Thursday, September 7, 2017

Michael Bennett's Statement: Racial Attack By Police

Michael Bennett reported that he had been a victim of police brutality because of his race.

Is he truthful?

Here is his statement followed by analysis and conclusion.

I. His public statement
II. The Analysis
III Conclusion

Dear World,


On Saturday, August 26, 2017 I was in Las Vegas to attend the Mayweather-McGregor fight on my day off. After the fight while heading back to my hotel several hundred people heard what sounded like gun shots. Like many of the people in the area I ran away from the sound, looking for safety. Las Vegas police officers singled me out and pointed their guns at me for doing nothing more than simply being a black man in the wrong place at the wrong time.


A police officer ordered me to get on the ground. As I laid on the ground, complying with his commands to not move, he placed his gun near my head and warned me that if I moved he would “blow my fucking head off.” Terrified and confused by what was taking place, a second officer came over and forcefully jammed his knee into my back making it difficult for me to breathe. They then cinched the handcuffs on my wrists so tight that my fingers went numb.


The Officer’s excessive use of force was unbearable. I felt helpless as I lay there on the ground handcuffed facing the real-life threat of being killed. All I could think of was “I’m going to die for no other reason than I am black and my skin color is somehow a threat.” My life flashed before my eyes as I thought of my girls. Would I ever play with them again? Or watch them have kids? Or be able to kiss my wife again and tell her I love her?


I kept asking the Officers “What did I do?” and reminding them that I had rights they were duty bound to respect. The Officers ignored my pleas and instead told me to shut up and the took me to the back of a nearby police car where I sat for what felt like an eternity until they apparently realized I was not a thug, common criminal or ordinary black man but Michael Bennett a famous professional football player. After confirming my identity, I was ultimately released without any legitimate justification for the Officers’ abusive conduct.


I have always held a strong conviction that protesting or standing up for justice is just simply, the right thing to do. This fact is unequivocally, without question why before every game, I sit during the national  anthem-because equality doesn’t live in this country and no matter how much money you make, what job title you have or how much you give, when you  are seen as a “Nigger, “ you will be treated that way.


The system failed me. I can only imagine what Eric Garner, Michael Brown, Trayvon Martin Tamir Rice and Charleena Lyles felt.


I have retained Oakland Civil Rights Attorney John Burris to investigate and explore all my legal options including filing a civil rights lawsuit for the violation of my constitutional rights.


Sincerely,


Michael Bennett

II. The Analysis

The following is a brief analysis to discern if the subject, Michael Bennett, is truthful.

Dear World,

We note that he wishes to address "the world" as his audience. He does not address this to police, his attorney, nor to a court, but holds an expectation that his audience will be very large.


On Saturday, August 26, 2017 I was in Las Vegas to attend the Mayweather-McGregor fight on my day off. 

Here he reliably reports his location. Note the need to tell "the world" that it was his day off. One might question why this work status is important enough to him to include it here in an allegation of being racially assaulted. If it is his "day off", we can consider his employment status as very important to him. Employment is where we earn money.



After the fight while heading back to my hotel several hundred people heard what sounded like gun shots.

An honest person should tell us what he heard, not what others heard. We now note that he has the need to include many others in his statement.

He did not report that he heard gun shots.

He did not report that several hundred people reported gun shots.

He reported that several hundred people heard what sounded "like" gunshots.

We now consider that the reporting of the sound is very sensitive to the subject. For whatever reason, he refuses to say "I heard gunshots" and he has a need to be found, psychologically, in a large crowd. If he is incapable of saying "I heard gunshots", we are not going to say it for him.

This next sentence is even more sensitive to him:

Like many of the people in the area I ran away from the sound, looking for safety.

Here we may now understand the topic of acute sensitivity: running away.

He is deceptive right here in the statement about running.

1. He refuses to commit to what he heard;
2. He refuses to be alone in his commitment to hearing;
3. He refuses to be alone in his action of running

4. He has the need to explain why he ran, in an open statement; This means the subject anticipates being asked, "but why did you run?"

Since there were gunshots, it is not likely that any investigator would even think of asking this question. This is how guilty people give themselves away: he wants to answer a question before it is asked, but it is a question we would not even think to ask.

Hence, the highest sensitivity.


5. He has the need to explain why he ran when gunshots would warrant no need for explanation.

It is unnecessary information. Unnecessary information in a sentence is to be deemed "very important" information.

