Look, I don't want this to be a political post, because there is a war with our government and the media. But this Landry thing is just a distraction and damaging to Landry, just based on headlines. It seems the Headlines read like this, "LANDRY INVESTIGATED FOR BATTERY." The details after several lines of reading (which no one reads, because everyone forms their opinion on headlines), is "however, girlfriend denies physical altercation." Really? The gf's official spokesperson denied the battery part. But the media in this country loves when popular people are potentially in trouble. Now I will say this. I know of domestic violence accusers and abusers. I have lived enough to see many people in bad relationships. What tends to happen is emotions get high, there is a physical altercation, and then after the cops are called OR the abuser is arrested, the victim then cools off, and doesn't cooperate with the State. Based on what I know about the legal system in Broward (I'm no lawyer), if the Police suspected abuse, especially with a kid, Child Protection Services would have interviewed the gf within days, and they would have arrested Landry and/or executed a restraining order. I'm worried about Jarvis "blocking her from leaving." Could the cops/State constitute that as battery after reviewing the case? It's unfortunate because based on Broward Court Records, it seems to be a bad civil case. Hope Jarvis stays focused.
It's sensationalism. Sadly it's not new. Landry is a high profile individual. This team has of late been squeaky clean so that makes it even more attractive. There are no hurricanes yet, Little Marco lost and it's football season so the story has even more allure to the soulless bastard media. Keep in mind this used to be a town with a whole lot more crime and murder to report on so they need something to talk about. Landry needs to keep his head down and do his thing. He seems to have a good head on his shoulders so be the good guy and let it all go away. Remember Bullygate? Remember parading Marino into court to be a character witness so we could get Tony Martin into camp? Remember Cecil the Wecil? Remember the disaster that was David Boston? Remember Brandon Marshall getting stabbed? We've suffered far worse. Hit the zoom out button Jack!
Media lives by selling advertising. The more readers advertising reaches, the more advertisers pay. The more sensationalism, the more readers. The more the government does bizarre stuff, the more sensationalism. Then the liberal and conservative media stoke their reader bases and feed off each other. So Landry has been sucked into a ready-made circus.
To me, the gf saying on the scene that he had not been violent and signing a sworn statement to that effect should tell the state attorney that he'll never get a conviction beyond a reasonable doubt, and it's time to leave it alone. But the media will be the media anyway. Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro
agree. and what is there to investigate if she won't comply? Let's not also realize that the State loves this too and loves wasting time on cases like this. Why not put the County and State in the lime life and make a documentary? Again, If there was battery, esp with a child, Landry would have been arrested already and CPIS would have given limited visitation. The gf said they are going through a civil case and Jarvis wouldn't lay a hand on her. BUT the media, is just quoting her and not standing by her quote or giving their opinion on her quote. The ratings would be jucier if they keep posting "Battery Investigation."
not if there was no one arrested or no charges filed its just goes off the way side....the media is foul unless you have charges filed or concrete videos like ray rice or the kid from Oklahoma then leave it alone
Assault is me saying, "I'm going to stomp your butt into the ground" in a hostile, threatening way. Battery is me actually doing it, or even shoving you around a little as I deliver the threats. The girl said that Landry never touched her and went on to state that he would "never do something like that." She was also not the one who called police in the first place. Add that up and there's zero grounds for battery- which was why Landry wasn't arrested. It's a BS story and if I were Landry, I'd be suing someone for defamation of character. The facts just don't line up with the headline- they don't come even close. And as someone with ties to law enforcement, I can tell you that police get thousands of these calls every single day...knowing full well before they even arrive on the scene that nobody is getting arrested. This is a non-story that couldn't hit at a worse time, and it does make you think about the politics of the media. Did Landry deny the reporter an interview at one point in his career? Somewhere there's motive above making a headline here- all reporters know that you don't convict someone with a crime in a headline and keep your job for long.
I agree, but wasn't there something said about watching the video? It does sound like this is being blown out of context.
What the alleged victim says isn't really important, everyone keeps siting what she said, but to the police that makes little difference, if they were called out on a DV call, there will be an investigation, especially in a high profile case like this. It will come to nothing in the end, but the process has to go forth. The media is just being the media, anything to get you to click...
Media needs to be careful they could get sued. I believe one headline was he was accused (not investigated) of battery
Accused would be correct. Does not mean he did it. Now if they said he did it, and he did not they would be hot water.
"The media" isn't the problem. The problem is advertising. The media needs to be sensational to get people's attention because that generates more desire for advertising. As with the government, the blame falls squarely on the entities doing the corrupting....business.
For the investigation to start he had to have been accused. Maybe not by the GF, but by somebody made the accusation which triggered the investigation. Where you have words like "accuse" that have a common conversational meaning and a technical legal meaning newspapers have been exploiting that ambiguity to sell papers since the invention of tbe printing press. The media are being very careful, which is why they used "accused" not "charged".
