Washingtonian.com: Redskins’ Fred Davis’s Legal Mess: Harassment Suit, Restraining Order

[RawBBQSauce]

In Niles we trust.

[SWFLSkins]

Fred is a dumb ass...cut him...we don't need the headache...talented but immature and not a champion...later Fred...

That's twice I used this today, and I may have to use it again.

[d10]

There are more transcript excerpts here: http://www.washingtonian.com/blogs/capitalcomment/local-news/fred-davis-attorney-at-law-the-courtroom-transcripts.php

Chaka: Well, let’s look at your document. It says December the 3rd, 2012. What’s today’s date, Mr. Davis?

Davis: I don’t know. I don’t know.

Chaka: What’s the date of today?

Davis: I don’t know what today is. All I know is I had court today.

Chaka: You don’t know what today’s date is? His document is not even valid.

Davis: What are you talking about? . . .

Chaka: Well, according to your statement, to bullet No. 5, it says that this event happened December 3rd, 2012.

Davis: Okay, and, what about it?

Chaka: Has December 3rd, 2012 even happened yet?

Davis: What?

Chaka: What? That’s the same thing I’m saying, Mr. Davis.

Davis: It was a misprint. Okay, December 3rd, 2011, okay, great.

Chaka: You signed an official document that you turned into the court—

Davis: With the wrong date, okay, all right.

Chaka: Stating that this incident happened on this date when there’s no such thing.

Davis: Okay, it’s a misprint.

Chaka: There’s no such event that could have ever happened on December the 3rd, 2012.

Davis: A misprint, okay.

Chaka: It’s not valid.

Davis: It is a misprint. It is a misprint.

:doh:

[flexxskins]

Chaka is confused by this thread.

http://cdn.screenrant.com/wp-content/uploads/chaka-land-of-the-lost.jpg

:rotflmao:Great stuff. Had to show the wife this one.

If a man can't represent himself in a simple case, the citizens of his country have work to do.

Well, no one in this thread said that Davis couldn't represent himself. Pretty much everyone here has said that he shouldn't, and that it's stupid.

BTW, citizens in every country have work to do in one way or another. Unless maybe you are familiar with a perfect country?

[Shadowfire]

How in the bluest of blue hells can the NFL punish him for representing himself.

No, seriously. I get that Roger Goddell's is only slightly less evil than the most evil person who ever eviled evily, but honestly, how the hell is Goddell going to punish him in this case?

If we're going to worry about stuff, can we at least worry about REAL stuff that might actually happen?

How I appreciate your sarcasm maybe you could take a min to realize if he loses the case he could have ramifications from the NFL. I hope that qualifies worrying about REAL stuff to you and yes if he is found guilty of assault and/or harrassment the NFL can/will impose further discipline. Just something REAL to think about, in case you didn't read everything he has been accused of, threating to kill her is one of them. I would think that would be a REAL enough charge to justify a lawyer but thanks again for your sarcasm and lack of foresight.

[Dirt]

The girl's clearly full of ****. "I know McGahee, and he's way richer so why wouldn't I try to extort him?" That's called reaching and it's what you do when you're full of ****.

---------- Post added June-30th-2012 at 12:07 AM ----------

After reading the cross examination back and forth between them, I picture Judge Judy.

And seriously, we don't know everything, but from what we do know... I don't really blame this on Freddy as a bad decision, or associating with the wrong people, etc. Seems pretty clear that she got mad because he wouldn't hook up with her, or hang out with her or whatever. Let's not act like that's uncommon. If that's the case, then shouldn't we be glad Freddy decided NOT to hang out with this psycho?

Then he appears (via police report/video) to calmly approach her. Again, the right decision. Could have just gone and sat down, could have made smart ass remarks and ugly looks to her table all night but no, he tried to just put the pin in the balloon and say "hey, I'm here, let's be cool." Now, even if he did say something smartassy, the same video/police report says she just went and tossed a drink on him. Then says he poured the juice or whatever on her and tossed it at her. That I can envision. Again, not uncommon. I'm not going to hate on him for that. And one more time, this video/police report is exposing her as a pathological liar. "Video shows he tossed the container at her body". Chaka: "no he didn't he threw it really hard at my face." Ok then what's the point of video cameras lol.

