In most cases, I agree. There are cases where your chances of a criminal prosecution are nearly zilch, but you actually still have a semi-decent chance of getting some semblance of justice via a civil case. Pretty much all of these are actually of that nature.

I would also suggest that the lawyer, whatever his name is, likely sought out as many of the women as he could to get as many viable cases going as he could, BUT, he's only interested in the civil cases and would have nearly no impact on whether criminal proceeding went forth, but he likely spurred the criminal filings to give basis to the civil filings. However, how those proceeded would be the domain of the prosecutor(s).

Are all of the cases valid? Not likely. Almost certainly not likely.
Are some of them valid? Fairly likely. Where there's smoke, there's fire, as the saying goes. Once the lawyer had a handful of credibles, he'd seek out as many marginally credible cases as he could in order to double-down. It worked, he got an early pay day from those, but what is left are the ones not settling, and those are likely the stronger, more credible cases (speculative on my part, I don't know which are which).

The point that this whole diatribe has been getting steered away from was me making the still valid point that a decision to not indict is meaningless in general, but more specifically for where we are at in this process. The outcome of the criminal stuff is nearly meaningless because all it means is that he isn't getting jail time.

All that matters is "did his conduct violate the NFL Personal Conduct Policy?". This is a Yes/No question, and I think pretty much everyone can agree that it is a Yes.

So, the ONLY question is whether or not the degree of violation is sufficient for a suspension.... and nobody knows because the NFL's history is nothing but a complete joke when you look at what might be considered precedent. They have been absolutely all over the place. All that remains is opinion, although that is turning into people actively lobbying for one result or another, as if anyone on here has any impact whatsoever, lol.

In the end, the league is going to do what they feel is best for the league. They may require a sacrificial lamb be slaughtered; they may feel they can float a story that lets them avoid anything overtly draconian. They will work with the NFLPA because they know the union will have to give its harrumphs, and the NFLPA will work with the league because they know this is how the bread gets baked, and they will all do their damndest to make sure they give every appearance that their new system works in a way that keeps people happy.



As always, for the NFL & the NFLPA, this is nothing more than publicly managing a PR problem. Despite the recent campaign in the media with articles to float the idea of leniency, or even outright clemency, I think a large portion of the public opinion has remained in the camp that requires a blood debt be paid, and in that vein, I think there will surely be a suspension, but I think it will be long enough to satiate the majority of the blood hungry while not being so long as to have people screaming that he's been martyred. I think the chances of a full season suspension are nil, and I feel the same way about any thoughts of there being no suspension or anything shorter than like four or five weeks. In the end, I think the NFL & NFLPA will work out something they can both live with and they will feed this to Robinson behind closed doors and lo & behold, she will come out with a recommendation that matches it and both the NFL and NFLPA will just nod sagely and choose to "respect her decision & recommendation".