-
Follow us on Twitter @buckeyeplanet and @bp_recruiting, like us on Facebook! Enjoy a post or article, recommend it to others! BP is only as strong as its community, and we only promote by word of mouth, so share away!
- Thread starter buckeyefool
- Start date
tibor75
Banned
Steinbach charged with boating DUI on Ohio River
GEORGETOWN, Ky. -- Bengals left guard Eric Steinbach was arrested Saturday night and charged with a operating a boat under the influence of alcohol on the Ohio River. He was arrested by an officer with the Kentucky Department of Fish and Wildlife Resources. Steinbach was stopped for speeding by the officer in the idle-only speed zone between the Interstate 75 and Interstate 471 bridges, Mark Marraccini, spokesman for the agency, said tonight. The officer ran Steinbach through a series of field sobriety tests, which he failed, Marraccini said. At that point, Steinbach was arrested and taken to the Campbell County Jail. He refused a breath test. He will appear in Campbell District Court. The Bengals do not comment on ongoing legal issues involving their players. Steinbach practiced twice Monday.
-- Mark Curnutte
Upvote
0
OSUBasketballJunkie
Never Forget 31-0
Dispatch
8/8/06
Dispatch
8/8/06
8/8/06
Braham is center of kids’ attention
Youth league’s players lobby for their favorite Bengals lineman
Tuesday, August 08, 2006
Aaron Portzline
THE COLUMBUS DISPATCH
<!--PHOTOS--><TABLE class=phototableright align=right border=0><!-- begin large ad code --><TBODY><TR><TD><TABLE align=center><TBODY><TR><TD align=middle></IMG> </TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE></TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>
GEORGETOWN, Ky. – One by one they filed into the Cincinnati Bengals’ training camp yesterday, about 200 kids all wearing orange T-shirts with a message written in black on the front:
"We need ‘74’ for one more."
Amid a sea of Carson Palmer No. 9 and Chad Johnson No. 85 jerseys, the kids from the Spartan Youth Football League in Fort Mitchell and Villa Hills, Ky., were showing support for one of the Bengals’ grunts: center Rich Braham, who lives in Villa Hills and is an avid supporter of the league for 6- to 13-year-olds.
The message on the shirts was aimed at changing the writing on the wall.
Conventional wisdom says Braham — the longest-tenured Bengal, now in his 13 th year — might be in his final year with the franchise.
Braham’s contract expires at the end of the season and the Bengals have stockpiled offensive linemen through the draft and free agency. In the salary-cap world of the NFL, it wouldn’t be a surprise if Braham were allowed to walk away.
"I had nothing to do with (the T-shirts)," Braham said with a chuckle.
"If they want me back for another year, and I feel good, I wouldn’t have a problem with that. But you get to an age where they have (centers) Ben Wilkerson (23) and Eric Ghiaciuc (25) coming up. That’s the way it is."
Braham, 35, has been through thick and thin with the Bengals since 1994 — mostly thin until the past few seasons.
He has trained in Wilmington, played in Riverfront Stadium and toiled under coaches Dave Shula, Bruce Coslet and Dick LeBeau during the dark years. He has had multiple surgeries on his right knee and both ankles, and just as many challenges to his job.
"They always say it’s easier when you get older and wiser," Braham said. "It doesn’t. You have to work even harder."
But Braham is still atop the depth chart, the heart and soul of a very good offensive line, with Levi Jones and Willie Anderson at tackle and Eric Steinbach and Bobbie Williams at guard.
The Bengals’ offense is loaded with talent – quarterback Palmer, receivers Johnson and T.J. Houshmandzadeh and running back Rudi Johnson – but it’s the group up front that makes it work.
"Rich is a good, tough guy," coach Marvin Lewis said. "He’s a good leader and role model for a lot of young guys — how you do it, how you be a pro, how you prepare yourself to play in the NFL."
As for Braham’s future beyond 2006, Lewis was understandably vague.
"We’ll worry about this year. That’s all I’ll worry about."
As for the Spartan football players, they’ve already started worrying. Hence the T-shirts.
Braham frequently visits the league’s practices and games. He’s the grill master at the yearend parties and also has hosted a Fourth of July party each year.
Yesterday, he and Palmer spent at least 45 minutes after practice signing autographs and taking pictures with fans and, of course, the players.
"They’ve got to bring Braham back for another year," said Phil Dietz, who wore a T-shirt with his son, who plays in the league. "He’s a down-home boy, a Cincinnati Bengal through and through."
