3 Griz Arrested

[PlayerRep]

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

Must be some other thread railing on the homeowners for being at fault. I haven't seen a single post here blaming them.

Nor have I. Soldier, put up or shut up. Let's see the posts blaming the homeowner.

 

[haZyskies]

I think we need to start looking to the future, and focus on if the Griz will be able to climb the ladder of success.

 

[Sam A. Blitz]

Why do you say they wouldn't have been charged with a felony? I certainly think anyone's initial sentencing of breaking and entering into someone else's property should be very serious. That requires some serious explanation.

You don't go into someone else's property. Period. It doesn't matter if it's construction in progress, a barn, or a crap house. You certainly don't do it at 2 or 3 at night. Why try to defend it?

 

[ilovethecats]

The "ladder" was a makeshift wooden thing for carrying stuff to and from the room being built.

some of you have really had a chance to analyze the evidence. :shock:

question....did this makeshift wooden thing have two long pieces of wood joined by many smaller pieces of wood that connected them from top to bottom? maybe something that looked similar to a capital letter "H" but instead of just one line in the middle connecting the sides there were many lines in the middle connecting the sides?

this could completely make or break this case i feel like....

 

[PlayerRep]

Why do you say they wouldn't have been charged with a felony? I certainly think anyone's initial sentencing of breaking and entering into someone else's property should be very serious. That requires some serious explanation.

You don't go into someone else's property. Period. It doesn't matter if it's construction in progress, a barn, or a crap house. You certainly don't do it at 2 or 3 at night. Why try to defend it?

Because people go onto other people's property and into buildings in construction all the time--both day and night--and nothing comes of it. If tools are stolen, that's different. Nothing was taken or broken in this one, according to the owner's quote in the Kaimin. Lots of egriz posters have already said they've gone into buildings on construction sites.

 

[GrizLA]

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!!!

I believe you missed the point....I was referring to the "responses" on egriz.

 

[UMGriz75]

Jesus. You have got to be the biggest UM apologist in existence. Your homerism rivals that of PR, and that is saying something. I would be willing to bet that if a UM football player raped someone you would come up with some irrational bullshit excuse in order to spin the story and make the guilty look innocent...oh wait. Douche bag. Headline: " UM football player leaves the United States to join ISIS". UMGriz75: "Anyone who has googled ISIS is basically a terrorist, so lets cut the guy some slack, after all, he is a UM FOOTBALL PLAYER." smh.

I love hyperbole. Stupid hyperbole, not so much.

Thanks for playing.

 

[GrizLA]

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

Must be some other thread railing on the homeowners for being at fault. I haven't seen a single post here blaming them.

What is truly amazing about this, is the high level of restraint and judgement of the homeowner. This guy could have shot any or all them and didn't. That people are here defending their actions or not, seems to overlook just how lucky they were and are.

 

[PlayerRep]

Our game is over, so I don't have a dog in this fight, so I hope I can offer something constructive as an outsider looking in. As a current teacher and an experienced Air Force NCO/Supervisor, I've dealt with students and young airman (not much older than these kids) doing questionable things.

I read the provided articles and for me it leaves me with some unanswered questions.

If I missed something or I touch on something somebody has already answered, please (civilly) educate me.

One personal question of mine is, did they come back with the team or catch an earlier flight?

Where were they before this event? A friends home? A local club? At 2:30 (at least in Oregon and Texas) most bars are closed at that time.

Was alcohol a factor? I didn't see any reference to any BAI level or mention of any of them being intoxicated, so I am assuming they were all sober at the time.

When did they call to be picked up? Before or after the fact? Why didn't they wait in a more accessible location?

I keep coming back to asking, "What would a REASONABLE person do in this situation?"

Personally, and forgive me if I tread on any toes, I can't see or find any reasonable actions in any of this.

After experiencing a grueling rode trip with a plane flight to a another city, a physically exhausting football game in extremely inclement weather conditions, then a late flight home, is it reasonable for anyone to be out walking around at 2:30 in the morning in what I understand to be to be cold, wet and rainy weather?

Would a reasonable person even consider climbing a ladder (possibly risking injury) to climb into an open second story window on another person's property (unoccupied or not) as an excuse to get out of the weather while waiting for a ride.

I assume that in Montana, like Texas, a "castle defense statute" exonerates a property owner who disables or kills an intruder in their home, which, if they have been in Montana for a while they should know.

If they were freshman on their own for the first time, I could excuse it for inexperienced exuberance, but these were experienced, hopefully well-educated upperclassmen and in the eyes of society, legal adults, responsible for their actions.

On the surface, I can't see any reasonable actions on any of these individuals, but then again, we don't know all the facts in this matter. I say let the detectives conduct their investigation and if it goes to trial let a jury decide guilt or innocence.

As for what the college administration decides to do, as long as it is in accordance to the student code of conduct and NCAA regulations, I'm fine with that.

What ncaa regulation do you think could apply to this situation?

No, MT law does not allow homeowners to shoot intruders unless they homeowner is threatened with physical harm (paraphrasing).

Yes, college kids often party late at night, even after football games.

 

[UMGriz75]

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

That's bullshit. No one has said that. If you need to fabricate an argument, it must be a piss poor argument.

 

[PlayerRep]

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

Must be some other thread railing on the homeowners for being at fault. I haven't seen a single post here blaming them.

What is truly amazing about this, is the high level of restraint and judgement of the homeowner. This guy could have shot any or all them and didn't. That people are here defending their actions or not, seems to overlook just how lucky they were and are.

