this is what they do, discredit the enforcer....
You can take the yo out of the hood but you can't take the hood out of the yo, ala Shaun King !!

View attachment 89092

I'm not mad. For what? Unless he used to QB the Bucs I don't even know who Shaun King is and even than, I don't know King beyond that. I wonder though, if this article was about 19 year old Cam Newton or 19 year Russell Wilson or 19 year old Tom Brady or 19 year old Andrew Luck . Would all those who are so willing to dismiss this now still be so willing?

Manning didn't enforce shit against Newton or do any embarrassing of Newton in the Super Bowl. Von Miller, the Denver defense, and Cam himself did that. Manning simply rode a wave to a victory that was created by Miller and Denver's defense. C'mon now.

 

[Breed]

He also painted Naughright as the righteous amazing professional when she has been known to have a big time profane mouth just like Manning said she did and she has had quite a few lawsuits throughout the years especially against famous people.

Well if the just recenly filedt lawsuit filed against UT and in part Manning. By a group of women including Naughright continues forward. We're likely to learn much more about who did or didn't do what.

 

[cdumler7]

Well if the just recenly filedt lawsuit filed against UT and in part Manning. By a group of women including Naughright continues forward. We're likely to learn much more about who did or didn't do what.

Well Naughright should know that if she reopens the case then she is actually opening herself up to a huge lawsuit by Manning. This whole thing was settled and had a gag order put on it. She cannot use her situation with Manning. The last 2 times Manning mentioned the situation publicly she sued him over it. You can be sure he won't hesitate to do the same to her.

Right now from what I understand the lawsuit is not going after Manning but just showing that for many years there has been a problem at Tennessee with women being treated unfairly especially when it came to sexual assault within the sports programs. Manning's situation is just mentioned as one of the incidents but most of the lawsuit is actually for more recent incidents.

I actually don't think she is a part of this lawsuit. I'm sure she wants to be but my guess is she knows if she is a part of it not only a good chance they would lose because of using evidence that has been sealed but that she would probably lose more than she could ever win in the lawsuit with Manning going after her.

 

[Breed]

Well Naughright should know that if she reopens the case then she is actually opening herself up to a huge lawsuit by Manning. This whole thing was settled and had a gag order put on it. She cannot use her situation with Manning. The last 2 times Manning mentioned the situation publicly she sued him over it. You can be sure he won't hesitate to do the same to her.

Right now from what I understand the lawsuit is not going after Manning but just showing that for many years there has been a problem at Tennessee with women being treated unfairly especially when it came to sexual assault within the sports programs. Manning's situation is just mentioned as one of the incidents but most of the lawsuit is actually for more recent incidents.

I actually don't think she is a part of this lawsuit. I'm sure she wants to be but my guess is she knows if she is a part of it not only a good chance they would lose because of using evidence that has been sealed but that she would probably lose more than she could ever win in the lawsuit with Manning going after her.

Fair enough. However it shakes out though. I'm not saying I believe Naughright's story completely or even partially. Though I'm also not saying I believe Manning's story completely or even partially either. Given my druthers, I hope the story against Manning isn't true. If for no other reason than it'll just be another black eye on the my fave sport. But if the story against him is completely true. I won't lose any sleep over it nor feel bad for Peyton or Archie.

 

[SoCalWizFan]

I'm not mad. For what? Unless he used to QB the Bucs I don't even know who Shaun King is and even than, I don't know King beyond that. I wonder though, if this article was about 19 year old Cam Newton or 19 year Russell Wilson or 19 year old Tom Brady or 19 year old Andrew Luck . Would all those who are so willing to dismiss this now still be so willing?

Manning didn't enforce shit against Newton or do any embarrassing of Newton in the Super Bowl. Von Miller, the Denver defense, and Cam himself did that. Manning simply rode a wave to a victory that was created by Miller and Denver's defense. C'mon now.

Let me help you. This is not the formerly skinny QB from the Bucs. This Shaun King is a 36 yr old white guy from Kentucky pretending to be a black guy. He looks predominately white & both of his parents are white. What a nutjob. By all means have it & go after Manning & something that happened almost 20 yrs ago & was previously settled.

After all - according to some - the only way to clear up Cam Newton's now fractured reputation is to go after his peers like Manning. It couldn't say be fixed by Newton acting like a man & clearing up his reputation on his own or say by his misguided followers just pointing out the good things Newton does & not trying to sling mud at others in the NFL. What a bunch of whack jobs.

