Has anyone heard this about Payton Manning before today?
- Thread starter Monroe Claxton
- Start date
Yeah - it is old news. The media in Knoxville at the time tried to spin it as him mooning a teammate and it being an accident and it kind of went away, until Archie's book which broke the confidentiality clause in the payoff/settlement agreement they had with the trainer. She sued for defamation and they settled again. Not sure why it is being brought up again - unless it is backlash for the media all but deifying him.
The way UT made up the "mooning" part is no surprise. His ex-teammates exposing him as a vindictive liar is new to all of us who only remembered the cleaned up version that UT spun.
i had heard about this but didn't realize how bad peytons side was. i always thought it was just the mooning and being a little punk about getting called out on it. but hell, he tried to keep up that lie for a long time. lord knows it want hurt him in the long run but i'lll admit that i like him a little less after reading that.
I remember hearing about the "mooning" incident, but didn't know that Peyton and Archie made up lies about the woman and allegedly destroyed her career.
Damn shame that a woman, who was by all accounts an outstanding professional, had her career and reputation destroyed by a coverup.
and he's clearly the kind of repressed square *** who would violate a woman and then fixate on her (made-up) vulgar language
archie is a huge creep too. what a surprise
archie is a huge creep too. what a surprise
This is why you never cheer for Tennessee QB's! C'mon people!!!
Reading these comments is like reading comments from headlines, social media, push media headlines and 24/7 news bombarding our consciousness.
Not a single poster on this thread has even a clue what is true or not. Our responses are based more on emotion than fact. This is what the media feeds on to boost ratings and audience share. Thi is life in a 500 channel world. Congratulations OP, you just did your share to feed the media monster.
Not a single poster on this thread has even a clue what is true or not. Our responses are based more on emotion than fact. This is what the media feeds on to boost ratings and audience share. Thi is life in a 500 channel world. Congratulations OP, you just did your share to feed the media monster.
Did you read the story with the court transcripts?
Those weren't court transcripts, but, rather, citations to a 74 page filing by the plaintiff's attorney.
Moreover, the writer is Shaun King. He is a professional SJW with an agenda of his own, and credibility issues of his own. King's agenda is very simple- he resents the negative attention that Cam Newton received in recent weeks (which is understandable, because Newton has taken his share of unfair heat), and has decided to take his anger out on Peyton Manning.
Because it makes all the sense in the world to think if there was a story there, not one media person would have chased it. Right. That's what media does in the 21st century: there's very little competition, they all march in lockstep to protect public figures. Just like in the 60s, the way the media protected JFK and ignored his dalliances, as with Monroe. Just like today....
The only place I put a sports star on a pedestal is on the field, and to take their word about what product to buy is the height of idiocy, the only thing their endorsement means is that it will be priced higher than it should be. Of course some products they endorse will be good, just by chance.
You're right the board is censored. We don't allow racist language, profanity, flaming and other disruptive conduct. Those are the rules you agreed to when you became a member. If you find that objectionable you're in the wrong place.
Listened Jacob Tamme on the wlap Sunday morning last Sunday with Mark Buerger, Larry Vaught and Anthony White. Tamme went to the trouble to travel to the Super Bowl because of his love and respect for Manning. Tamme always seemed to be a really good guy. I'll go with folks like Tamme who actually know Manning over a hit piece by some writer with an agenda.
Because the woman had a past and reputation of her own and never had the complete credibility to prove what the Mannings stated were lies. I mean she claimed he scooted down the bed and laid his penis on her head while she was looking at his foot. She didn't notice him drop his drawers and scoot butt a$% naked down to her with a penis coming at her head without reacting? Other members of the staff and players called her a carpet knocker or something in that nature because she was sleeping with female coeds. Florida State would not have fired her over only the Mannings words against her...there was more to the story and the fact nobody has given it the time of day until now says something. King is admittedly mad because his home boy is being painted in a negative light because of his piss poor attitude and sore looser ways.
The mooning stuff is old information. Don't know about the new stuff. There was not that many girls in men's locker rooms in the old days. I guess that is changing.
I don't think that there is enough information to know for sure...
If it was so clear that he committed a crime it would have gone to court and he would have been found guilty...
Anyone who has ever been a part of male team sports knows that a lot of shenanigans go on behind the scenes...vulgar language and behavior are part of it...
Maybe Peyton had an extremely juvenile moment where some locker room horse play went terribly wrong and some trainer was offended...but to me "sexual assault" is a pretty serious accusation...
If it was malicious and intentional then shame on Peyton...but there is absolutely nothing that has occurred since then that would suggest Peyton is that sort of person...to my knowledge there are no whispers of behavior like this with the colts or broncos...
if he was some sort of perverse sexual deviant then i think there would have been some other incidents..."peyton manning inappropriately grabs athletic trainer", "peyton accused of sending explicit photos to colts cheerleader...", "peyton get's rough with girl in bathroom of bar in Denver..."....
Peyton probably was an entitled golden boy turd...he may very well still be behind the scenes today...but being an entitled prick doesn't necessarily make you a criminal sexual assaulter of women...
I don't know one way or the other...I don't have a horse in the race...but I know you have to be proven guilty...
If it was so clear that he committed a crime it would have gone to court and he would have been found guilty...
Anyone who has ever been a part of male team sports knows that a lot of shenanigans go on behind the scenes...vulgar language and behavior are part of it...
Maybe Peyton had an extremely juvenile moment where some locker room horse play went terribly wrong and some trainer was offended...but to me "sexual assault" is a pretty serious accusation...
If it was malicious and intentional then shame on Peyton...but there is absolutely nothing that has occurred since then that would suggest Peyton is that sort of person...to my knowledge there are no whispers of behavior like this with the colts or broncos...
if he was some sort of perverse sexual deviant then i think there would have been some other incidents..."peyton manning inappropriately grabs athletic trainer", "peyton accused of sending explicit photos to colts cheerleader...", "peyton get's rough with girl in bathroom of bar in Denver..."....
Peyton probably was an entitled golden boy turd...he may very well still be behind the scenes today...but being an entitled prick doesn't necessarily make you a criminal sexual assaulter of women...
I don't know one way or the other...I don't have a horse in the race...but I know you have to be proven guilty...
1. It was settled out of court which means there was enough of a threat to pay her
2. Our court system is rarely about guilt or innocence, more about $. Rich guys often times get away with stuff.
the flip side of that is rich famous guys are high profile targets for tort abuse. There have been numerous cases where plaintiffs went after celebrities especially pro athletes on meritless charges that were settled by the defendant in order to avoid a lengthy, damaging and expensive trial.
I agree...settling often means "hush money"...
but sometimes settling is just settling...
the accuser realizes that maybe the crime wasn't as serious as she first felt and that there isn't enough evidence to convict...and the guy being accused realizes that he would rather not go through a legal process even if he is confident he would be proven innocent...
Peyton could have gone through that entire mess and been found innocent beyond a shadow of a doubt...that the woman was out to get some attention and money...even then, to this day Peyton would have the stigma of being an accused sexual assaulter...
like i said...i don't know who is right or wrong...if it comes out that Peyton is a dog and committed the crime...then he deserves all the negativity and stigma he gets...
but, just as there are a lot of males in general, and specifically male athletes on campus that treat women poorly and get away with perverse behavior...there are females who target them with nefarious intentions...females who know all they have to do is yell "rape" or "sexual assault"...
Once they avoid court we don't really know if it was meritless or not. But I'm sure there are guys falsely accused but I would wager that's the exception not the rule.
Right On, SACat. Media dredging something up that happened when he was about 20 yrs old. The writer is an A-hole.