If the homeowner had shot them, he'd probably be the one with the felony and high bail. You can't shoot someone who is on your property but not threatening you with physical harm (paraphrasing). Karma certainly found that out.

 

[GrizLA]

Great post

Must be some other thread railing on the homeowners for being at fault. I haven't seen a single post here blaming them.

What is truly amazing about this, is the high level of restraint and judgement of the homeowner. This guy could have shot any or all them and didn't. That people are here defending their actions or not, seems to overlook just how lucky they were and are.

If the homeowner had shot them, he'd probably be the one with the felony and high bail. You can't shoot someone who is on your property but not threatening you with physical harm (paraphrasing). Karma certainly found that out.

And, for witnesses, you would have....? A he said, he said thing.....sorry, I disagree. Someone comes onto my property that late, takes the trouble to climb into a window, they would not be leaving except on a gurney to the hospital or morgue..These men were very lucky the homeowner has a strength of self control.

 

[PlayerRep]

I find it amusing that someone who works in the financial services industry, as Everett has said he does--an industry that many people believe breaks the law frequently--would take such a strong position about kids breaking the law by trespassing.

 

[PlayerRep]

Must be some other thread railing on the homeowners for being at fault. I haven't seen a single post here blaming them.

What is truly amazing about this, is the high level of restraint and judgement of the homeowner. This guy could have shot any or all them and didn't. That people are here defending their actions or not, seems to overlook just how lucky they were and are.

If the homeowner had shot them, he'd probably be the one with the felony and high bail. You can't shoot someone who is on your property but not threatening you with physical harm (paraphrasing). Karma certainly found that out.

And, for witnesses, you would have....? A he said, he said thing.....sorry, I disagree. Someone comes onto my property that late, takes the trouble to climb into a window, they would not be leaving except on a gurney to the hospital or morgue..These men were very lucky the homeowner has a strength of self control.

You've now earned the new nickname of Karma.

 

[poorgriz]

So PR is still banging the "The Missoula PD is out to bring the football program down" drum, huh? Really? you think they were only charged with felonies because they're football players? What about the non football players? How did the cops know they were football players.... Did they ask them?

 

[EverettGriz]

I find it amusing that someone who works in the financial services industry, as Everett has said he does--an industry that many people believe breaks the law frequently--would take such a strong position about kids breaking the law by trespassing.

SMFH.


Now I know you're desperate in this conversation. Just give it up. Your "defend the players at all costs" position is another loser. Just like...(edit).

 

[signedbewildered]

So PR is still banging the "The Missoula PD is out to bring the football program down" drum, huh? Really? you think they were only charged with felonies because they're football players? What about the non football players? How did the cops know they were football players.... Did they ask them?

The helmets, shoulder pads and the fact that they were each found with a half eaten free hotdog on their persons likely gave them away.

 

[mcg]

let's remember that the "just getting out of the rain" theory was just that...a theory. someone mentioned this might be a reason for entering someones home and other posters just rolled with it.

This is precisely my point, ILTC. I don't CARRRRRRRRRREEEE what the "justification" is. The decision was wrong and illegal. It's the same argument I made during the MSU players breaking into the Mayor's house. I don't care if they knew a guy who knew a guy who once was there. It was wrong. They KNEW it was wrong (and illegal), and they did it anyway.

Again, it's about personal responsibility. Unless Schmaing was about to have a baby, I cannot envision ANY reason why they needed to be in that house. None. And they went there knowing it was illegal. I guess I just don't see why there needs to be any discussion beyond that.

There is no question that the players broke the law. None. The question is what law did they break and that is a function of what actually happened and what the circumstances were. That matters for a lot of reasons, mostly about what the consequences will be. If the building was 'occupied' (as defined in the code) or if they stole anything they are looking at burglary; if they were simply hanging out in a building not 'occupied' (again as defined), then it's misdemeanor trespass (doesn't really matter why they chose to hangout, not a good choice, but the 'why' doesn't matter). Way different outcomes for everyone involved.

For the record, the legal system has to work for a while before we know the answer to this question, but in my opinion it seems like trespass is a much more likely outcome. If you think about it the county attorney is saying she doesn't know what happened, so it would seem unlikely a bunch of message board warriors like us would have any idea of really happened.

 

[HookedonGriz]

Lots of Cat trolls chirping in on this....some respectfully....most not. Don't throw rocks in glass houses. Translation: you have athletes that do dumb things too:

http://skylinesportsmt.com/montana-state-forward-cited-for-misdemeanor-theft-last-month/

Suspended for one game, yet if these football players get charged with misdemeanor and only are suspended one game you will all freak out. Even though a 1 game suspension is like 10 percent of your season in football. It's a hand slap in hoops.

 

[PlayerRep]

I find it amusing that someone who works in the financial services industry, as Everett has said he does--an industry that many people believe breaks the law frequently--would take such a strong position about kids breaking the law by trespassing.

SMFH.


Now I know you're desperate in this conversation. Just give it up. Your "defend the players at all costs" position is another loser. Just like...(edit).

Nope, I don't defend players at all costs and don't defend alot of them at all. When I have defended players, my track record has been very good. I have been right on every player I've defended, except for once saying my instinct said one guy didn't do it. You, on the other hand, talk mostly about moving up and diss the Big Sky conference frequently. Now you're off on this holier than thou tangent with some players who, according to their attorney, were curious and walked into an unfinished room above a garage.