We now recognize that the subject, Michael Bennett, ran away for a reason he is not disclosing here. He has the need to persuade us that "everyone was doing it" and "everyone heard the same thing" which is used in kindergarten when a youngster is caught. "But everyone was doing it!"  

The psychological need for "others" reveals weakness. The truth stands on its own.


Las Vegas police officers singled me out and pointed their guns at me for doing nothing more than simply being a black man in the wrong place at the wrong time.

Note here he now alleges racism immediately following his point of deception regarding running.

It is impossible to do "nothing" and we know that he was "running" and that he is concealing his motive for running.

Let's look at his commitment to racism. 

Does he believe his own words?

We look for the language of experiential memory to report a traumatic event.

To be targeted by police, armed with lethal force, is a trauma-producing event. It is personal and upfront for the subject. We expect to hear it in the language.

Objection: Maybe he has PTSD.

Answer: We let the subject guide us. Those severely traumatized can use disassoicative language in such statements. They are almost paralyzed and cannot express emotion.

Let's see if the subject indicates this (passive voice and lack of emotion) in the statement. We do specifically analyze for PTSD like symptoms within a statement. Adult victims of childhood sexual abuse can sound, for example, like liars, especially if the abuse pre dated speech.

We continue:

Please note that he "knows" their motive. Rather than reliably report what happened (the psychological "wall of truth" lets the event speak for itself), he has the need to "narrative build", instead of reporting. Police often call this "story telling."

He knew what "hundreds" of others heard; (sensory)
He knew the motive for others running to be, (thought) and now he knows the motive of police in Las Vegas: police conspiracy of racism.

He did not say "the police pointed their guns at me because I am black."

By moving into the general (note the article, "a") he linguistically moves away from that which is very personal, and on to the general. 

This is often used as a deceptive tangent and emotional manipulation.  Instead of reliably reporting what happened to him, he now appeals to an indiscriminate number of black males in an indiscriminate location.  

This is to linguistically run away from commitment of what happened to him.  

Next note the location:  he gives us only another general statement:  

"in the wrong place at the wrong time." He does not reliably report his location because he has been deceptive about his action.  This is not the language of experiential memory:  

This is an example of editorializing rather than reliably reporting.  

He does not believe his own words.  



A police officer ordered me to get on the ground. As I laid on the ground, complying with his commands to not move, he placed his gun near my head and warned me that if I moved he would “blow my fucking head off.” 

Note that the scenario is personally traumatizing but the language remains distant and editorializing.

He uses overly polite and soft language, including "placed" in a specifically harsh context.


Terrified and confused by what was taking place


Here we have the inclusion of emotion in the portion of the statement where the activity is taking place. This is a signal of artificial editing, especially in an event that should be traumatizing. We find that in such traumatizing events, the emotions will be added later in the recall process. This is because it takes us time to consider the events carefully. Reliable statements have the emotion after the event. When we find emotions in the logical or "perfect" part of the story, it is often a signal of just that: story telling.

Next note the use of passivity in his statement: "what was taking place."

This is not the language of experiential memory but also consistent with story telling.

The "attack" by police is not to be heard in passive voice. Passivity conceals identity and/or responsibility.

please note that he does not assign these emotions to himself. There is no psychological ownersip of his emotions. Instead, his "story" continues:
Terrified and confused by what was taking place
a second officer came over and forcefully jammed his knee into my back making it difficult for me to breathe. 

The artificial placement of emotion is here confusing. He is assigning emotion to the police.  

The awkwardness of such is because it does not come from experiential memory. 

Here he gives an example of connecting himself to the statement. This increases reliability: "jammed his knee into my back" is reliable in form.

Consider: "officer jammed his knee into the back of a black man..." as absurd sounding. This would have removed himself from the scene.

Now go back and read the above portion of his statement. Parts are reported reliably and parts are not.

They then cinched the handcuffs on my wrists so tight that my fingers went numb.

Although he adds in information that would take time to process, the handcuffs on his wrists show reliability. Note again that he did not distance himself here by saying "on the wrists of a black man in the wrong place at the wrong time." Here is it, in form, more reliably stated.  The handcuffs were very likely tight. We cannot discern, from this statement, if this was due to deliberate action by police (he does not commit to this) or due to his size or other factors.

He now returns to his editorializing, with emotion indicating artificial placement:


The Officer’s excessive use of force was unbearable.

He no longer reports what happens but goes back to "story telling" with the inclusion of emotion in the "perfect" part of the story:

I felt helpless as I lay there on the ground handcuffed facing the real-life threat of being killed. 