[email protected]
Dispatch
8/8/06
Upvote
0
OSUBasketballJunkie
Never Forget 31-0
cnnsi.com
8/8/06
8/8/06
Bengals increase QB Palmer's practice workload
Content that his rehabilitation is on course, and that it is now the appropriate time to further tax his surgically repaired left knee, the Cincinnati Bengals have increased the practice workload of quarterback Carson Palmer.
<!--------------------------START PLAYER CARD------------------><TABLE class=tableheadFixWidth cellSpacing=1 cellPadding=3 width=200 align=right><TBODY><TR class=stathead><TD class=whitelink colSpan=2>Carson Palmer</TD></TR><TR class=evenrow align=right><TD align=left>Quarterback
Cincinnati Bengals
Profile</TD></TR><TR class=evenrow><TD align=middle><TABLE cellSpacing=1 cellPadding=1 width=190 bgColor=#ffffff border=0><TBODY><TR class=stathead align=middle><TD align=middle colSpan=6>2005 SEASON STATISTICS</TD></TR><TR style="BACKGROUND: #bcbcb4" align=right><TD width="17%">Att</TD><TD width="17%">Comp</TD><TD width="17%">Yds</TD><TD width="17%">TD</TD><TD width="17%">Int</TD><TD width="17%">Rat</TD></TR><TR align=right bgColor=#999999><TD>509</TD><TD>345</TD><TD>3731</TD><TD>32</TD><TD>12</TD><TD>101.1</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE></TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE><!---------------------INLINE MINI-PLAYER CARD ENDS HERE--------------------->
The move came after Palmer publicly lobbied for more snaps, and privately implored coach Marvin Lewis to give him more work. It also came after a weekend in which Cincinnati coaches and executives huddled with doctors and trainers to review the status of Palmer's rehabilitation.
The result: Palmer, who took only about 40 percent of the repetitions with the first-unit offense during the opening week of camp, logged roughly 70-80 percent of the Monday practice snaps. That level of activity is expected to continue through this week, unless Palmer has a setback, which is not anticipated.
"He feels like the more snaps he gets, the better he feels," Lewis said. "We told him to wait until the second week and see how he felt and got through the first week. Now we can begin to ratchet up the snaps. He can get them when he's on the field. When he's not out there, [backups Anthony Wright and Doug Johnson)]can go back and kind of split it."
Palmer suggested last week that he was rusty, attributing that to his decreased work in the offseason, when he was rehabilitating his knee, and to his reduced workload at the outset of camp. No matter how much he works in practices this week, however, Palmer is not expected to play until the third preseason game.
His status for the regular-season opener at Kansas City on Sept. 10 remains undetermined.
"He's getting a few more snaps now at his request, so that's a good sign," said offensive coordinator Bob Bratkowski. "Carson says he wants more reps and we'll give him some if the doctors and everybody says, 'Hey, that's fine.' It's been pretty honest."
Said Palmer: "I need all [the snaps] I can get."
One of the league's fastest emerging stars -- and a most valuable player candidate in 2005 when he finished second to Peyton Manning of Indianapolis in the league passing derby and registered an impresive 101.1 efficiency rating, while leading the NFL with 32 touchdown passes -- Palmer suffered two torn ligaments in his left knee and a dislocated kneecap in a Jan. 8 playoff loss to the Pittsburgh Steelers.
In the ensuing seven months, the grueling rehabilitative pace set by the 2002 Heisman Trophy winner and top overall selection in the '03 draft has been documented in magazine feature articles. There have been suggestions that Palmer, 26, is remarkably ahead of schedule in recovering from the kind of injury which can take 9-12 months to rehabilitate. And the widespread hints that he would be able to start in the regular-season opener have been so broad that his readiness for the meeting with the Chiefs, which would come on the eight-month anniversary of the surgery to repair his knee, has been taken for granted in some quarters.
Notable, however, is that neither Palmer nor Lewis have issued any public pronouncements about the opening game. Privately, the Bengals' brass is cautiously optimistic about Palmer's chances for being ready to go from the outset of the season, but caution is clearly the operative mindset.
Said Palmer last week: "It's unrealistic to say that I'm going to start against the Chiefs. It's realistic to say that I might start against the Chiefs. That's my goal. We'll just see how it works out."
