Unless you're in a 14 or 16 man league (and even then at this point) there shouldn't be any reason for him being on a team. Just wasting a roster spot.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" lang="en"><p>Prosecutor's request to recuse Judge Kelly Case from the Adrian Peterson proceedings denied, which is good news for the defendant. ...</p>— Albert Breer (@AlbertBreer) <a href="https://twitter.com/AlbertBreer/status/525075903164870656">October 23, 2014</a></blockquote> <script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script> <blockquote class="twitter-tweet" lang="en"><p>With Case still on the Peterson case, parties go forward with trial date he set (12/1 ). If other cases fall off docket, could be earlier.</p>— Albert Breer (@AlbertBreer) <a href="https://twitter.com/AlbertBreer/status/525076454506123264">October 23, 2014</a></blockquote> <script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" lang="en"><p>Adrian Peterson and his reps have been in ongoing talks to reach a plea agreement that could be done as early as Tuesday, per sources.</p>— Adam Schefter (@AdamSchefter) <a href="https://twitter.com/AdamSchefter/status/528934130390937600">November 2, 2014</a></blockquote> <script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" lang="en"><p>Source: Adrian Peterson will plead no contest to misdemeanor charge <a href="http://t.co/eTfLkQaj7k">http://t.co/eTfLkQaj7k</a></p>— ProFootballTalk (@ProFootballTalk) <a href="https://twitter.com/ProFootballTalk/status/529662861019480065">November 4, 2014</a></blockquote> <script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
I will still be very surprised if he is back on the playing field with the Vikings this year. Even with the Vikes mediocre again this year I think local opinion is pretty sour on him. My own feeling is that the next time we see Petersen on an NFL field will be next year for another team.
Paging Roger. ROGER! ROGER! <blockquote class="twitter-tweet" lang="en"><p>Adrian Peterson pleads no contest. He will pay a fine of $4,000, serve 80 hours of community service, be placed on probation.</p>— Ian Rapoport (@RapSheet) <a href="https://twitter.com/RapSheet/status/529727220085194754">November 4, 2014</a></blockquote> <script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script> <blockquote class="twitter-tweet" lang="en"><p>Peterson gets a $4,000 fine, pleads no contest, 80 hours community service. Judge defers guilty/innocent ruling for two years.</p>— Kevin Seifert (@SeifertESPN) <a href="https://twitter.com/SeifertESPN/status/529727288846602240">November 4, 2014</a></blockquote> <script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script> (40 of the 80 hours are PSA)
define malicious intent please.... beating the **** out of a small child is pretty damn malicious to me
Intent = intending to harm. That's different from doing harm. It seems pretty clear from all of his statements - and he's been brutally honest about the whole thing - that he thought he was being a good parent and administering reasonable discipline. He may not be right and he did do harm, but that's different from intending to harm. The disturbing part to me is that he still doesn't seem to realize that what he did was wrong, at least when we last heard from him a few months back.
I think beating a child, as the pictures show, indicates an intent to do harm. He didn't accidentally do it. Maybe he is one of the stupidest people alive and he didn't honestly intend to cause harm but I think under any rational thought process a grown man of his size and strength would understand that beating a young child like that would do harm.
That's certainly true - I should have clarified the "malicious" part. He intended to hit the child, and he did it as punishment for whatever the kid was doing. But it wasn't with malicious intent - he clearly thought he was being a good parent and trying to raise his child "properly". It's different from hitting a child because you're angry at them or because you want to hurt them. He was doing it because he thought it was being a good parent. There's a scale of what is acceptable, and corporal punishment is legal, even if you or I may disagree with it personally. He went beyond that and that's why he's in court, but there's a difference between going too far and having malicious intent. Again, this is a pretty standard way for cases like this to be resolved - he shouldn't be treated differently because he's famous, good or bad.
A jury in Montgomery county wasn't going to convict him and the DA knew it. How he disciplined his son is fairly common in that area and there is great deference given to parenting down there. All the news media centered in the north and people in large cities like LA, NY and Chicago can be shocked but it is what it is.
This wasn't in east county or even in Cut-n-Shoot. This was in The Woodlands. Not a place where that is common.
Given what has come out about him since this story first broke, including him telling the drug tester he had smoked weed recently, I wouldn't discount AP's stupidity.
I do not think it is common to whoop a child such that he has multiple open wounds over multiple parts of his body including his scrotum. I have read a lot of comments where folks said "my parents/grandparents did that to me", yet I have not read a single comment where those folks said "and I do the same to my child".
