3 Griz Arrested

[George Ferguson]

Copper, I fully agree with you that all three Griz players should be punished according to the law says and whatever the student conduct code says, as well as whatever Stitt wants. He does reserve the right to go beyond the conduct-code, like Urban Meyer did today with J.T. Barrett.

However, what is troubling to me is, we like to jump all over these three BECAUSE THEY GOT CAUGHT DOING SOMETHING ILLEGAL. Well guess what, there were thousands upon thousands of college football and basketball players under the age of 21 drinking alcohol and smoking weed on Halloween night. I will bet my bottom dollar that there were Griz football players under the age of 21 drinking Saturday night, as there were MSU football players drinking too. As there were Ohio State football players and Harvard football players and Duke football players that were underage drinking too Saturday night. But, everyone sleeps well at night because THOSE KIDS didn't get caught. MSU and Griz fans come on here on their high horse when something like this goes down and talk so honorably about breaking the law and doing the time. But, I never see anyone speaking out in advance of the dangers of underage drinking. Why? Because no one gives a s--t what these kids do until after they get in trouble. It's pretty hypocritical if you ask me.

 

[horribilisfan8184]

Perspective is everything. We raise labs who run free in our fenced (6 ft vinyl) back yard. Our new neighbors 10 and 12 year old kids scaled the fence , walked across our metal shed (how I knew the came in the yard) to see the 6 week old puppies. No police were called. The kids admitted what they did and apologized, and I popped out the roof dents. Nothing was hurt and lessons were learned. If these were Griz kids, I guess I should have called the cops and forced them through Juvie.

 

[SoldierGriz]

Copper, I fully agree with you that all three Griz players should be punished according to the law says and whatever the student conduct code says, as well as whatever Stitt wants. He does reserve the right to go beyond the conduct-code, like Urban Meyer did today with J.T. Barrett.

However, what is troubling to me is, we like to jump all over these three BECAUSE THEY GOT CAUGHT DOING SOMETHING ILLEGAL. Well guess what, there were thousands upon thousands of college football and basketball players under the age of 21 drinking alcohol and smoking weed on Halloween night. I will bet my bottom dollar that there were Griz football players under the age of 21 drinking Saturday night, as there were MSU football players drinking too. As there were Ohio State football players and Harvard football players and Duke football players that were underage drinking too Saturday night. But, everyone sleeps well at night because THOSE KIDS didn't get caught. MSU and Griz fans come on here on their high horse when something like this goes down and talk so honorably about breaking the law and doing the time. But, I never see anyone speaking out in advance of the dangers of underage drinking. Why? Because no one gives a s--t what these kids do until after they get in trouble. It's pretty hypocritical if you ask me.

I guarantee Stitt and every other coach on the staff frequently remind players to make good decisions...I am also certain these talks include pitfalls of alcohol...and I am also certain that every single player on the team knows laws associated with underage drinking. A few will always make bad choices, and those few should be punished. I have read nothing about alcohol involvement...perhaps it's assumed.

Trespassing....is this something we really need to remind grown men of?

I also think everyone on here cares about the Griz players...we just expect them to make good choices. When they don't, disappointment is the rightful emotion.

 

[George Ferguson]

Soldier, I wasn't talking about Stitt or his staff, I was talking about fans who ONLY talk about the law after it's been broken. If people are so concerned with laws, then get out and do some preventative good. Do community out reach, do community service, go talk at schools, go do volunteer work at your local B&G, hell ask Stitt or Decuire if you can talk to the team about the pitfalls of making bad decisions. It just seems to me, people are only concerned with this type of thing and have thoughts and opinions on it after the fact, and especially if it affects the team losing more games.

Oh and to be clear, for those of you who already do the things I mentioned above, Good For You. We need more people like you.

 

[AZGrizFan]

Good God, PR/75.

You're trying to assign rational thought to what is clearly an irrational behavior. Who knows -- or better yet who CARES -- why they did what they did. To stay dry? They broke the law. To raise hell? They broke the law. Because one of them took woodshop in junior high and wanted to see a real 2 by 4? They broke the law.

There's only one important sentence in that paragraph. It's repeated 3 times. THEY BROKE THE LAW. Period. Discussion over.

Bullseye! I really don't know how you refute - They Broke The Law. Black or white. No grey here.

Swing and miss. There are infinite levels of "grey" in the law. Jaywalking is breaking the law. Murder is breaking the law. Should a "zero tolerance" policy kick a player off for both offenses? Trespassing is breaking the law. Burglary is breaking the law. Should a "zero tolerance" policy result in the same suspension regardless of the level of offense?