He participated in last Friday's scrimmage, completing four of nine passes for 59 yards, conceding that he struggled at times to knock off some of the rust that developed in the spring. The former Southern California star, who sported a brace on his left knee in the scrimmage, did not take part in the team's annual training camp "Mock Game" last Saturday.
Palmer seemed pleased, after Monday's session, with his extended practice time.
"It's time for me to start working on getting outside the pocket and making plays," Palmer said, "instead of so much work in the pocket. It's good for me to get outside and run around a little bit."
Senior writer Len Pasquarelli covers the NFL for ESPN.com.
Upvote
0
OSUBasketballJunkie
Never Forget 31-0
Dispatch
8/9/06
Dispatch
8/9/06
8/9/06
NFL
Cornerback has nowhere to hide
James all about making plays, not looking back
Wednesday, August 09, 2006
Aaron Portzline
THE COLUMBUS DISPATCH
<!--PHOTOS--><TABLE class=phototableright align=right border=0><!-- begin large ad code --><TBODY><TR><TD><TABLE align=center><TBODY><TR><TD align=middle></IMG> </TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE></TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>
GEORGETOWN, Ky. — Life in the NFL is not easy for cornerbacks. An otherwise good season can be ruined by one or two bad plays.
Ask Bengals cornerback Tory James.
James followed up an All-Pro season in 2004 with a pretty good 2005, intercepting five passes and finishing sixth on the Bengals with 72 tackles.
But his performance slid in the second half of the season, including a dreadful performance in a 45-37 loss to Indianapolis on Nov. 20. James was burned by Colts receiver Reggie Wayne for a 66-yard touchdown pass and called for pass interference on Wayne on a thirdand-18 play to keep a touchdown drive alive. Wayne finished with five catches for 117 yards.
"It’s the nature of the position," James said. "When you make a mistake, it’s a big mistake sometimes.
"You can’t hide out there on the corner."
Cornerbacks coach Kevin Coyle doesn’t judge a season on a handful of plays.
"His overall numbers weren’t as high last year (five interceptions) as they were a year before (eight), but he might have played even better last season," Coyle said.
As for James’ second-half struggles?
"I don’t think that’s fair," Coyle said. "He gave up a couple of big plays. He was trying to do too much. He got caught looking in the backfield.
"But that’s what people remember. They don’t remember the play in the Tennessee Titans game (a 31-23 win Oct. 16) where (James) broke up the pass that Odell Thurman returned for a touchdown. That really turned around our season, and it doesn’t get mentioned very much. It’s the mistakes that get magnified."
The Bengals can’t afford a second-half slide if they want to repeat as AFC North champions. Their schedule is much tougher than a year ago. They play at Indianapolis on Dec. 18. They also face a slew of high-powered offenses, including Pittsburgh (twice), Kansas City, New England, Denver and San Diego.
"We talked about" the big plays, Coyle said. "He’s very aware of it. And he’s going to go out there this year and make sure it doesn’t happen again."
James has started all 48 games since signing a free-agent contract with the Bengals in 2003, and he’s listed on the depth chart as the starter on the right side.
How long that string stays intact is in question, as the Bengals are extremely deep in the secondary.
Cincinnati spent this year’s No. 1 draft pick (24 th overall) on cornerback Johnathon Joseph of South Carolina. Whitehall graduate Keiwan Ratliff played mostly in the Bengals’ nickel defense last season but has looked good in training camp.
"It’s a lot better than when I first got here," James said. "We’re a lot deeper. Everybody here can play in the NFL. We’re a whole lot better.
"That’s what you need, because that’s what the NFL is turning into, a passing game. You need a lot of guys who can step in there and play in any situation."
In 10 NFL seasons, James has missed only two games. If he’s threatened by the young players behind him on the depth chart, he won’t admit it.
"I come out here and work, no matter what," he said. "I don’t need anybody to push me. When I start needing people to push me, it’s time for me to leave."
[email protected]
Dispatch
8/9/06
Upvote
0
OSUBasketballJunkie
Never Forget 31-0
Dispatch
8/10/06
Dispatch
8/10/06
8/10/06
Bengals face tough decisions on receivers
Thursday, August 10, 2006
Bill Rabinowitz
THE COLUMBUS DISPATCH
<!--PHOTOS--><TABLE class=phototableright align=right border=0><!-- begin large ad code --><TBODY><TR><TD><TABLE align=center><TBODY><TR><TD align=middle></IMG> </TD></TR><TR><TD class=credit width=200>NEAL C . LAURON DISPATCH </TD></TR><TR><TD class=cutline width=200>Tab Perry, used primarily as a kickoff returner last season, is working for an expanded role in the Bengals’ passing offense this year. </TD></TR><TR><TD align=middle>
</IMG> </TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE></TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>
GEORGETOWN, Ky. — Receivers coach Hue Jackson is bemoaning the number of Bengals receivers stuck in the training room these days, but that’ll pass.