 

[cdumler7]

Fair enough. However it shakes out though. I'm not saying I believe Naughright's story completely or even partially. Though I'm also not saying I believe Manning's story completely or even partially either. Given my druthers, I hope the story against Manning isn't true. If for no other reason than it'll just be another black eye on the my fave sport. But if the story against him is completely true. I won't lose any sleep over it nor feel bad for Peyton or Archie.

I'm completely with you on this. I do think Manning did something wrong. I just don't know to what extent. If it was just him mooning her or farting in her face then to me not like most of us on here haven't done something like that at some point. That seems like pretty typical high school/college stuff for a boy to do. If it was that he actually stuck his genitals on her face and then tried to intimidate her and others to lie then yeah I won't feel for him getting what is coming. Sometimes it truly is where the cover up is worse than the crime itself.

At this point though we have nowhere near the whole story and honestly I doubt we ever do. Both sides to me sound like they have exaggerated their side of the story to win the case. It was settled though so like I said I doubt we get the full picture as it is a he said/she said situation.

 

[The Oldtimer]

His Dad is a tool. Eli is a complete DB. I've found myself fighting it but liking Peyton. I know he's a brand, but he sure sold it well.

LMFAO!!!! Isn't it wonderful living in America!!! Everyone has an opinion.

 

[SoCalWizFan]

His Dad is a tool. Eli is a complete DB. I've found myself fighting it but liking Peyton. I know he's a brand, but he sure sold it well.

Ok - do tell. Beyond the whole thing with Eli & the Chargers what exactly has Archie Manning done for you to come to this conclusion? Everything that I have seen has portrayed him as a good guy & good father.

 

[chf]

Actually I was pointing out the actual double standards, not the ones imagined by the type that write these kind of pieces. I then somehow smoked out your own hypocrisy. You seem to think it was OK for bill clinton to sexually assault women all through out his life cause he never drugged anyone like Cosby did. That seems to be your line according to your own words.

I then said that it does not seem Peyton Manning drugged anyone. So again, it should not bother you at all that he may have sexually assaulted someone.

You may not think there is a relation between what you and your types consider perfectly acceptable by slick willy and what you are seemingly disgusted by what Manning allegedly did.

Ok....now we can carry on. Especially now that I have revealed your double standards.

Nope, if Clinton is guilty of sexual assault he should face whatever justice is coming to him.

You're determined to find hypocricy, and surprise, surprise you're finding it. Sidebar continues. Carry on.

 

[Stomp]

Ask yourself this: What was the point in publishing this decades old, settled matter?

Its been cited in a current lawsuit against the University of Tennessee

 

[theknight307]

Nope, if Clinton is guilty of sexual assault he should face whatever justice is coming to him.

You're determined to find hypocricy, and surprise, surprise you're finding it. Sidebar continues. Carry on.

Oh right. I forgot. Clinton is innocent of everything.

Either way, your line was, as stated by you, that since clinton did not drug anyone with roofies like cosby, that it was acceptable.

I then pointed out that there is no indication that Manning drugged anyone. Which means what? Like clinton, in your mind Manning did not do anything wrong.

Now, that I have created cognitive dissonance by pointing out the double standards displayed by you, you say I am deflecting and creating a "side bar." Is that litigator nomenclature?

Huh......

"Carry on."

 

[chf]

Oh right. I forgot. Clinton is innocent of everything.

Either way, your line was, as stated by you, that since clinton did not drug anyone with roofies like cosby, that it was acceptable.

I then pointed out that there is no indication that Manning drugged anyone. Which means what? Like clinton, in tour mind Manning did not do anything wrong.

Now, that I have created cognitive dissonance by pointing out the double standards displayed by you, you say I am deflecting and creating a "side bar." Is that litigator nomenclature?

Huh......

"Carry on."

You're incoherent now. YOU brought Cosby into the conversation. I pointed out why Cosby is different. <shrug>

That is NOT saying that what Clinton did is okay. That's purely in your imagination.

But hey, if you want to wank over your perceived double standards, good luck getting others to join in the circle jerk.

 

[eaglesnut]

Are we talking about the black Shaun King or the white one? This clown doesn't have an ounce of credibility.

Either way it's the ramblings of a dumb fuck and possibly a child molester if you hear his neighbors' kids tell it.