This sentence is fascinating for analysis. It is in 3 parts:

1. "I felt helpless"
2. "I lay there"

These, in spite of emotional editorializing, show commitment. We may consider that he did feel helpless and he very likely was in the lying down position. Note next:

"facing the real-life threat of being killed" not only lacks the commitment with the pronoun "I" (this is the most extreme circumstance of the three: death) but returns to passive voice.

What does this mean?

It means that he was lying down and he felt helpless but he is deceptive about fearing death.

Death, or the prospect of, is far worse than body posture or a feeling of helplessness.



All I could think of was “I’m going to die for no other reason than I am black and my skin color is somehow a threat.” 

He reported to know what Las Vegas police were thinking: they targeted him because he is black. This followed knowing what hundreds of others were both hearing and thinking.

Now he reduces commitment with the word "somehow."

Question: What is this word, "somehow" connected to in his sentence?

Answer: "threat."

We should now question if the subject's actions or words threatened the officers. This is what the subject is signaling to us even in his lack of commitment to the motivation of race.

The story telling (emotional editing) continues.

When someone has had years of processing an event, the emotions will eventually enter the narrative in the "event" portion of the statement.

This statement was made shortly after the event.

It now moves to a level of story telling that is specifically designed for emotional manipulation of others. First he appealed to "black males" in the "world" but now:


My life flashed before my eyes as I thought of my girls. Would I ever play with them again? Or watch them have kids? Or be able to kiss my wife again and tell her I love her?

This is a good example for police training in "artificial placement of emotions" in a statement. It is extreme.


I kept asking the Officers “What did I do?” and reminding them that I had rights they were duty bound to respect. The Officers ignored my pleas and instead told me to shut up 

Note the change of verb tense.
Note "told" me to shut up is consistent communicative language. This may be another point of reliability.

and the took me to the back of a nearby police car where I sat for what felt like an eternity until they apparently realized I was not a thug, common criminal or ordinary black man but Michael Bennett a famous professional football player. After confirming my identity, I was ultimately released without any legitimate justification for the Officers’ abusive conduct.

Here we find him citing his body posture ("sat") which indicates, as he is recalling the event, an increase in tension for him.

Note the need to persuade that the delay was acute: "what felt like", and "until" are used. (note "ultimately", "realized" are both words that represent passage of time). 

Then, he enters back into reading their minds with "apparent" but makes a critical mistake:

"legitimate justification" is used.

Here is an acknowledgment that the officers were justified in their actions against him (this is very likely related to running). He editorializes the justification as "legitimate" (in the negative, "without") which tells us:

he recognizes that they had a reason; he just disagrees with it.

We note the narcissism displayed as "a famous professional football player" (not "me") which should be considered with the officer telling him to "shut up" at some point.

Next we have what is called in Statement Analysis as "Sermonic", where one who has guilt has a need to "preach", lecture, or sermonize in order to portray oneself as morally "good."

It is a signal of the opposite. It is the "need to persuade" that one must be innocent here not because one issues a reliable denial, but because one is "such a good person":


I have always held a strong conviction that protesting or standing up for justice is just simply, the right thing to do. This fact is unequivocally, without question why before every game, I sit during the national  anthem-because equality doesn’t live in this country and no matter how much money you make, what job title you have or how much you give, when you  are seen as a “Nigger, “ you will be treated that way.

As a famous professional football player, he invokes "Nigger" into the language, as a millionaire. We may now consider why his employment was important enough for him to include it as a priority in the opening of his statement.

He stated that he was this "famous professional" which addresses:

1. being well known
2. income or gainful employment


The system failed me. 

One might wonder what system he is referring to and how it failed him and if others can find such failures.


I can only imagine what Eric Garner, Michael Brown, Trayvon Martin Tamir Rice and Charleena Lyles felt.

Note the names used to divert attention away from his own actions and on to figures of controversy, including criminals. Consider this choice of inclusion of specific names in his wording of what he is not: "I was not a thug, common criminal" above.


I have retained Oakland Civil Rights Attorney John Burris to investigate and explore all my legal options including filing a civil rights lawsuit for the violation of my constitutional rights.


Sincerely,


Michael Bennett


III. Analysis Conclusion:

Michael Bennett is Deception Indicated.

Among some reliable points, he is deceptive about his own actions, specifically, running. 

He is also deceptive about his status of fearing for his life, and reveals a motive of exploitation of race for his own protection and possible gain.

Whether or not he had assistance in writing out this statement, it is the statement, itself, which reveals deception.

