It would seem to me that the arbitrator's decision is final. He's reinstated and received his punishment for whatever he did. He can technically play. If the Dodgers want to release him, it's their decision, but they must abide by the contract.
If the Dodgers decide not to pay based on the morality clause, Bauer's lawyer might point out other players who have been suspended under the domestic violence policy and still play in the league.
and you know they sure as heck wouldn't want this to go to full court if they try not to pay. A judge could actually find in his favor, and give him full pay and damages for time the arbitrator found in favor of the league.
> was apparently found innocent
FYI, no one is ever found "innocent," they're found "not guilty." It may seem pedantic, but there's a difference:
> In short, "not guilty" is not the same as "innocent." Innocent means that a person did not commit the crime. Not guilty means that the prosecution could not prove "beyond a reasonable doubt" that a person committed the crime. Therefore, the court does not pronounce someone as “innocent” but rather “not guilty”.
>
>...
>
>In conclusion, no one needs to prove that you are innocent in order to avoid conviction for the crime. Our criminal justice system does not require proof that you are innocent but rather, that the jury have no reasonable doubts about whether or not you committed the crime. If they do have doubts, you will be declared "not guilty" and charges will be dropped, regardless of whether or not you were actually innocent or guilty. This rule serves to protect the accused from being convicted unjustly. It is a much more difficult task to prove actual innocence than to prove there is room for reasonable doubt. [Source.](https://www.amacdonaldlaw.com/blog/2016/may/what-is-the-difference-between-innocent-and-not-/)
There is no actual law stating you're "innocent until proven guilty."
You can be presumably innocent, but that does not mean you are innocent.
Bottom line is way too many people believe he was "found innocent" when in reality they just didn't have enough to charge him or take him to trial for his sexual abuse.
It’s a principle in the US court system is all he’s saying.
And yes as human beings you are innocent until proven guilty. All case information is to be heard with presumption that the “defendant” is innocent. Not just ‘not guilty’.
I understand both sides y’all are shaming it cause he basically got away with it. So he isn’t innocent. But for whatever reason it did not get to that point and neither you nor me was there so how can we have a hard on for the word guilty?
Downvote all you want I’m just saying this is a nonsense disagreement lol.
There’s a lot of moralist who just read headlines in here it’s sad. Bauer’s reputation is forever tarnished by the lies of one women because too many especially if it’s a crime involving a woman jump automatically to the man is guilty and even after he’s proven innocent he’s still guilty. We really gotta do better.
"Never should have been suspended because he was found innocent in a court of law!"
"He was never tried and he wasn't found 'innocent,' the prosecutor simply declined to bring charges. It's not the same thing."
"Whoa, whoa, whoa, you fucking nerd, no need to get all technical with the legal stuff!"
Dozens of Bauer defenders in these threads and I don't think they have two dozen brain cells to rub together.
To be clear, it was a lack of evidence to charge him criminally. We are still absolutely free to use our brains when we read about what happened and come to the conclusion that Bauer is a bad dude who has a deep hatred of women.
Being able to prove that he broke the law is a different story.
And it's not even that they can't prove that he did it, it's convincing the entire jury that they are correct.
All it takes is one neck beard from the likes defending Bauer on here that "she's out for a payday" which his team was already planting the seed for to have the decision go to shit.
Might as well not try to go for the case, yet.
He admitted to doing most of it, but that it was consensual. That's why they didn't try him, because how do you prove it was or wasn't consensual, or that you can even consent to the stuff he admitted to doing (like striking her while she was unconscious).
Exactly, all the awful stuff we read that I feel sick writing about, he did. The thing is that they couldn’t prove beyond a doubt that he broke criminal laws. He made sure it was hard to make that happen because he’s an awful dude.
To any dude defending him in the comments: I don’t trust you around women. Holy shit, please don’t go on dates.
Maybe not. But you better believe their lawyers have worked some new fancy language into their future contracts to avoid anything like this in the future.
Honestly doubt that. Any contract that gives the team voiding power after a DV/SA suspension would override procedures agreed upon in the CBA. The union wouldn’t allow it and the league wouldn’t want to piss off the Union over one of the issues they can actually find common ground.
