I agree. I said before that I thought he might have played his last game in GB--mostly because the league doesn't like to deal with the spectre of domestic violence in the public eye. Things have played out a little differently since that time. It's starting to feel like there's not much that's going to come of this.

If he wasn't arrested at the scene and hasn't been charged, yet, denying him the ability to meet the off-season/workout parts of his contract is a bad play in front of the rest of the team. If he's actually charged--which seems less and less likely--then things pivot pretty hard.

I didn't say Jacobs was guilty, did I guys? What I said is that GB is walking a very thin line with the Jacobs situation. And bringing him to camp is akin to burying your head in the sand, saying if I can't see it, there must be nothing there. The pictures from yesterday make it seem like everything is just perfect. Most fans have a skewed perspective on the players/heroes on their favorite teams and will give them a pass for almost anything.

Even though actual charges haven't been filed, this is serious stuff for the Packers that could easily go sideways on them. Plus, I don't think GB should allow other players talking about it or giving opinions. It puts them in peril with fans and the team.

While all claims of domestic violence should be taken seriously - false or exaggerated claims do happen. Any investigation must consider this possibility. However this requires a strong "theory of the case" backed by concrete proof - which usually requires both time and labor. Perhaps this is why no charges have been made to date - to either Jacobs (or his girlfriend).

Also - the choice to not report domestic violence is incredibly complex and deeply rooted in the cumulative barriers that victims face. Not because I forwarded some potentially pertinent information about an open investigation.

Just wait a minute here. Have you actually read some of the posts I've made about this or have you just done your down-votes out of hand?

The actual statute, as I explained, is Strangulation/Suffocation. As I've explained, don't get hung up on the title, read the actual elements of the offense. You apparently want to imagine Jacobs with his biceps bulging and his thumbs pressing against her throat while causing some petechiae in those heterochromatic eyes of hers. What if the only thing he did was hold her tightly to get her to stop throwing things and breaking things and she told the officer(s), "He held me so tight I couldn't breath." ? That comment right there would satisfy the suffocation element, wouldn't it? I'm not saying it did happen that way but something as minimal as that would fit. Again, we just don't know yet. Don't get so wrapped up on a word. When facts come available, figure out how it meets the legal and elemental language of the statute.

I simply said they both have agency in their relationship. You seem to put her on the Doris Day pedestal while she might be more toward the Amber Heard end of the continuum. Yeah, maybe Jacobs should have watched that "Hot/Crazy Matrix" YouTube video and took it to heart. But here's the thing. When has this ever been reported or rumored about him ever in the past? Pretty much never. You are correct. Maybe she also picked the wrong guy to shack up with as well.

You wanna know what happens to most people in a domestic abuse situation in a first offense type scenario? They get deferments. They get sent to counseling. They get probation. If they get can get straight, not re-offend, and behave themselves the charges often get dropped or minimized. It sure helps if they split and go their separate ways. That's pretty much anyone, not just a rich NFL player. Someone mentioned the numbers in a another thread as if it doesn't get adequately prosecuted. That's just not true. The system tries help make corrections to behaviors early on. It is an interventionist strategy aimed at correction and compliance and not simply giving people criminal charges and washing their hands of them. Voluntary compliance is often the goal of any law enforcement. It is especially the goal of correcting domestic abuse.

@GP61--I'm siding with you. Something untoward happened over there.

If this was an open and shut case where harm was undisputed in fact and cause, it’s unlikely that he would be freed unconditionally as opposed to charged on something and released on bail subject to conditions.

The other wrinkle here is that he left before the police were arrived and was not apprehended till after charges were recommended by the police. That means they almost certainly acted on her story.

Combined with evidence of an altercation in the building and via neighbors, the Police are legally constrained to arrest and charge based on her statements. There is a very good reason for that, saving lives. There is, by law, no leeway to not arrest the party seen to be the greatest potential threat (in this case a no brainer). However that’s not a finding of guilt, but a risk mitigation decision. In this case that triggers and ensured the issuance of a warrant.

So the police were pretty much bound to arrest and propose charges and had to do so on evidence of an altercation and her testimony. The neighbors weren’t visible witnesses who can substantiate more than that, although one may have talked to her after, and could thus speak to what she said to her perhaps.

What the prosecutor got when charges were referred was therefore all her side almost certainly. He or she knows that’s never going to stand up, so the investigation began only then in any real sense. By now they should have had any medical tests done and no doubt are in possession of statements from Jacobs. They will be attempting to verify all of that.

All we can say at this point is that they do not see an ongoing threat (since he’s free without charge) or compelling evidence sufficient to support confidence of wrongdoing beyond reasonable doubt. So what do we really know? Nothing. This could be an angry partner lashing out, trying to cover her tracks or it could be what the up in arms brigade assume and more.

However, Jacobs does have know public record of anything like this in his past. That’s going to figure into assessments of veracity. I know little of her past, but that could influence too in a basically his word versus hers situation. Unless the charge of basic battery is increased, it does seem like there was no visible evidence of physical harm and, by now, it seems likely that any medical exam hasn’t changed that.

There really is nothing to go on here since the police were largely constrained to do what they did do and the charges are pretty generic in instances with no eye witness and no visible harm. They are not an indictment they are allegations. This is how the law works to protect victims in these circumstances not public condemnation on which one can rely to assign guilt or predict the outcome. The DA, if they want a career, will be keeping this extremely close to his or her chest and minimizing those with even partial knowledge.

Guam and Coldworld I totally agree with both of you. Thanks, Since '61