 

[UMGriz75]

Good God, PR/75.

You're trying to assign rational thought to what is clearly an irrational behavior. Who knows -- or better yet who CARES -- why they did what they did. To stay dry? They broke the law. To raise hell? They broke the law. Because one of them took woodshop in junior high and wanted to see a real 2 by l
There's only one important sentence in that paragraph. It's repeated 3 times. THEY BROKE THE LAW. Period. Discussion over.

Good God yourself, who said they didn't?

The problem is with the "lynch mob" mentality of "crucify them" not matter what.

This is a minor trespass for which there was no criminal intent.

"THEY BROKE THE LAW," repeated as a lynching song, bears no resemblance to honoring distinctions between that "criminal intent" and overt stupidity, and I pity any athlete subjected to the Star Chamber convictions of overly-confident hypocrites who vest in "punishment" as an ideal, the substitution of "conviction first," "punishment now," "destruction immediately," in place of the simple and honest dignity of waiting until the facts are first found out, and young people can receive the benefit of the doubt, something that the frothing and foaming toads on this debate are incapable of doing.

 

[SoldierGriz]

Good God, PR/75.

You're trying to assign rational thought to what is clearly an irrational behavior. Who knows -- or better yet who CARES -- why they did what they did. To stay dry? They broke the law. To raise hell? They broke the law. Because one of them took woodshop in junior high and wanted to see a real 2 by 4? They broke the law.

There's only one important sentence in that paragraph. It's repeated 3 times. THEY BROKE THE LAW. Period. Discussion over.

Bullseye! I really don't know how you refute - They Broke The Law. Black or white. No grey here.

Swing and miss. There are infinite levels of "grey" in the law. Jaywalking is breaking the law. Murder is breaking the law. Should a "zero tolerance" policy kick a player off for both offenses? Trespassing is breaking the law. Burglary is breaking the law. Should a "zero tolerance" policy result in the same suspension regardless of the level of offense?

Of course not...the nuance you describe is relevant. But, there are some who actually think the homeowners are at fault, or it was unclear if it was a dwelling, or the rain forced them into the structure. Those ideas floating around on here in an attempt to somehow dismiss this are insane.

They did the wrong thing. No nuance there in my opinion. The remedy formed by the court, admin, and coaches has spece for nuance. I believe Stitt needs to send a strong message in his first big test. I would.

 

[GrizRanger]

If all these young men did was seek refuge from rain at a construction site, I don't understand why so many people want to put them in prison and kick them off the football team. Certainly they should have been more careful and cautious, and probably should have suffered in the rain rather than enter private property, but some of you idiots are making them out to be terrible criminals.

Get real!

 

[UMGriz75]

Trespassing....is this something we really need to remind grown men of?

Most people, adults and otherwise, are unaware that crossing even the corner of a lawn is "trespassing" under the statute, and that like most statutes for whom people advocate "zero tolerance," in many cases that approach is simply ridiculous.

Decent people don't wreck lives over stupidity. Other kinds of people can't wait ....

 

[SoldierGriz]

Trespassing....is this something we really need to remind grown men of?

Most people, adults and otherwise, are unaware that crossing even the corner of a lawn is "trespassing" under the statute, and that like most statutes for whom people advocate "zero tolerance," in many cases that approach is simply ridiculous.

Decent people don't wreck lives over stupidity. Other kinds of people can't wait ....

Yeah...cutting across the lawn is the same thing.

Grown men in or near your dwelling at 3 in the morning...I have kids. Can't imagine. Scary as hell. I am not underwriting this. It's wrong. I don't think they should hang for this. The remedy will likely be fair. It can't be chalked up to stupidity in my opinion.

 

[bigkid]

You people talk about taking shots of fireball, drinking beer after beer after beer, and then brag about how drunk you get. Probably driving home after games. Look in the effing mirror you damn hypocrites and clean up the " program".

 

[UMGriz75]

Yeah...cutting across the lawn is the same thing.

Actually, I said it was "ridiculous."

But, that's just me, because that is also the dead-end of "zero tolerance." It IS the same thing to fanatics for those kinds of simplistic notions of "justice."

 

[UMGriz75]

You people talk about taking shots of fireball, drinking beer after beer after beer, and then brag about how drunk you get. Probably driving home after games. Look in the effing mirror you damn hypocrites and clean up the " program".