Even when attorneys influence our statements, or if an attorney should actually write out a statement, it shows what is believed, and what areas of weakness need "help" in convincing the public.

Las Vegas police would do well to oppose and defend their officers in this case and not pay out. Bennett shows how emotional tangents are used to move the topic away from one's own actions and how deceptive people report emotions.

Bennett shows himself as all statements reveal us:

Background
Experiences
Priority
Personality traits

Note the linguistic connection between the use of distancing language regarding his employment. There is a word he uses here which in advanced analysis would be useful in describing his behaviors to the arresting officers for confirmation.  

A full psycho-linguistic profile should be completed prior to interviewing Bennett. He is an opportunist and emboldened in deception. It is likely that those who know him best an latest to this.

***************************************************

If you or your department or business wish to be trained in Detecting Deception, please visit www.HyattAnalysis.com 

We offer:

Seminars for Law Enforcement
Seminars for Business
Advanced Seminars
Private training completed at your home
Live ongoing trainings

We also do Employment Analysis, consultations and we identify Anonymous Threatening Letter authors.

14 comments:

Anonymous said...

I feel so proud of myself right now. I've been reading this blog for a few months and was able to catch many of the things Peter pointed out here. I really want to take the courses when I have time, but for now I'm loving the blog. Thanks, Peter!

Dee

Anonymous said...

So you saying hillary didn't win?

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/sep/7/voter-fraud-alert-over-5000-new-hampshire-presiden/

Anonymous said...

He was probably trying to flee & was probably on drugs...Ive seen cops do that to a white guy who they managed to get down on the ground...they put a gun to his head & then another put a knee on his back...the cops did a phenomenal job...I was the sole eyewitness to what this guy had done while high out of his mind on METH...he nearly killed a young woman....went off the road going at least 70 mph, hits her car on drivers sids JUST MISSING HER IN THE DRIVERS SEAT BY AN INCH...sends her car flying....I pulled over to help the woman....the guy gets out of his car HIGH OUT OF HIS MIND ON METH...I was scared cause you could see the guy was FLYING HIGH...Finally I hear cop sirens & the guy runs, jumps in his truck, hits the gas, goes flying up the street swerving, drives off an embankment, hits a tree with no seatbelt on & this did not stop him....he pushes his car door open and RUNS up the road. The cop cars stop, the cops jump out with their guns drawn, chase him down...they got him down in the middle of the road on his stomach, gun to his head, knee on his back...the cops did an excellent job, the guy had almost run me off the road and then hit that poor girl...she didnt see it coming & he sent her car FLYING. The cops wanted to know had I seen where he had come from since he had almost hit me further up road bc they wanted to find where he got the drugs...unfortunelty I hadnt seen, but METH makes people unstoppable...the cops were fantastic!

Foolsfeedonfolly said...

Why do we need to know it was his day off? Why does he have to "explain" to anybody why he's there instead of somewhere else (like work)?

Why does Michael Bennett say "several hundred people heard what sounded like gun shots"?
-He did not say he heard what sounded like gun shots. Distancing.
-How does he know what other people heard, much less what several hundred people heard? Sounds like he's "hiding in a crowd", as in "How do you know it was me? There was several hundred other people there too."

"Like many people in the area, I ran away from the sound..."
-NTP. He doesn't simply say "I was afraid so I ran away.". He has a need to persuade that he was running away from the sound, just like many other people. His priority is justifying his running away and he's using "many people" to hide in a crowd again.
- He doesn't say many people in the area were running away...only "like" many people.

"...nothing more than simply being a black man..."
-There's five words between officers pointing their guns at him and the phrase black man. He's knows that's not why and that's why he can't just say it straight out. He knows it's a lie.
-So, in a crowd of several hundred people, he's the only black man? Was he the only black man among the many people in the area? Or was he the only one running away?

From the remainder of the article, the language is clear that he expected to be recognized and hailed as a "not an ordinary black man, but Michael Bennett a famous professional football player" (direct quote). His need to persuade that he was compliant is obvious, as is pulling the victim card and plucking the emotional heartstrings (re: his girls, future grandkids, his wife). He pulls in his self-righteous National Anthem protest and invokes a host of Black victim martyrs. Agenda, much?

This guy's a joke, a thug, a liar, and dangerous. He has no compunction inciting the black community (specifically angry black men who emulate his football hero-ness) to violence against innocent officers (authority).

tania cadogan said...

off topic

The remains of Natalee Holloway were mixed with a dog's to make it tougher to identify her, according to new information revealed in a mini-series on the Alabama teen's disappearance more than 12-years-ago.