So he makes some dumb decisions but not nearly as many, or as bad ones as people are making it seem. Could have done a lot worse. For instance, I'm not mad at him for smoking weed, but failing multiple drug tests is dumb. I'm not mad at him for pouring juice on a crazy chick, but acting as your own attorney is dumb.

And through it all, I still can't shake the feeling that it seems like an Onion article. Lol I mean come on.

[rskin72]

Some of these replies had me rolling....the chaka doesn't understand this thread....the double facepalm....and of course Perry Mason. Classic. And the thread has also had educational value as i now know the meaning of pimp cup.

With regard to his lawyer or lack therein.....he did have a lawyer..or a senior litigation expert....earlier in the case. This woman was also apparently going out with davis......article states that she doesn't represent him anymore but does not say if they r still going out. Maybe she is providing behind the scenes guidance for the f. Lee bailey wanna be.

My issue with this revolves around his character and the caliber of folks he chooses to associate with. As this happened a while ago prior to the weed suspension....maybe he has changed and grown up some. He is ours for this season...think beyond that will depend in part on any further off field issues as much as on field play. Imho.

[AlvinWaltonIsMyBoy]

This could be the most awesome thing ever.

That's exactly what I was thinking! My love for Smoky grows...

[Pedro]

Well, no one in this thread said that Davis couldn't represent himself. Pretty much everyone here has said that he shouldn't, and that it's stupid.

And what I'm saying is the average Joe should be able to defend himself in a case like this one. Fred has the money to spend if needed on a lawyer, but not everyone is in his position.

BTW, citizens in every country have work to do in one way or another. Unless maybe you are familiar with a perfect country?

If the law is too complicated for the average Joe to follow in court, how can you reasonably expect it to be followed out of court? And just because there's worse examples doesn't mean people in countries like yours and mine should sit back and think we're the dogs *******.

As it stands, the more money you have, the more likely you are 'not guilty'. You think that's a good thing?

[Dirt]

I've always thought representing yourself in court sounded like a cool idea. Like **** these lawyers and attorneys, I got this! I've only been in court for relatively minor things, and all but once done it with no lawyer. In normal court though, that's always the case, you get to say whatever to the judge and the DA. Mostly, my talking has gotten things dropped or reduced, it's actually kind of fun.

And I can see how this is personal to Fred, and he wants to be a part of it. But considering the nature of the case, this is exactly the kind of thing you have an attorney do for you. Make the psycho chick look psycho in court. Involving yourself in questioning is ridiculous and is literally the difference between regular court and Judge Joe Brown.

Again, I think Sleepy makes some dumb decisions, but nothing catastrophic. He's harmless. I think Shanny understands that, and I think he's going to take the field and be awesome this season. We need to hope he stays healthy, and not worry hoping that his circus with this crazy chick resolves. Screw this thing, court takes months and years to happen anyway.

RG3's gonna be pouring his drink all over Freddy's face this season. In the end zone.

[Aireskoi]

If a man can't represent himself in a simple case, the citizens of his country have work to do.

Man, that's good right there. We definitely have work to do.

[Pedro]

He's harmless. I think Shanny understands that, and I think he's going to take the field and be awesome this season.

I agree with all 3 points above, he's not a bad person. If the case were a serious one then he would need to do it the lawyer way, but it's not.

If he's healthy he's having a great year with us

Man, that's good right there. We definitely have work to do.

In my country we need to work on having a democracy, rather than the top down system as it works today. In your country it will be interesting to see how RGIII is when he's President :king:

[MartinC]

And what I'm saying is the average Joe should be able to defend himself in a case like this one. Fred has the money to spend if needed on a lawyer, but not everyone is in his position.

If the law is too complicated for the average Joe to follow in court, how can you reasonably expect it to be followed out of court? And just because there's worse examples doesn't mean people in countries like yours and mine should sit back and think we're the dogs *******.