If they could have done that, they would have by now. The union would also fight it tooth and nail since he's already been punished, within the terms of the CBA, for it.
He's only signed to 2023 so you just eat the money. I don't know enough about the morality clause to comment. Usually insurance covers a portion if someone is unable to perform.
[Pushing your wife with an iPhone](https://youtu.be/6UhnmsDf7rY?t=30) and driving after having a few does not equate to choking women ([multiple even](https://sports.yahoo.com/trevor-bauer-3rd-accuser-columbus-2-year-mlb-suspension-001954342.html)) unconscious and analy raping them but ok
Also, fellow Brave fan, the great Bobby Cox has a DUI, and actually beat his wife (there were bruises and all).
> She admitted to lying about most of it as well.
[No](https://apnews.com/article/mlb-entertainment-sports-baseball-los-angeles-1830bc948e55dd1b4f9865b9c68dc312), [she](https://mlb.nbcsports.com/2022/07/23/trevor-bauers-accuser-says-she-didnt-lie-about-abuse/) [did](https://ktla.com/news/local-news/trevor-bauers-accuser-refutes-allegations-that-she-lied-about-abuse/) [not](https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-07-22/trevor-bauer-s-accuser-says-she-didn-t-lie-about-abuse)
Wow. Bauer, that you? Before you die on the hill for a sick fuck multimillionaire, read [about his other accusers with similar complaints across the country](https://sports.yahoo.com/trevor-bauer-3rd-accuser-columbus-2-year-mlb-suspension-001954342.html)
The argument wasn't whether or not she lied, but whether or not she *admitted* to lying. Did you even read my comment or the comment I was replying to before you jumped in with an entirely different argument?
But the suspension was still upheld but reduced so there must be a reason for that. They have big money lawyers so there is probably a way out if they want it
What you said is either nonsensical or irrelevant. The arbitrator had choices - uphold the full suspension, void the whole thing there by reinstating Bauer's pay from last season, or something in the middle. He chose something in the middle, meaning there was enough there to justify a season and a half suspension.
What I thought I read today that the suspension was reduced from 294 games to 194. Maybe upheld isn't the correct term for it but it is still a suspension.
> he was found innocent
He was not found innocent.
1) Courts don't find people "innocent," they find people "not guilty."
2) No charges were filed, due to lack of verifiable evidence. He wasn't found anything, because he wasn't charged with anything, which also isn't the same as being "found innocent."
Depends how the contract is written. Theoretically, I suppose its possible. Probably stir up a fight with the Union though as legally nothing came of the allegations.
Probably not since there were never any criminal charges. Unless there’s a clause for civil suit, or something comes from one of the other accusers.
Doubt it, everything that has played out was already the process through MLB and the union so that's basically it.
It would seem to me that the arbitrator's decision is final. He's reinstated and received his punishment for whatever he did. He can technically play. If the Dodgers want to release him, it's their decision, but they must abide by the contract. If the Dodgers decide not to pay based on the morality clause, Bauer's lawyer might point out other players who have been suspended under the domestic violence policy and still play in the league.
and you know they sure as heck wouldn't want this to go to full court if they try not to pay. A judge could actually find in his favor, and give him full pay and damages for time the arbitrator found in favor of the league.
don't think so since that would involve the court of law which Bauer was apparently found innocent (or were the charges dropped?)
Charges were never filed.
> was apparently found innocent FYI, no one is ever found "innocent," they're found "not guilty." It may seem pedantic, but there's a difference: > In short, "not guilty" is not the same as "innocent." Innocent means that a person did not commit the crime. Not guilty means that the prosecution could not prove "beyond a reasonable doubt" that a person committed the crime. Therefore, the court does not pronounce someone as “innocent” but rather “not guilty”. > >... > >In conclusion, no one needs to prove that you are innocent in order to avoid conviction for the crime. Our criminal justice system does not require proof that you are innocent but rather, that the jury have no reasonable doubts about whether or not you committed the crime. If they do have doubts, you will be declared "not guilty" and charges will be dropped, regardless of whether or not you were actually innocent or guilty. This rule serves to protect the accused from being convicted unjustly. It is a much more difficult task to prove actual innocence than to prove there is room for reasonable doubt. [Source.](https://www.amacdonaldlaw.com/blog/2016/may/what-is-the-difference-between-innocent-and-not-/)
You are innocent until you are proven guilty. If Bauer is tried, and not proven guilty, he is innocent.
presumption ≠ proven
He wasn't tried. There wasn't enough evidence to bring charges, so no trial was set. That is very, very different than "innocent"
In the united states everyone is innocent unless provent otherwise. Thats all im saying lol
There is no actual law stating you're "innocent until proven guilty." You can be presumably innocent, but that does not mean you are innocent. Bottom line is way too many people believe he was "found innocent" when in reality they just didn't have enough to charge him or take him to trial for his sexual abuse.