So will the Bengals ... often.
The Bengals’ passing game should be potent again this season. Carson Palmer, assuming his left knee is deemed sound, is a huge reason for that. But so are his receivers. There may not be a better, deeper group of receivers in the league.
"All of our receivers are No. 1s or No. 2s," All-Pro receiver Chad Johnson said. "What we would call our third, fourth and fifth receivers are ones and twos on other teams. We have starters all the way down."
The Bengals had a deep receiver corps last season with Johnson and T.J. Houshmandzadeh leading the way. It is even deeper this year. Tab Perry, used primarily as a kickoff returner as a rookie in 2005, is working for an expanded role.
The free-agent signing of Antonio Chatman, now nursing a bruised pelvis, should more than compensate for the loss of dependable Kevin Walter to the Houston Texans.
Cincinnati also added Reggie McNeal and Bennie Brazell in the final two rounds of the draft. At the time, those picks looked superfluous given the talent already on board. But both — though sitting out because of minor injuries — can give the Bengals an added dimension.
McNeal, a quarterback at Texas A&M, can give the Bengals a threat on razzle-dazzle plays like the Pittsburgh Steelers got from Antwaan Randle El.
Brazell is a former Olympic hurdler who has shown he’s a football player with a track background rather than a track athlete trying to become a football player.
"Not only does Bennie have the speed," Johnson said, "but Bennie has it all put together. Usually you get a receiver (converting from track) and he can’t stop or he can’t catch. But he can do it all. He’s a dangerous receiver."
Though Brazell appears to have too much potential to cut, the same can be said for others. Chris Henry looked to be a goner after his repeated off-field problems. But Henry, who practiced last night after missing the past few days because of a sore leg, was spectacular in the intrasquad scrimmage Friday and has been on his best behavior.
"He made some bad choices, and I hope he’s learned from those mistakes, but only time will tell," Jackson said. "In the process of that, he has to earn back the trust of the coaches, his teammates and everybody. I think he’s trying to do that."
Henry is facing a possible NFL suspension for his various arrests, which could at least temporarily keep open a roster spot for another receiver.
NFL teams usually keep no more than six receivers. That means a capable player like Kelley Washington is in serious jeopardy of not making the roster, partly because he hasn’t been a special-teams player.
"Right now, in my opinion everybody’s on the bubble," Jackson said. "I’d like to keep all of them if I could. Obviously, that’s not the way it’s going to work out. All this is based on performance. It’s not based on what we think you can do, what you might do.
"That’s why it’s disheartening to know that so many guys are inside. I know they’re doing everything they can to get healthy. They’re not slackers. But the one thing I do know is you can’t make the team on the sidelines. They have to be out there playing to make the club."
[email protected]
Dispatch
8/10/06
Upvote
0
OSUBasketballJunkie
Never Forget 31-0
Dispatch
8/11/06
8/11/06
Spotlight isn’t his thing
First-round pick Joseph happy to just blend in
Friday, August 11, 2006
Bill Rabinowitz
THE COLUMBUS DISPATCH
<!--PHOTOS--><TABLE class=phototableright align=right border=0><!-- begin large ad code --><TBODY><TR><TD><TABLE align=center><TBODY><TR><TD align=middle></IMG> </TD></TR><TR><TD class=credit width=200>TONY TRIBBLE ASSOCIATED PRESS </TD></TR><TR><TD class=cutline width=200>Johnathan Joseph has had an impressive camp, but he might not get the nod to be the Bengals’ nickel back. </TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE></TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>
GEORGETOWN, Ky. — First-round picks are supposed to command the spotlight.
Yet Johnathan Joseph has just happily blended into the woodwork at the Bengals’ training camp, which officially ends today.
The cornerback from South Carolina wasn’t a headline-grabbing holdout. He has stayed out of trouble, which can’t be taken for granted on this team. He has simply worked at his craft without making a fuss.
Joseph might be as low-key a firstround pick as the Bengals have had in years. The lack of attention is just fine with Joseph, the 24 th overall pick in the NFL draft in April.
