Adrian Peterson's legal issues resolved, charges dismissed
- Blog Post by:
- November 13, 2012 - 5:31 PM
Peterson had been scheduled to appear in court in Houston on Thursday for a hearing to have a trial date set. But a Harris County grand jury instead found no probable cause for Peterson's arrest or charges that he had resisted arrest during an argument with police and night club security at "Live! At Bayou Place."
Peterson was a patron at that establishment and, according to the initial accusations from police, had grown difficult and belligerent when asked to leave the club at closing time. The Vikings star denied those claims and said he had been treated unfairly, with police tackling, punching and arresting him.
The charge of resisting arrest seemed most peculiar since there were no other formal charges filed to understand what the Houston police were arresting him for to begin with.
Peterson was shaken and embarrassed by the incident, which was seemingly out of character for the often gracious and jovial running back.
Peterson never denied exchanging heated words with club security but was always adamant he did nothing to warrant an arrest or the physical treatment he received from police.
Peterson emerged from the incident with his face swollen.
At his first court date in July, Peterson denied ever initiating contact with police or security and asserted he was "200 percent innocent."
He later told the Star Tribune in early September that he had learned his lesson from the incident.
"I saw how fast something can flip, just like that," Peterson said. "So innocent. It wasn't meant to get to that level. So I've been able to step back and get a different view of Adrian and things I need to be better about. ... You need to know when to walk away.
"Yeah, I've got the freedom of speech to say what I want to say. But me saying what I wanted to say added to what happened. I'm not saying you submit to anyone. But I could have cut it short."
The Harris County grand jury has now cut Peterson's legal proceeding short with a ruling that in effect dismisses the case altogether.
© 2016 Star Tribune