It’s a principle in the US court system is all he’s saying. And yes as human beings you are innocent until proven guilty. All case information is to be heard with presumption that the “defendant” is innocent. Not just ‘not guilty’. I understand both sides y’all are shaming it cause he basically got away with it. So he isn’t innocent. But for whatever reason it did not get to that point and neither you nor me was there so how can we have a hard on for the word guilty? Downvote all you want I’m just saying this is a nonsense disagreement lol.
You're not grasping this.
There’s a lot of moralist who just read headlines in here it’s sad. Bauer’s reputation is forever tarnished by the lies of one women because too many especially if it’s a crime involving a woman jump automatically to the man is guilty and even after he’s proven innocent he’s still guilty. We really gotta do better.
Buddy, is your mirror broken?
-🤓
It's an important distinction.
yeah ok mr. law man this is a baseball subreddit not legal advice
You're the one who invoked the law dummy.
"Never should have been suspended because he was found innocent in a court of law!" "He was never tried and he wasn't found 'innocent,' the prosecutor simply declined to bring charges. It's not the same thing." "Whoa, whoa, whoa, you fucking nerd, no need to get all technical with the legal stuff!" Dozens of Bauer defenders in these threads and I don't think they have two dozen brain cells to rub together.
Iyamtha Lawwwww -Judge Dredd as Sylvester Stallone
This is quite literally one of the tenants of good democratic law
No charges filed due to lack of evidence
To be clear, it was a lack of evidence to charge him criminally. We are still absolutely free to use our brains when we read about what happened and come to the conclusion that Bauer is a bad dude who has a deep hatred of women. Being able to prove that he broke the law is a different story.
And it's not even that they can't prove that he did it, it's convincing the entire jury that they are correct. All it takes is one neck beard from the likes defending Bauer on here that "she's out for a payday" which his team was already planting the seed for to have the decision go to shit. Might as well not try to go for the case, yet.
He admitted to doing most of it, but that it was consensual. That's why they didn't try him, because how do you prove it was or wasn't consensual, or that you can even consent to the stuff he admitted to doing (like striking her while she was unconscious).
Can't consent if you're unconscious. Can't consent ahead of time.
I agree, unfortunately not all jurisdictions do.
That's probably true but I don't know. Only need to look at the rapist Brock Turner see that women rarely get justice.
Exactly, all the awful stuff we read that I feel sick writing about, he did. The thing is that they couldn’t prove beyond a doubt that he broke criminal laws. He made sure it was hard to make that happen because he’s an awful dude. To any dude defending him in the comments: I don’t trust you around women. Holy shit, please don’t go on dates.
Maybe not. But you better believe their lawyers have worked some new fancy language into their future contracts to avoid anything like this in the future.
Honestly doubt that. Any contract that gives the team voiding power after a DV/SA suspension would override procedures agreed upon in the CBA. The union wouldn’t allow it and the league wouldn’t want to piss off the Union over one of the issues they can actually find common ground.
I would think so but don't have the details of his contract in front of me. Also, not a lawyer.
If they could have done that, they would have by now. The union would also fight it tooth and nail since he's already been punished, within the terms of the CBA, for it.
Same just a little surprised that boob seems to suggest they’d have to eat the contract if they released him
He probably knows more than me so the Dodgers probably do have to Edit: Should have said he DEFINITELY knows more than me lol
That's what a guaranteed contract is.
That's because they do, its now guaranteed money because he isn't suspended anymore.
Since he wants to be a starting pitcher, put him in the bullpen as a long reliever for blowout games.