"Yeah, that’s how I’ve always been everywhere I’ve gone," Joseph said after signing autographs at practice Wednesday night. "I just stay off to the side to myself, talk to the guys on the sideline. Don’t make a big commotion and bring the spotlight to yourself because then if something happens, you’re in the spotlight again."
That’s not to say Joseph shrinks from pressure. It’s impossible to play cornerback without confidence. Joseph has it. He just doesn’t flaunt it with a look-atme attitude.
"I just try to save the excitement for the game when you make a good play," he said.
Joseph will have his first taste of NFL competition when the Bengals open their preseason Sunday in Paul Brown Stadium against the Washington Redskins.
Going against the Redskins can’t be any tougher than doing battle against the Bengals’ slew of talented receivers.
The day Joseph was drafted, he talked with excitement about lining up in practice against Chad Johnson.
Now, having done it for two weeks?
"It’s a nightmare," he said with a laugh, "but at the same time a great challenge. He lets you know he’s going to go hard every time. He’s not going to slack off. He makes you bring your ‘A’ game."
The Bengals have experienced starting cornerbacks in Deltha O’Neal and Tory James and drafted Joseph with the expectation they could work him in gradually.
In fact, Joseph is no lock to be the nickel cornerback. Defensive coordinator Chuck Bresnahan said recently that Joseph has had a "great camp," but coaches have been happy with the play of Keiwan Ratliff, Rashad Bauman and Greg Brooks, as well.
"We’ve got a real battle between those guys," Bresnahan said.
Joseph said he has not gotten caught up in worrying about whether or not he can get significant playing time.
"It’s not even on my mind," he said. "I’m just going out there and playing right now and just making the best of my opportunities."
[email protected]
Upvote
0
methomps
an imbecility, a stupidity without name
Rucker Response
link
August 11, 2006
Rucker Response
Leonard Levine, the attorney representing former USC defensive end Frostee Rucker, sent a letter to ESPN objecting to the cable network's July 3 report on Rucker without interviewing anyone from Rucker's camp for a balanced presentation.
Here's the full letter:
Justine Gubar
ESPN
Re: Segment on Frostee Rucker
Inside the Lines
Dear Justine:
As you suggested, I have now reviewed a tape of ESPN’s “Behind the Line” segment on Frostee Rucker. While I am sure there was an attempt to make the program fair and balanced, it unfortunately was just the opposite.
One thing struck me immediately upon viewing the tape. First, there was no opportunity given for a representative of Frostee to respond to any of the allegations, none of which I might remind you have resulted in convictions involving violence of any kind. While I understand your claim that by contacting the Cincinnati Bengals you somehow accomplished the goal of giving both sides an opportunity to be heard, you of course accomplished just the opposite.
You failed to contact any of the parties who you had to know would have direct contact with Frostee, including myself, his agents, his family, or Frostee himself. You ignored the fact that as Frostee’s attorney, I was the one representative who could competently present his side, while still allowing the attorney for Joelle’s family every chance to state his case. The only protocol in cases such as this should be to get the truth from both sides -- not to satisfy some vague practice of contacting the team in order to reach the player. That should not suffice in cases where criminal charges are pending. Now, to the substance of the facts that were presented on your program:
The first case, of course (in Tustin), ended with a verdict of not guilty, which should have ended your inquiry. To give voice to an alleged victim who the court has found not credible does a disservice to your program and the public. What good is a court of law, where cross-examination and a full exploration of the facts occurs, when a verdict exonerating the accused is then ignored by the media. At the very least, Frostee’s acquittal should have been emphasized, and not just mentioned in passing as if the ruling was clearly in error.
In addition, the program clearly suggested that the not guilty verdict was likely the result of letters sent to the court in support of Frostee, and that somehow his standing as an athlete affected the outcome. (That is hard to believe, considering the fact that Frostee was only 13 at the time, and hardly a household name.) Of course, what you also failed to mention was that such letters are never admissible as evidence at any trial, and therefore could not possibly have affected the not guilty verdict. Thus, it is clear that Frostee’s exoneration could only have been the result of a lack of proof, not any influence a 13-year-old might have on the court.