As it stands, the more money you have, the more likely you are 'not guilty'. You think that's a good thing?

Pedro if I want my gas boiler servicing I call a registered plumber - I COULD do it myself but I run the risk of blowing myself up or poisoning the kids with carbon monoxide since i have no experience or training in this area. If I need to defend myself in court I will call a lawyer - I COULD do it myself but I could lose the case and suffer fines or loss of liberty because I have no experience or training in this area.

If you want a legal system in which everyone has to defend themselves or bring prosecution themselves you would have a system that is much less fair than we have today in the UK, US and most of the Western style democracies. Cases won or lost because of the intelligence or lack thereof of the parties not the strength of their cases much more so than under the current system.

[Pedro]

Pedro if I want my gas boiler servicing I call a registered plumber - I COULD do it myself but I run the risk of blowing myself up or poisoning the kids with carbon monoxide since i have no experience or training in this area. If I need to defend myself in court I will call a lawyer - I COULD do it myself but I could lose the case and suffer fines or loss of liberty because I have no experience or training in this area.

And servicing a gas boiler is a skilled job where if you get it wrong and injure a 3rd party you're going to prison. Defending a mickey mouse civil case where there's camera evidence on your side isn't a hard case. You can't lose your liberty and if you mess up and lose the money side you can appeal - and get a lawyer.

If your car brakes you might need to get a mechanic - if your car needs petrol you might be able to do it yourself?

If you want a legal system in which everyone has to defend themselves or bring prosecution themselves you would have a system that is much less fair than we have today in the UK, US and most of the Western style democracies. Cases won or lost because of the intelligence or lack thereof of the parties not the strength of their cases much more so than under the current system.

I didn't say everyone should defend themselves nor bring prosecutions themselves.

If a man can't represent himself in a simple case, the citizens of his country have work to do.

is what I said and it still stands. Court should be to decide who is right or wrong, not who can bull **** the best and even though it is often a bull **** contest this case is about as simple as one that actually makes it to court can be. Two adults acted like children. Pride was hurt, big deal.

[Califan007 The Constipated]

And what I'm saying is the average Joe should be able to defend himself in a case like this one. Fred has the money to spend if needed on a lawyer, but not everyone is in his position.

Would you say the same thing if Davis was going up against a seasoned attorney instead of this Chaka woman? If you would, then you're incredibly naive.

And as others have pointed out, Davis having an attorney would have made this woman look like a nutty stalker and could have possibly had the case end right now instead of having it put off until next year. This is something that is still on his plate...he could have possibly had it off his schedule and out of his thoughts completely if he had an attorney. Attorney's talk to each other, know each other, they talk to the prosecutor's office well before the case ever goes to trial, they try and see what can be accomplished outside the court, they have a game plan they know they will use if they do have to go to court...when you represent yourself that rarely, if ever, happens. Both Davis and this woman were just out there winging it, with the naive perception that they have the skills and talent to argue each other away.

If the law is too complicated for the average Joe to follow in court, how can you reasonably expect it to be followed out of court?

There's all sorts of flawed logic in this statement.

When you're in court, it's not about avoiding breaking any laws during your court case lol...it's about procedure and evidence and inadmissibility and protocol...it's about prior cases that help bolster your stance, if there's a jury it's about convincing 12 people to all think alike reach the conclusions you want them to reach...and a whole ****load of other things that can/will determine how your case turns out.

Outside the court, you don't have to think about any of that. You just have to know what is legal and what is not. And that's not always known, even to the smartest among us.

[zCommander]

Am I the only one who read that and thought Onion... and then looked to see the sourcing to see if he was right? That just reads like an parody script.

He may have talent, but whooo boy.

He was paid by Onion to act it out in real life.

[MartinC]

If your car brakes you might need to get a mechanic - if your car needs petrol you might be able to do it yourself?

