Yes. Because there was not sufficient evidence of domestic violence. Furthermore, there was a substantial amount of exculpatory evidence. And she refused to sign off on the report the NFL wanted which was misleading vis a vis the actual facts.
Where are you getting this? From what I've seen, she just didn't see the witness as credible. Also, based on the Co-Author, she suggested that they create a report, based on a chronological timeline of events,because of the witnesses credibility issues, discuss the issue further and come to a decision. This is based on her testimony.
That sounds like exactly what happened, based on the suggestions of the other co-author of the report. Yea, it was strong-armed, and it isn't surprising based on the current view of the league and it's trackrecord of domestic abuse. But again, this doesn't seem like some hidden agenda. You guys are harping on a person whose reasoning isn't fully known, one of the co-authors. The other authors suggestion is listed above. Seems like the league followed through with that one.
How is the league hiding anything?