In addition, Frostee’s version of the events in Tustin (which the judge obviously accepted as more credible than that of the accuser) was clearly stated in the police reports, which you obviously reviewed. However, that version was never mentioned, despite the not guilty verdict validating its accuracy. Rather, you took great care to present a poignant moment where the alleged victim talks about how difficult it is to walk around the pool area where the alleged incident occurred. Again, since neither you nor I were there, the not guilty verdict should have been the deciding factor in determining the truth. Obviously, however, ESPN has little faith in our judicial system or respect for its verdicts.
As far as the second incident is concerned, which resulted in a misdemeanor harassment conviction, a careful review of the police reports and written statements by the victim, witnesses and accused, reveals the following facts that your "expose" failed to mention.
1. The primary allegation of the alleged victim was that Frostee forced himself upon her, when she had no intention or desire to engage in sexual relations with him. As such, she admittedly maintained throughout her initial interviews with the police that she had no interest whatsoever in Frostee romantically, and that she had made that abundantly clear to him, despite his constant overtures. Of course, this claim of no prior sexual contact between them was flatly contradicted by Jamal Hall, who clearly stated that he was actually present during one of the times when sexual intercourse (consensual) was occurring, and was also present when a second incident likely occurred. No mention of this was made at all by your interviewer, or by Jeremy Schapp
2. When the alleged victim was later confronted with the statement of Jamal Hall, she continued to deny that such a prior sexual relationship existed, but did so in a way that resulted in the interviewing officer reporting as follows:
"When I told her that JAMAL was providing me with exact dates that she and FROSTEE had intercourse I noted that she blushed bright red in the face. She continued to deny that they had been sexual other than the assault."
More importantly, there follows a hand written statement, clearly by the alleged victim, in which she finally admits to having had sexual intercourse with Frostee on at least two prior occasions, but not wanting to admit it because, "I was embarrassed and ashamed because I didn't want to hurt my boyfriend.”
The second occasion, she claims was by force, although obviously never reported. (This force allegation was directly contradicted by Jamal Hall’s account.) How relevant it would have been to your story if these facts had been brought out, and if the victim had been confronted with them, for better or worse, by the interviewer. How would she have explained lying to the police about her prior sexual relationship with Frostee, and how might that fact have affected the final outcome, when it eventually became known to the prosecution. But then, that would have been a fair and balanced approach, designed to get at the real truth, something with which ESPN was obviously not that concerned
It is clear that a balanced, objective examination of the facts was not ESPN's primary motive in airing the piece. Remember, these admissions from the Colorado complainant came after she had emphatically claimed, over and over, that she had never slept with Frostee before the alleged rape. Now we know why the resulting reduction to a misdemeanor charge of harassment was at the "victim's request”, as the police report states.
3. Why, when the current victim, Joelle, claimed touchingly that she had no desire to injure Frostee’s career, and just "wants him to get help", was she not confronted with the fact that her attorney sent out a packet of police reports of Frostee’s prior alleged misconduct (which you and I also have) to every NFL team before the draft, and specifically to the Bengals after his selection on the third round. If that was not designed to injure his career and potential bargaining power in obtaining a fair contract, then I do not know what is. However, she was never asked to explain her answer.
4. As you know, Joelle waited almost six months before reporting the alleged assault, and then produced photographs taken from a cell phone that are dated sometime in November, over three months after the alleged assault (the Los Angeles City Attorney’s Office is still trying to explain that discrepancy.) We also have uncovered in our own investigation evidence that severely questions Joelle’s credibility and account of the events; and establishes that it was she who initiated arguments and acted irrationally around Frostee, not the other way around. I would have been happy to expound on that for your segment, but of course was never even contacted.
5. While the program did mention that Frostee had filed a restraining order against Joelle in September, it was glossed over with the comment that he was just “putting the blame on her”. However, had you bothered to review the restraining order you would have learned that it contained serious allegations against Joelle by Frostee, reported to the USC Police, that clearly presented a motive for her to retaliate with her charges in this case. Unfortunately, your program did not bother to raise that point.
Finally, let me say that ESPN has every right to present whatever it wants during its programming. However, when it endeavors to present this programming as a fair and balanced journalistic examination of a serious subject, it should remember that truth and integrity are as important as ratings.
In essence, you presented a one-sided segment on a young man who has never been convicted of any assaultive conduct whatsoever, and who will likely be acquitted of the most recent charges. Unlike the young women who appeared, we believe in trying serious matters such as this in the courtroom and not in the media. That is the only forum where the truth can be ascertained through the presentation of evidence by both sides, and where witnesses are subject to cross-examination, and their accusations not simply accepted as true because they are made. That is why Frostee was acquitted in the first case in Tustin, as he would have been in Colorado had that case proceeded to trial. While you found it appropriate to uncritically present the views of these three women, and Joelle’s attorney (and don’t you wonder why she needs an attorney at all), you made no effort to contact Frostee’s counsel. As a result, one has to question your real motives, and whether a fair and balanced presentation was even considered.