Good point. These are the same people who can't respect the athletes enough to stop drinking at the tailgates to come back and watch these kids bust their butts for the team and these fans. I've never seen such a collection of pious hypocrites.

 

[EverettGriz]

There's a huge difference between misdemeanor trespassing and felony burglary.

Is ANYONE arguing this point?

The remainder of your post is simply the mutterings of a lunatic, so I won't address those.

You are. You are saying that breaking the law is breaking the law, and the consequences should be the same no matter what. You seem to be indicating that you have never broken the law.

I challenge you to find any post of mine saying the penalty for illegal trespass and burglary should be the same.


But frankly, none of the smoke screen you're pouring out your backside is changing the fact they broke the law.

And before you get on the whole "you never broke the law" RIDICULOUS high horse, I'll simply leave you with this:

No, I have never entered someone else's property illegally at 2:30 in the morning, and since I have been 3 years old, I would recognize that as not only wrong, but stupid and illegal.

 

[EverettGriz]

Good God, PR/75.

You're trying to assign rational thought to what is clearly an irrational behavior. Who knows -- or better yet who CARES -- why they did what they did. To stay dry? They broke the law. To raise hell? They broke the law. Because one of them took woodshop in junior high and wanted to see a real 2 by 4? They broke the law.

There's only one important sentence in that paragraph. It's repeated 3 times. THEY BROKE THE LAW. Period. Discussion over.

Bullseye! I really don't know how you refute - They Broke The Law. Black or white. No grey here.

Swing and miss. There are infinite levels of "grey" in the law. Jaywalking is breaking the law. Murder is breaking the law. Should a "zero tolerance" policy kick a player off for both offenses? Trespassing is breaking the law. Burglary is breaking the law. Should a "zero tolerance" policy result in the same suspension regardless of the level of offense?

Of course not...the nuance you describe is relevant. But, there are some who actually think the homeowners are at fault, or it was unclear if it was a dwelling, or the rain forced them into the structure. Those ideas floating around on here in an attempt to somehow dismiss this are insane.

They did the wrong thing. No nuance there in my opinion. The remedy formed by the court, admin, and coaches has spece for nuance. I believe Stitt needs to send a strong message in his first big test. I would.

Great post

 

[George Ferguson]

Everett, I haven't seen anyone post yet that the Griz trio didn't break the law. But, you have to admit, we are seeing some extremes on both ends here. One poster compared this situation to Laurence Phillips for crying out loud!!!

 

[EverettGriz]

Everett, I haven't seen anyone post yet that the Griz trio didn't break the law. But, you have to admit, we are seeing some extremes on both ends here. One poster compared this situation to Laurence Phillips for crying out loud!!!

Agreed. There are idiots everywhere.

But those who are denying these kids did anything wrong are just as ridiculous. Maybe more so, because that is simply inarguable.

I have no problem with saying this wasn't burglary. But they did something they HAD to know was illegal. I don't care about degrees; I care about personal responsibility. And PR/75 is trying to say they shouldn't even be held to that standard? Bullshit. I'll call him (and anyone with a similar argument) out every day on that. These are grown men who did something you and I knew at 3 years old was illegal.

 

[signedbewildered]

PR: "Not sure what your comment meant, but you should look at Pabst's full statement, in which she said there wasn't sufficient evidence to support charging with a felony, but they wanted to investigate more before deciding on the charge."

That's what I understood, that they likely wouldn't be charged with the felony, who knows, possibly they wont be charged with anything. To me the heading on the article "Prosecutor: Initial investigation insufficient to file charges against Griz players, 2 others" implied there wasn't enough evidence to file any charges, felony or otherwise.

I would have inserted the word "felony" between "file" and "charges." I guess this is why I don't work at a newspaper. Is the title untruthful? Not essentially, but to me it is a little misleading.

 

[jodcon]

This is becoming comical. So the spin now is they were just trying to get out of the rain until their ride came, so they climbed a ladder into the second story of a house, or did I get that wrong?

I don't know about Missoula but there are about 50 places on my street alone to get out of the rain without entering a house, maybe it was raining from every direction that would explain it.

 

[EverettGriz]

This is becoming comical. So the spin now is they were just trying to get out of the rain until their ride came, so they climbed a ladder into the second story of a house, or did I get that wrong?

I don't know about Missoula but there are about 50 places on my street alone to get out of the rain without entering a house, maybe it was raining from every direction that would explain it.

Yeah, no, you pretty much nailed the PR/75 justification.

C'mon, jodcon, do you really expect personal responsibility from these student-athletes we give free educations to?