There are just about two sides to every story.
In the curious case of whatever happened between Brett Favre and Jennifer Sterger, there are about 36 different sides and countless variations.
We’ve heard opinion after opinion about the situation, some refusing to touch the subject and others condemning Favre as the spawn of Satan.
I’m going to be different. I’m going to listen more carefully to what hasn’t been said. I’m not here to point fingers, but silence can often speak louder than words.
First we’ll start with the facts. Only fact we really know is that some form of contact occurred between Favre and Sterger. That’s all we’ve got. That’s the only evidence that can be labeled ‘Exhibit A’ and presented in a court of law. But that fact alone gets us nowhere.
Favre and Sterger may not be talking, but their silence is.
We know there was contact between the two, however, we’re not sure of what kind. Inappropriate contact has been implied and when given the chance to refute such claim Favre ‘didn’t wanna get into that’. I’m no saint but if I’m a married man with children and it’s implied that I sent inappropriate messages to an attractive young lady, I’m denying vehemently……if I’m innocent. If I’m guilty, well, I wouldn’t wanna get into that.
I know Brett Favre may be trying to protect his golden boy image but isn’t that even more reason to deny allegations when given the opportunity?
Another fact: Brett Favre’s tearful team meeting days before the Vikings matchup with the Dallas Cowboys.
Why the tears? These are allegations. They’re not even criminal. Punishable only by public embarrassment.
If someone alleges they saw you in town wearing a pair of Lee’s instead of Wrangler’s will there be another team meeting? Will it be tearful?
Silence + tears = hmmm……
How deep did this go? (I’ll save the obvious joke for twitter)
Switching gears to Ms. Sterger.
There’s an awful lot of silence coming from the Sterger camp and it’s hard to decipher why. The NFL only wants confirmation, if there is any, of the claims reported by deadspin.com. If the situation is as cut and dry as a harassment case then you cooperate, point out your offender, and walk away vindicated. Again, if.
Instead, a week after this is initially reported and becomes a mass media story, Sterger releases this statement:
“This is something that allegedly happened two years ago. We don’t want a quick resolution, but the proper resolution.”
Allegedly? Well you’re the one that allegedly received the inappropriate messages, did you or didn’t you? That’s a fair and simple question in my opinion. Either you’re holding the smoking gun or you’re not.
“We don’t want a quick resolution”, odd. Yes or no is a quick statement and it’s the only one you’re being asked to make. Why prolong the embarrassment unnecessarily? If a simple “yes” or “no” disperses all heat from you and directly back to Favre, what’s wrong with that?
Instead, they want the “proper resolution”. The silence between those two statements is enough to tell me there’s a significant difference between them. Quick and easy, versus proper and safe. Given what was alleged as a one sided harassment case you’d figure ‘quick and easy’ would be the ideal resolution. To the Sterger camp, it obviously isn’t.
I don’t buy that she’s protecting Favre. He’s no longer a Jet employee. Hell, neither is she. I don’t buy that it would harm her career, that is, if it’s a cut and dry harassment case. Erin Andrews was violated, she pressed charges, she’s doing just fine. Sterger was violated, “allegedly”, she refuses to press charges or even cooperate.
Erin Andrews wouldn’t have had much of a case if she would’ve started posing for the camera. Sterger’s silence tells me there may be more to this than she is prepared to deal with.
I’m not going to speculate on details because that part of it can’t be proven and I’m no shock jock. I’m just looking at what was said and reading into what wasn’t.
Here’s another fact: if I’m holding a smoking gun with another mans fingerprints on it and I’m being questioned, I’m handing it over…..unless I know he has the same.