I remain available to present Frostee’s rebuttal to the false and misleading accusations made on your program, and trust that when Frostee is exonerated of any criminal conduct in this case, that you will give it the same attention and air time that you did when allowing the false allegations to be made in the first place (without any rebuttal or independent investigation). I know you told me that you thoroughly investigated the facts before presenting them on the air, but the above information calls that claim into serious question.
I would appreciate it if you would make this letter available to Jeremy Schapp, as I have always respected his work and his ethics, and strongly believe he would have appreciated knowing the other side before participating in the segment.
Sincerely,
link
August 11, 2006
Rucker Response
Leonard Levine, the attorney representing former USC defensive end Frostee Rucker, sent a letter to ESPN objecting to the cable network's July 3 report on Rucker without interviewing anyone from Rucker's camp for a balanced presentation.
Here's the full letter:
Justine Gubar
ESPN
Re: Segment on Frostee Rucker
Inside the Lines
Dear Justine:
As you suggested, I have now reviewed a tape of ESPN’s “Behind the Line” segment on Frostee Rucker. While I am sure there was an attempt to make the program fair and balanced, it unfortunately was just the opposite.
One thing struck me immediately upon viewing the tape. First, there was no opportunity given for a representative of Frostee to respond to any of the allegations, none of which I might remind you have resulted in convictions involving violence of any kind. While I understand your claim that by contacting the Cincinnati Bengals you somehow accomplished the goal of giving both sides an opportunity to be heard, you of course accomplished just the opposite.
You failed to contact any of the parties who you had to know would have direct contact with Frostee, including myself, his agents, his family, or Frostee himself. You ignored the fact that as Frostee’s attorney, I was the one representative who could competently present his side, while still allowing the attorney for Joelle’s family every chance to state his case. The only protocol in cases such as this should be to get the truth from both sides -- not to satisfy some vague practice of contacting the team in order to reach the player. That should not suffice in cases where criminal charges are pending. Now, to the substance of the facts that were presented on your program:
The first case, of course (in Tustin), ended with a verdict of not guilty, which should have ended your inquiry. To give voice to an alleged victim who the court has found not credible does a disservice to your program and the public. What good is a court of law, where cross-examination and a full exploration of the facts occurs, when a verdict exonerating the accused is then ignored by the media. At the very least, Frostee’s acquittal should have been emphasized, and not just mentioned in passing as if the ruling was clearly in error.
In addition, the program clearly suggested that the not guilty verdict was likely the result of letters sent to the court in support of Frostee, and that somehow his standing as an athlete affected the outcome. (That is hard to believe, considering the fact that Frostee was only 13 at the time, and hardly a household name.) Of course, what you also failed to mention was that such letters are never admissible as evidence at any trial, and therefore could not possibly have affected the not guilty verdict. Thus, it is clear that Frostee’s exoneration could only have been the result of a lack of proof, not any influence a 13-year-old might have on the court.
In addition, Frostee’s version of the events in Tustin (which the judge obviously accepted as more credible than that of the accuser) was clearly stated in the police reports, which you obviously reviewed. However, that version was never mentioned, despite the not guilty verdict validating its accuracy. Rather, you took great care to present a poignant moment where the alleged victim talks about how difficult it is to walk around the pool area where the alleged incident occurred. Again, since neither you nor I were there, the not guilty verdict should have been the deciding factor in determining the truth. Obviously, however, ESPN has little faith in our judicial system or respect for its verdicts.
As far as the second incident is concerned, which resulted in a misdemeanor harassment conviction, a careful review of the police reports and written statements by the victim, witnesses and accused, reveals the following facts that your "expose" failed to mention.