I don't accept your analogy. Acting as a barrister and arguing a case, even a relatively simple one at face value IS a skilled job. In no way is it just a case of turning up on the day and telling your side of the story - you need to really understand the law in question, understand what case law has meant in terms of interpretation and what arguments have prevailed and which have been rejected - most cases with lawyers involved don't even get to court, they get settled in advance saving you potentially time, worry and money.

I didn't say everyone should defend themselves nor bring prosecutions .

No you didn't but that's the logical conclusion of your position. If you are allowing people to hire lawyers and be represented by them in Court you end up with exactly the system we have now. No sane person is going to represent themselves in anything but the most simple case if the other side has a lawyer. Unless your just there to plead guilty I guess.

[Est.1974]

Davis really could be a top TE. Maybe not great, but very very good.

However, I'm staring to think he's not wired up right. Well, not fully, anyway.....

[Pedro]

Would you say the same thing if Davis was going up against a seasoned attorney instead of this Chaka woman? If you would, then you're incredibly naive.

No. I read the link and thought it was amusing as well as pretty harmless. Nothing bad will come of this the way it is playing out, and other than the judge also finding it amusing I'm surprised it hasn't already been dismissed. If he were going up against any sort of attorney I expect he would have the best legal team available to the Washington Redskins. You think they wouldn't have stepped in already if our FO were worried? If not I would be more worried about our FO than a TE.

I don't accept your analogy. Acting as a barrister and arguing a case, even a relatively simple one at face value IS a skilled job. In no way is it just a case of turning up on the day and telling your side of the story - you need to really understand the law in question, understand what case law has meant in terms of interpretation and what arguments have prevailed and which have been rejected - most cases with lawyers involved don't even get to court, they get settled in advance saving you potentially time, worry and money.

No you didn't but that's the logical conclusion of your position. If you are allowing people to hire lawyers and be represented by them in Court you end up with exactly the system we have now. No sane person is going to represent themselves in anything but the most simple case if the other side has a lawyer. Unless your just there to plead guilty I guess.

It's a comedy case, harmless learning opportunity for Fred. Not in the law which is obviously not for him, but about off field things like where and with whom your free time is spent. I firmly believe our FO are at least neutral with how this is going or they would have changed it.

Davis really could be a top TE. Maybe not great' date=' but very very good.

However, I'm staring to think he's not wired up right. Well, not fully, anyway.....[/quote']

He said Bruce looked out for him in the drug thing and sounded grateful, we then gave him a good amount of salary by franchising him while he shows us what we want to see. He's one of the guys who said yes to Waco and has a leader to follow who sets the right example. To me that's all he needs 'cos it means he's gonna be putting in a huge amount of effort which to go with his talent is gonna be very productive come game time.

[Peregrine]

I have to agree with Pedro on this.

If you cant defend yourself in a simple case where someone wrongfully sues you with no merit just to extort money, then the legal system is seriously messed up and is based on money and BSing rather than right, wrong, and justice.

However, I know for a fact the legal system is seriously messed up, so we may need another TE...

[tibbidoe]

They should be made to settle this with a best-of-7 Thumb War.

To make it fair, Fred should have to tie one arm behind his back.

[Leonard Washington]

If you cant defend yourself in a simple case where someone wrongfully sues you with no merit just to extort money, then the legal system is seriously messed up and is based on money and BSing rather than right, wrong, and justice.

However, I know for a fact the legal system is seriously messed up, so we may need another TE...

Just because it makes no sense, Davis will probably end up owing her $60M and get 3yrs in prison.

[KCClybun]

Am I the only one noticing the age difference between those who think this is a silly bit.of.nothing and those who think it's an indictment of Fred's decision making skills?

[DeadExField]

Just because it makes no sense, Davis will probably end up owing her $60M and get 3yrs in prison.

IIRC this was a civil case, can't get locked up for this. I could be wrong though

[Califan007 The Constipated]

Am I the only one noticing the age difference between those who think this is a silly bit.of.nothing and those who think it's an indictment of Fred's decision making skills?

I haven't noticed, no...but if it does break down by age like that, what do you think it says?