Holloway's father Dave Holloway, and investigator T.J. Ward revealed secret recordings with Joran van der Sloot's best friend John Ludwick during the series 'The Disappearance of Natalee Holloway,' on Oxygen in which Ludwick tells them about the remains, and what happened to them.

'I can take you where I… I got the remains,' the friend, Ludwick said, according to the NY Post. The admission was caught by an informant wearing a mic so that Natalee's father Dave and private investigator Ward could hear it for themselves.

According to Ludwick's claims during the secret recordings, Van der Sloot buried Natalee up a hill in the desert and threw dog bones on top of her to throw authorities off.

Ludwick then claimed in the recordings he was later paid to take the remains to a crematorium and scatter the ashes.

'It didn't happen to my kid,' Ludwig said. 'Could have thrown it into the ocean, could have flushed it down the toilet. I don't give a s–t.'

Van der Sloot, the longtime suspect in Natalee's disappearance, allegedly had a sexual relationship with Ludwick, who says he accepted $1,500 from Van der Sloot to dig up the teen's remains and take them to be cremated.

The recordings of Ludwick transpired after information from an informant named Gabriel told Dave and Ward that he knew the man who claimed to have carried out Van der Sloot's request to move Natalee's buried remains.

However since the episode aired, Dave has said while promoting the series, that they have discovered what is human remains in Aruba and they are in the process of DNA testing them to see if they are in fact Natalee's.

Human remains found at a site in Aruba where Holloway may have been buried belong to a young woman of eastern European descent, according to preliminary tests, DailyMail.com can reveal.

The breakthrough, made during the early stages of DNA testing, means the Holloway family - which has eastern European heritage- may be one step closer to finding out the agonizing truth behind their daughter's disappearance.

The initial finding is still to be confirmed by further testing.

Natalee, 18, from Mountain Brook, Alabama vanished on Aruba on May 30, 2005 while on a trip to celebrate her high school graduation.

She was last seen by her classmates leaving a nightclub with Van der Sloot - a then 17-year-old Dutch honors student living on the tropical island. No trace of her body has ever been found.

Now her father believes the discovery of human remains - the result of a tip-off investigated by his private investigator TJ Ward - could be the lead they have been waiting for this past 12 years.

The full DNA test results will determine whether the bone fragments belong to Natalee or not.

A source told DailyMail.com: 'The nature of these remains means further testing is required before anything can be confirmed.'

DailyMail.com has also learned that Natalee's mother Beth Holloway provided a saliva sample to assist in the testing.

A source with knowledge of the testing said: 'So far all the indicators are that these bone fragments are the human remains of a young female, consistent with someone of eastern European descent.

'This is in line with what the investigators would expect when it comes to Natalee's family's lineage.

'It will be agonizing if Dave and Beth are told this is their daughter, but after 12 years of searching for answers it will be a huge deal for them - it might finally bring them closure.'

The source says experts are conducting a mitochondrial DNA test (mtDNA test) on the remains at a reputable, undisclosed lab in the US.

tania cadogan said...

cont.


The mtDNA test traces a person's matrilineal or mother-line ancestry using the DNA in his or her mitochondria - a structure that sits inside the human cell.

This type of DNA is passed down by the mother unchanged, to all her children, both male and female.

If the mtDNA inside the bone fragments matches that in the saliva provided by Beth Holloway, that will be conclusive evidence that Natalee's remains have been found.

The information that led investigators to these remains came from the informant Gabriel, a former roommate of Ludwick.

Van der Sloot - who is currently in prison in Peru serving a 28-year sentence for the 2010 murder of 21-year-old business student Stephany Flores Ramírez - has long been a suspect in Natalee's disappearance.

Gabriel told Dave that Ludwick had previously told him that Natalee was buried in a park near her hotel on the island - a sequence of events that marked one of the biggest breaks in the 12-year history of the case.

Ludwick apparently told Gabriel that Van der Sloot disposed of Natalee's body with help from his father Paulus, a judge on the island, after the teen choked to death on her own vomit soon after she was given a drink that had been spiked with GHB. Paulus has since died.

It is claimed Van der Sloot revealed his actions to Ludwick, who then repeated the information to Gabriel while the two were living together in recent years.

The information Ludwick previously told Gabriel did not match up with what Ludwick told Gabriel during the taped conversations about Van der Sloot mixing Natalee's remains with dog bones.

Dave announced while appearing on Today that he followed up on the original information Ludwick gave Gabriel, and soon after remains were found.

