bluto

Too late for that now, my dude.
And if the "investigation" yields no basis for the allegation, how does Kelly and the Argos get their reputation restored? Do they get to sue the Accuser? will they face civil or criminal charges? We know that they won't. It's a free hit as part of a civil wrongful dismissal case designed to produce a nice, easy settlement.

We'd be saying Al Couture shouldn't have wore those tight pants.

Given the reaction to the Bombers suspending Lawler when his DUI happened was "good for them for being proactive", I suspect our reaction would be much the same.
My wife always says I am divorced from reality, does that count?

That was the first video I've watched today. I had to search for highlight reels of good plays before I felt sufficiently "up" so that I could leave the house.
 
There's no way I'm starting my day like that.
 

And yet, look how his final game turned out for him.
What a way to sign off.

And yet, look how his final game turned out for him.
What a way to sign off.

Are you trying to tell us that "Hell hath no fury like a woman scorned"  and that in happens in real life....  Noooooooooooooo waaay!  
 
 

Kelly has been conspicuous for his hard work and charitable hours and for the record, I don't recall ever scoffing... but then I don't ever recall attesting to any particular player's sainthood either.
I don't think I'm likely to taste any crow here based on a $50k add-on to a wrongful dismissal suit. But you never know.
 
Like I said earlier, ask Shawn Oakman about this stuff.
Or, as I trust that most people around here are men of middle age or more, I find it difficult to believe that nobody here has an acquaintance who went through an acrimonious divorce where allegations were made. These things happen in lawsuits. They are common leveraging tools. And the tell is that usually the civil suit is filed and no criminal one is. Because if there's a criminal suit, it always makes the civil one a tap-in. 

Big job ahead: Find the next Stiggers/Peters/Hendrix/Barlow/Pickett...

It's the Argo way. Not sure what you're scouts eat for breakfast...but I could do with some of it 

And when you have a son whose reputation and career options are torpedoed from a false allegation perhaps you'll understand why rushing to judgement can be ill advised. In that case, even when proven false, the damage is irreparable.

Excuse me, serious question: what victim? And who said that they ought to be shamed? This is a wrongful termination suit with a side of a sensationalized accusation to whip the press (and apparently internet forums) into a frenzy before evidence and judgement. And why would the accused be named and subjected to trial by press except for the purpose of shaming them into accepting a settlement (much as was done once before against the Argos)? 
This serves the accuser's legal strategy just fine, as was always the intent.
Give me a bit of credit for being a decent human please.
And your comment about the side of truth is just so offside here. And support what victim?
And this is why trial by media for a wrongful termination suit is ideal for the accuser.
Yahtzee.

Particularly because this isn't a criminal matter...

Just saying:
 
It's messed up how they can name Kelly but not the accuser.

Just saying:
 
It's messed up how they can name Kelly but not the accuser.

Just saying:
 
It's messed up how they can name Kelly but not the accuser.

Just saying:
 
It's messed up how they can name Kelly but not the accuser.

Since you asked, yeah I think that since this is over $85k FFS, perhaps having a sitdown with the club and holding the big stick of a trial-by-media may have done away with this.
They are an Accuser. Learn the difference. 

Just saying:
 
It's messed up how they can name Kelly but not the accuser.

Just saying:
 
It's messed up how they can name Kelly but not the accuser.

Just saying:
 
It's messed up how they can name Kelly but not the accuser.