Tennis Related - Off Court Serious Issues

[ti-amie]

[JazzNU]

[JazzNU]

I have thoughts, but I'll keep most of them to myself since I've noticed how one-sided people seem to be on this topic. But I'll just say, I'm not surprised and this was always an incredibly weak case that Ben was making.

[ti-amie]

I'm not surprised by the ATP finding insufficient evidence at all. I never thought they were looking all that hard to begin with.

[JazzNU]

I'm not surprised by the ATP finding insufficient evidence at all. I never thought they were looking all that hard to begin with.

If it was the ATP doing the investigation, then I'd agree with that. But with the third party conducting the investigation and putting their name and reputation at stake, I think it was thorough, there just wasn't anything there to find.

[dryrunguy]

In this day and age, if you don't have video, you're screwed. And even if you have video, you might still be screwed.

[JazzNU]

In this day and age, if you don't have video, you're screwed. And even if you have video, you might still be screwed.

That's not true for domestic abuse cases that are alleging violence. Quite a few of them have evidence, threatening texts, social media harassment, neighbors hearing fights through walls, hospital or urgent care visits, medical records, police getting called for loud noises, etc.

If video was required as proof in domestic abuse cases, no one would ever get a restraining order issued. And they get issued pretty darn regularly.

[ponchi101]

Only thing I will add.
Isn't that how the legal system works, in the sense that they say "not guilty"? They do not find you "innocent"; it is very much like trying to prove the non-existence of something.
The ATP cannot claim, with 100% certainty, that Zverev is innocent. All you can do is what they did here: they have not found sufficient evidence that he indeed abused in some form his former GF. Insufficient may range from one or two items that do not show much, to really nothing there at all. But the legal way of framing is that: "We have no sufficient evidence to support the claims".
Not much more they can do.

[Deuce]

Well... obviously there is not "nothing there at all", as he was accused of abuse in a very detailed accusation. That is evidence.
We obviously don't know all of the particulars of the investigation, nor if any other evidence exists, nor if any of the evidence was contradictory.

It must also be considered that 'investigations' are sometimes corrupt, and reach their pre-determined conclusions for reasons which conveniently serve certain parties best, and not because it's the truth.

[ti-amie]

There was a lot of support for Ms Sharypova from inside the tennis community. That's what makes me think that there is some "there" there. Then radio silence occurred and I think many who had followed the situation knew that the ATP would find nothing that could be proven. They want him to be one of their stars.

[JazzNU]

Only thing I will add.
Isn't that how the legal system works, in the sense that they say "not guilty"? They do not find you "innocent"; it is very much like trying to prove the non-existence of something.
The ATP cannot claim, with 100% certainty, that Zverev is innocent. All you can do is what they did here: they have not found sufficient evidence that he indeed abused in some form his former GF. Insufficient may range from one or two items that do not show much, to really nothing there at all. But the legal way of framing is that: "We have no sufficient evidence to support the claims".
Not much more they can do.

Yes, that's correct. And part of the lack of reliable evidence here sounds like it's going to be that at least some of what Ben was using as proof, didn't hold up under a forensic review. The statement says a third-party forensic expert was used as part of the investigation. So they said lack of reliable evidence and eyewitness reports along with conflicting statements meant that they couldn't substantiate the allegations. This was all stuff said in the statement released about the investigation.

But many formed an opinion on this long ago and won't budge even with new information. And let's not pretend people like Sascha all that much to begin with (and who can blame them). And many are still hung up on Acapulco as proof that he did this, which is a lot to assume to me, but I've seen it quite a few times on social media, so it's clearly part of the thinking for many. It would be nice if innocent til proven guilty was still a thing, but it doesn't appear to be that much in public discourse.

Personally, I'm not sure what he did, so I won't be viewing Sascha as an abuser, just the spoiled asshole I've always thought of him as.

[Deuce]

^Wow.

[ti-amie]

[skatingfan]

Kyrgios pleads guilty to assault, has no conviction recorded
By ROD McGUIRK today

CANBERRA, Australia (AP) — Australian tennis star Nick Kyrgios apologized for shoving a former girlfriend to the ground two years ago after he escaped conviction Friday on a charge of common assault.

The 2022 Wimbledon runner-up pleaded guilty in the Australian Capital Territory Magistrates Court to assaulting Chiara Passari during an argument in his hometown of Canberra in January 2021.

Magistrate Beth Campbell did not record a conviction against Kyrgios for reasons including that the offense was at the low end of seriousness for a common assault, was not premeditated and he had no criminal record.

Kyrgios, who was using crutches following recent surgery on his left knee, ignored reporters’ questions as he left court but issued a statement through a management company.