1. The primary allegation of the alleged victim was that Frostee forced himself upon her, when she had no intention or desire to engage in sexual relations with him. As such, she admittedly maintained throughout her initial interviews with the police that she had no interest whatsoever in Frostee romantically, and that she had made that abundantly clear to him, despite his constant overtures. Of course, this claim of no prior sexual contact between them was flatly contradicted by Jamal Hall, who clearly stated that he was actually present during one of the times when sexual intercourse (consensual) was occurring, and was also present when a second incident likely occurred. No mention of this was made at all by your interviewer, or by Jeremy Schapp
2. When the alleged victim was later confronted with the statement of Jamal Hall, she continued to deny that such a prior sexual relationship existed, but did so in a way that resulted in the interviewing officer reporting as follows:
"When I told her that JAMAL was providing me with exact dates that she and FROSTEE had intercourse I noted that she blushed bright red in the face. She continued to deny that they had been sexual other than the assault."
More importantly, there follows a hand written statement, clearly by the alleged victim, in which she finally admits to having had sexual intercourse with Frostee on at least two prior occasions, but not wanting to admit it because, "I was embarrassed and ashamed because I didn't want to hurt my boyfriend.”
The second occasion, she claims was by force, although obviously never reported. (This force allegation was directly contradicted by Jamal Hall’s account.) How relevant it would have been to your story if these facts had been brought out, and if the victim had been confronted with them, for better or worse, by the interviewer. How would she have explained lying to the police about her prior sexual relationship with Frostee, and how might that fact have affected the final outcome, when it eventually became known to the prosecution. But then, that would have been a fair and balanced approach, designed to get at the real truth, something with which ESPN was obviously not that concerned
It is clear that a balanced, objective examination of the facts was not ESPN's primary motive in airing the piece. Remember, these admissions from the Colorado complainant came after she had emphatically claimed, over and over, that she had never slept with Frostee before the alleged rape. Now we know why the resulting reduction to a misdemeanor charge of harassment was at the "victim's request”, as the police report states.
3. Why, when the current victim, Joelle, claimed touchingly that she had no desire to injure Frostee’s career, and just "wants him to get help", was she not confronted with the fact that her attorney sent out a packet of police reports of Frostee’s prior alleged misconduct (which you and I also have) to every NFL team before the draft, and specifically to the Bengals after his selection on the third round. If that was not designed to injure his career and potential bargaining power in obtaining a fair contract, then I do not know what is. However, she was never asked to explain her answer.
4. As you know, Joelle waited almost six months before reporting the alleged assault, and then produced photographs taken from a cell phone that are dated sometime in November, over three months after the alleged assault (the Los Angeles City Attorney’s Office is still trying to explain that discrepancy.) We also have uncovered in our own investigation evidence that severely questions Joelle’s credibility and account of the events; and establishes that it was she who initiated arguments and acted irrationally around Frostee, not the other way around. I would have been happy to expound on that for your segment, but of course was never even contacted.
5. While the program did mention that Frostee had filed a restraining order against Joelle in September, it was glossed over with the comment that he was just “putting the blame on her”. However, had you bothered to review the restraining order you would have learned that it contained serious allegations against Joelle by Frostee, reported to the USC Police, that clearly presented a motive for her to retaliate with her charges in this case. Unfortunately, your program did not bother to raise that point.
Finally, let me say that ESPN has every right to present whatever it wants during its programming. However, when it endeavors to present this programming as a fair and balanced journalistic examination of a serious subject, it should remember that truth and integrity are as important as ratings.
In essence, you presented a one-sided segment on a young man who has never been convicted of any assaultive conduct whatsoever, and who will likely be acquitted of the most recent charges. Unlike the young women who appeared, we believe in trying serious matters such as this in the courtroom and not in the media. That is the only forum where the truth can be ascertained through the presentation of evidence by both sides, and where witnesses are subject to cross-examination, and their accusations not simply accepted as true because they are made. That is why Frostee was acquitted in the first case in Tustin, as he would have been in Colorado had that case proceeded to trial. While you found it appropriate to uncritically present the views of these three women, and Joelle’s attorney (and don’t you wonder why she needs an attorney at all), you made no effort to contact Frostee’s counsel. As a result, one has to question your real motives, and whether a fair and balanced presentation was even considered.
I remain available to present Frostee’s rebuttal to the false and misleading accusations made on your program, and trust that when Frostee is exonerated of any criminal conduct in this case, that you will give it the same attention and air time that you did when allowing the false allegations to be made in the first place (without any rebuttal or independent investigation). I know you told me that you thoroughly investigated the facts before presenting them on the air, but the above information calls that claim into serious question.
I would appreciate it if you would make this letter available to Jeremy Schapp, as I have always respected his work and his ethics, and strongly believe he would have appreciated knowing the other side before participating in the segment.
Sincerely,
Upvote
0