Randy Moss's he said, she said

Well, this is exactly what we were afraid of when they signed him.
Some would say, true to form–Randy Moss is embroiled in a public controversy with someone he terms a “long-term acquaintance” just five days before the AFC Championship Game is set to be played in Foxboro. This could not have come, for the team and for Moss, at a worse time.

So. She said:

On Monday, Rachelle Washington secured a temporary restraining order against the wide receiver in Broward County Circuit Court (a copy of Washington’s TRO petition can be found below). Washington, 35, alleges that she was battered by Moss in her Fort Lauderdale home on Sunday, January 6 (the Patriots did not play that weekend due to the team’s opening round bye in the NFL playoffs). Washington contends that she has had an “intimate relationship” with the 30-year-old athlete since 1997. In the “lethality assessment” section of a court form, she checked off boxes indicating that Moss has guns and a “drug or alcohol problem.” The restraining order case, which is classified as a “dating violence” matter in court records, is scheduled for a January 28 court hearing. Until then, the TRO bars Moss from coming within 500 feet of Washington, her home, and her auto.

He said:

Moss, a resident of Orlando, Florida, said he was asked for a financial settlement from the woman over an incident he termed was an

This entry was posted in Randy Moss. Bookmark the permalink.

10 Responses to Randy Moss's he said, she said

  1. [...] post by MVN – Recent Articles Share and Enjoy: These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and [...]

  2. Jamie says:

    Nice job Beth!
    I’m reserving judgement on Randy Moss until the facts come out. If he indeed is guilty of battery on a woman, I can’t see how the Patriots re-sign him after the season is over. That would go against what this team is about.

  3. Andrew Farrar says:

    I’d agree with that.
    I’d also say that I’d be thinking about making Moss meet certain conditions before signing him for next season. And top of those would be losing the “Florida resident” tag – he’d be required to relocate to the Boston area.

  4. Jamie says:

    Andrew,
    You can’t make a player move to a team’s location permanently. The Players’ Union would not stand for that kind of language in a contract, plus it’s a pretty un-American thing to do.

  5. Andrew:
    There is also the tax issue. Florida does not have state income tax, one of the reasons so many high-profile athletes live there.
    Beth:
    Nice writing, presenting views from multiple sides. In this case, it all seems a little too opportunistic. I can not believe that I’m saying this when Moss is the other side, but it does seem to be the simplest explanation.
    But I balance that with the same thing you do, fear of not believing a woman who came forward on something that is terribly underreported.
    I’d like to know how things came to light. Did a reporter notice the restraining order through some kind of google-alert style search? Did Rachelle go to the press?
    Regardless, if I were the Patriots I would ignore it until after Sunday. There is no way you’re going to get unbiased information in this short time frame.

  6. Andrew Farrar says:

    Ah yes, Taxachusetts, as I believe it was once famously dubbed.
    Still, I always thought the Boston area would be one of the more civilised areas of the former colonies in which to live.

  7. Jamie says:

    Still is Taxachusetts Andrew! As far as Boston being civilized, I’m not so sure about that. I know driving through there is a nightmare, and drivers are pretty rude, obnoxious, and careless. But it does have its good points. I guess it’s like any major city?

  8. Andrew Farrar says:

    I take it the good people of Massachusetts have changed their stance on taxation? When we tried to impose some perfectly reasonable taxes on you, our tea was thrown in Boston Harbour.

  9. Jamie says:

    If I recall my history correctly, it was not the fact that the colonists were being taxed, but that they were being taxed without representation in Parliament. Citizens of Massachusetts have representation in state government, but they haven’t figured out that the same people they vote in year after year are the ones taxing them so much…

  10. Brent says:

    And voting themselves pay raises!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>