The New York Giants maintained a Big Blue wall of silence on Saturday regarding the Josh Brown situation. Brown, of course, has been suspended by the NFL for Week 1 following a May 22, 2015 arrest for one count of misdemeanor domestic violence against his then-wife. The charge was dismissed May 27.
Asked multiple times in his post-game press conference Saturday about Brown, McAdoo refused to offer anything new.
"I said everything I had to say on Thursday about the Josh Brown situation,” he said.
Per James Kratch of NJ.com, Giants co-owner John Mara and GM Jerry Reese both refused to comment. Per Kratch, Mara said only “"Check with me again next week, but I don't have anything to say.” Per Ralph Vacchiano of SNY, Brown also refused comment on Saturday.
Brown originally told reporters that the May 2015 incident was “just a moment.” Since then, however, many new details have emerged.
Here, from NJ.com, is the situation in a nutshell since Brown spoke to reporters.
But hours after those comments, the details of the full police report emerged. So did an interview Brown's ex-wife gave to a detective a day after Brown's domestic violence charge was dismissed on May 27, 2015.
In those documents, which have been obtained by NJ Advance Media, Brown's ex-wife alleges a history of multiple incidents where Brown was physically violent toward her, with police being called on several occasions. Those allegations opened up a new King County Prosecuting Attorney Office investigation, according to a prosecutor's letter obtained by NJ Advance Media.
But that case was closed with no charges filed in May of this year - a month after the Giants had re-signed Brown - after the prosecutor determined he would be unable to get sufficient information and cooperation from Brown's ex-wife, and other witnesses, needed to bring the case to a jury.
The new allegations have garnered national attention, with many wondering aloud why Brown was only suspended for one game, and why the Giants are remaining steadfast in their support and were willing to bring Brown back this offseason.
Here is the statement the NFL released:
In May 2015, the NFL was informed by the New York Giants of Josh Brown's arrest for an incident in his home involving his then wife. We began an investigation into the incident and circumstances surrounding it.
In the course of the League's investigation, our investigators became aware that his wife had filed a statement with the county court alleging previous altercations between the spouses. However, despite multiple attempts to speak with her about this incident and her previous statements, she declined to speak with us. We understand that there are many reasons that might have affected her decision not to speak with us, but we were limited in our ability to investigate these allegations.
Over the course of the 10-month investigation, we also made numerous requests—as late as this spring—to local law enforcement officers for information on the case and previous allegations. They declined those requests for information.
As a result of these factors, our investigators had insufficient information to corroborate prior allegations. In addition, no criminal charges were brought forward regarding the incident in question or prior allegations. The NFL therefore made a decision based on the evidentiary findings around this one incident as provided to us by the District Attorney.
The NFL made a finding that Mr. Brown had violated the Personal Conduct Policy. We did so based on the evidence of this one incident as presented in the police report, Mr. Brown and his wife's statements to police that evening, and his statements in interviews with the NFL.
The NFL Personal Conduct policy allows for discipline to be imposed even when criminal charges are not presented. It further allows for us to consider both aggravating and mitigating factors regarding discipline for domestic violence.
After reviewing the evidence in this one incident, we imposed a one-game suspension for violation of the personal conduct policy.
Mr. Brown and the NFLPA appealed this discipline, but the decision was upheld by a hearing officer.