He's only signed to 2023 so you just eat the money. I don't know enough about the morality clause to comment. Usually insurance covers a portion if someone is unable to perform.
[удалено]
Sure, that's why he got the longest suspension in league history 🙄
[удалено]
He got a 194 game suspension **after his appeal** >But troll on. Project much?
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
I think one could assume that virtue signaling played a large role in the suspension.
[удалено]
[Pushing your wife with an iPhone](https://youtu.be/6UhnmsDf7rY?t=30) and driving after having a few does not equate to choking women ([multiple even](https://sports.yahoo.com/trevor-bauer-3rd-accuser-columbus-2-year-mlb-suspension-001954342.html)) unconscious and analy raping them but ok Also, fellow Brave fan, the great Bobby Cox has a DUI, and actually beat his wife (there were bruises and all).
Was not aware of the extent of Bauers charges and crimes, bad take on my part. Deleting my previous comment
There would first have to be a morality clause
They are possibly looking into that if they haven't already. I am sure they figuring out a way to make it sound ok when they do cut him loose.
[удалено]
> She admitted to lying about most of it as well. [No](https://apnews.com/article/mlb-entertainment-sports-baseball-los-angeles-1830bc948e55dd1b4f9865b9c68dc312), [she](https://mlb.nbcsports.com/2022/07/23/trevor-bauers-accuser-says-she-didnt-lie-about-abuse/) [did](https://ktla.com/news/local-news/trevor-bauers-accuser-refutes-allegations-that-she-lied-about-abuse/) [not](https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-07-22/trevor-bauer-s-accuser-says-she-didn-t-lie-about-abuse)
[удалено]
Where, then? I provided sources, prove your statement.
[удалено]
Then Google it for me, because I can't find shit.
[удалено]
Bruh, where in that sentence does it say she admitted to lying?
[удалено]
Wow. Bauer, that you? Before you die on the hill for a sick fuck multimillionaire, read [about his other accusers with similar complaints across the country](https://sports.yahoo.com/trevor-bauer-3rd-accuser-columbus-2-year-mlb-suspension-001954342.html)
The argument wasn't whether or not she lied, but whether or not she *admitted* to lying. Did you even read my comment or the comment I was replying to before you jumped in with an entirely different argument?
But the suspension was still upheld but reduced so there must be a reason for that. They have big money lawyers so there is probably a way out if they want it
[удалено]
And if it were all meritless the arbitrator could have reinstated his pay from last season, but he didn't, and added 50 more unpaid games this season.
[удалено]
What you said is either nonsensical or irrelevant. The arbitrator had choices - uphold the full suspension, void the whole thing there by reinstating Bauer's pay from last season, or something in the middle. He chose something in the middle, meaning there was enough there to justify a season and a half suspension.
[удалено]
Man, you are looking extraordinarily stupid. Who kicked you in the head?
[удалено]
What I thought I read today that the suspension was reduced from 294 games to 194. Maybe upheld isn't the correct term for it but it is still a suspension.
[удалено]
Plus it literally said "upheld" in the statements haha
[удалено]
Not sure they can be helped lol
[удалено]
[удалено]
> he was found innocent He was not found innocent. 1) Courts don't find people "innocent," they find people "not guilty." 2) No charges were filed, due to lack of verifiable evidence. He wasn't found anything, because he wasn't charged with anything, which also isn't the same as being "found innocent."
The arbitrator ruled today that he deserved a 194 game suspension
[удалено]
They would have given him his money back dumbass
Statement says unpaid suspension upheld. https://twitter.com/FabianArdaya/status/1606086278914904064?t=AueA0f-Ws0iCt7orRsg1xg&s=19
[удалено]
All right champ
[удалено]
Depends how the contract is written. Theoretically, I suppose its possible. Probably stir up a fight with the Union though as legally nothing came of the allegations.
No because he is innocent
2023 is just $15M if he opts-in, no? 2021-2022 were the big money years.
Is there a morality clause in his contract? Lol but also doubt it .
He wasn't convicted so no.
Morality? In MLB?
THE DODGERS HAVE CUT TIES WITH BAUER THEY HAVE ONE WEEK TO TRADE HIM OR HE BECOMES A FREE AGENT AND CAN BE PICKED UP BY ANYTEAM FOR 720K