'We did an 18-month undercover investigation with an informant who was friends with an individual who had personal knowledge from Joran van der Sloot,' said Dave.

'We had information that took us to a spot where remains were found. And we took those remains and had those remains tested. They are human remains.'

Dave said he is being careful however to not rush to any conclusions.

According to Aruba Public Prosecutor Dorean Kardol, the discovery never happened.

He told the Huffington Post that 'no human remains were found' in the area Dave pointed out.

'During an investigation by police in an area indicated by Mr. Holloway, we found remains, but they were found to be from animals,' Kardol said.

Dave has long been a critic of the investigation into the disappearance of his daughter conducted by the Aruban authorities and slammed the prosecutor's comments as 'misleading'.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4863544/Suspect-friend-says-Natalee-Holloways-remains-dog-bones.html

Laura said...

Here is full statement...Im wondering 1) is it sincere? 2) what did this person do? I know some of what she did. 3) can this person be trusted? Also, I told this person not to contact me again 4 years ago.

"It's been 4 more years. I still think of you abd the friendship we used to have. We are obviously nowhere near the people we used to be-how could we be after all this time? I am sorry if I hurt you-obviously I did." (there are a few more sentences after this which are "nostalgic")

Anonymous said...

It was his day off is important, so I think you are correct in he was drinking or doing drugs.

However, police do need a reason to single someone out for running away from a dangerous situation when others are running, too. They were, weren't they?

Only now he feels a kinship to Travon Martin, Brown, et al.

What about before? Did he laugh at them?

I'm sure the police will defend their officers no matter what. Unless there was a camera on the incident at the time. And,there usually is in a crowd.

Did any one see the cop arrest the nurse for not violating an unconscious patient's rights when he wanted to draw blood after a suspect they were chasing crashed into him and put him in the burn unit?

So, it doesn't really matter if he has an opportunistic personality, the cameras will win.

Hey Jude said...

Spoiler for Anon, above - scroll past if you don't want to know what happened:



Watch the press conference and video, Anon - you'll see what happened - he was fortunate not to have been shot as he ran away, acting as he did in a high-alert situation. There were many black people in the area - he wasn't targeted, he acted suspiciously, by running and leaping over a wall as the police were clearing a night club, which caused them to suspect he might have been a gunman escaping from the building.

rob said...

You know all these millionaires, who chose not to stand for the National Anthem, while in uniform, on the clock, staging a protest while being paid to do another job. If Goodall had shut that crap down the first time it happened, it wouldn't be the fad right now.
I do my own protest, on my own time, with my pocketbook. No more tickets to NFL, no more NFL licenced merchandise, no more spending time watching it on Sunday. I'm happy. More and more are doing the same. When the ticket buyers finally get to the point that they request a refund for the season tickets, THEN a change will take effect. I don't pay that kind of money for the ticket, the parking, the $5 cokes, etc to watch someone stage a political protest for reasons that really don't add up.
Maybe if they start getting paid like your average blue collar worker, they'll have more respect for the job and the ticket buyer.

Anonymous said...

It was written by an ex-friend who is female.

I was friends with her for years but she did some shitty things to her friends, including me. I know a few of the things she did to me but I believe she may have done other shitty things to me behind my back.
I was hoping someone could help analyze it.

LC said...

My Season Tickets are only available because they were purchased with inherent Rights (no longer an avenue for purchase) so, if they are relinquished, the Team will merely sell them to the next person on the 50,000 waiting list. Policy restricts transfer, other than to a Direct family member And only during a 45-day transfer period during the Year. The NFL has given the Teams All control for ticket sales - it's almost like a hostage situation. The invoice for the following season is sent the very next week following the Super Bowl. The team collects the money a Full 8 months before a Pre-season game is even played. It's Highway Robbery.
Goodell is a weak link - even the much-touted Domestic Abuse policy is full of vapor.
Just like a 3rd-grader who doesn't stand to cite the Pledge of Allegiance (while the public Funds their education) these protesters who disrespect the very Flag which enables their freedoms and employment Should Not be Allowed to Participate.

John mcgowan said...

Well put, Rob!

rob said...

I get what you are saying LC. And as long as you desire to have the tickets, I got no problem with you having them. BUT, when enough people say 'screw this and them' and move on from football, the statement will be made.
Look in the stands, I've never seen enough minorities with tickets to keep the game going. Maybe white ticket buyers should demand more white players on the team. Oh hello, if that wouldn't stir up the stink of the century.
I'm just speaking for me. I'm done. My money is in my pocket.