“I respect today’s ruling and am grateful to the court for dismissing the charges without conviction,” Kyrgios said. “I was not in a good place when this took place and I reacted to a difficult situation in a way I deeply regret. I know it wasn’t OK and I’m sincerely sorry for the hurt I caused.

“Mental health is tough. Life can seem overwhelming. But I’ve found that getting help and working on myself has helped me to feel better and to be better,” he added.

The only media question he responded to as he was about to be driven away from the court was: “what’s next for Nick Kyrgios?”

“Just recovery and get back on court,” Kyrgios replied.

Campbell described the shove as an act of “stupidity” and “frustration.”

She assured him his celebrity was not a factor in him avoiding a criminal record.

“You’re a young man who happens to hit the tennis ball particularly well and your name is widely recognised outside this court room,” Campbell told Kyrgrios.

“I deal with you exactly the same way as any young man in this court.”

Kyrgios’ psychologist, Sam Borenstein, said in a written report and testimony by phone that Kyrgios had suffered major depressive episodes around the time of the assault and had used alcohol and drugs to cope. Kyrgios’ mental health led to impulsive and reckless behavior.

His recent knee injury had resulted in mild to moderate symptoms of depression, but his mental health was improving, Borenstein said.

“He’s doing very well,” Borenstein said. “His mental health has improved significantly.”

“Given the history, he is still vulnerable to recurrent episodes of depression depending on life circumstances,” Borenstein added.

Lawyers for Kyrgios had sought to have charge dismissed on mental health grounds but the application was unsuccessful.

In arguing against a conviction being recorded, defense lawyer Michael Kukulies-Smith cited the opinion of Kyrgios’s manager of a “strong likelihood of sanctions and impact upon sponsorship” from a conviction. Kyrgios had faced a potential maximum 2-year prison sentence if convicted.

The assault occurred when Kyrgios had been attempting to leave Passari during an argument late Jan. 10, 2021, outside her apartment in the inner-Canberra suburb of Kingston.

He called an Uber but Passari stood in the way of him closing the front passenger door. The driver wouldn’t leave with the door open.

Kyrgios eventually pushed Passari’s shoulders backward with open palms, causing her to fall to the pavement and graze her knee, according to agreed facts read to the court.

Passari signed a police statement alleging the assault 11 months later, after her relationship with Kyrgios had ended.

His current partner, Costeen Hatzi, wrote in a character reference that she had no concerns of such violence in her relationship. Hatzi was among Kyrgios’ supporters who sat behind him in court.

Kyrgios, wearing a dark suit and using the crutches for support, first spoke in court when the magistrate asked him if he could stand to enter a plea.

Kyrgios replied: “Yep, no worries, Your Honor,” as he rose to plead guilty.

In February last year, Kyrgios opened up about his performance at the 2019 Australian Open, saying what appeared to be a positive time in his life had been “one of my darkest periods.”

“I was lonely, depressed, negative, abusing alcohol, drugs, pushed away family and friends,” he wrote on Instagram. “I felt as if I couldn’t talk or trust anyone. This was a result of not opening up and refusing to lean on my loved ones and simply just push myself little by little to be positive.”

Kyrgios made further references to his mental health struggles during his runs last year to the final at Wimbledon and the quarterfinals at the U.S. Open.

After ending Daniil Medvedev’s U.S. Open title defense last September to reach the quarterfinals, Kyrgios expressed pride at lifting himself out of “some really tough situations, mentally” and “some really scary places” off the court.

The 27-year-old Kyrgios had a career setback last month when he withdrew from the Australian Open because the knee injury which later required arthroscopic surgery.

https://apnews.com/article/sports-nick- ... a304150516

[meganfernandez]

Only thing I will add.
Isn't that how the legal system works, in the sense that they say "not guilty"? They do not find you "innocent"; it is very much like trying to prove the non-existence of something.
The ATP cannot claim, with 100% certainty, that Zverev is innocent. All you can do is what they did here: they have not found sufficient evidence that he indeed abused in some form his former GF. Insufficient may range from one or two items that do not show much, to really nothing there at all. But the legal way of framing is that: "We have no sufficient evidence to support the claims".
Not much more they can do.

You're supposed to be innocent until proven guilty, so if you aren't proven guilty, the assumption of innocence stands. But that's not how it works in the court of public opinion, which is why there are publicists and crisis managers - to fight the stain of the accusation.

Sometimes evidence is essentially exonerating, but the court's job isn't to declare someone innocent. There are some processes where that happens, though. I know some states offer a certificate of innocence for exonerees, for example, going beyond just overturning a ruling and hoping the public understands that the accused's presumption of innocence is reinstated.