-
Hi Guest, want to participate in the discussions, keep track of read/unread posts access private forums and more? Create your free account and increase the benefits of your eGriz.com experience today!
Big Sky establishes serious misconduct rule
- Thread starter Colter_Nuanez56
- Start date
CatGrad-UMGradStu
Well-known member
PlayerRep said:
When you sober up tomorrow and come out of your stupor, read what you just wrote moron.
CatGrad-UMGradStu
Well-known member
PlayerRep said:
Who is the idiot? https://billingsgazette.com/news/crime/court-considers-lower-passing-grade-for-state-bar-exam/article_cebaf49d-93ec-512c-8eb2-b6e3e89fc92b.html
You're from the era that a UM law graduate did not have to take the bar exam to be admitted to the bar! Dartmouth (big mouth) has a zero percent pass rate; therefore, it is safe to surmise I've forgotten more about the UCMJ than your peanut brain will ever comprehend, especially in your disintegrating state of CTE. Moron.
Actually, I’m pretty sure PR went to law school at Stanford which is always rated as one of the top law schools behind Yale and Harvard. He would have had to sit for the Montana bar exam. Only Harvard of the West grads got a pass until Jim Geotz, an Ennis native and a MSU undergrad and Yale law school grad, sued the State Bar and won which resulted in everybody having to sit for the bar exam. Lol.
horribilisfan8184
Well-known member
Dutch Lane said:
Its "Goetz". I understand he flunked the exam, maybe several times. So he sued saying it was unfair and he lost. Goetz v. Harrison, 462 P.2d 891, 154 Mont. 274 (Mont., 1969). If you care to read the decision you will see he had a fool for a client and screwed up procedurally as well as losing on the merits. But alas, he eventually he passed.
He tried again as an attorney with another failed applicant, this time in Federal Court, and lost again. Huffman v. Montana Supreme Court, 372 F.Supp. 1175, (D.Mont. 1974). However, it was not Goetz that lead to the elimination of the diploma privilege after the graduating class of 1983 for Montana law school graduates, but Greg Murphy of Moulton Bellingham in Billings. He (and his "study" group) recommended and convinced the Montana Supreme Court to get with the future do away with the privilege.
But if you ask Jim, he may very well tell you he is responsible not only for eliminating the bar exam but for gravity and the earth's perpetual rotation.
I alhttps://egriz.com/grizboard/posting.php?mode=reply&f=1&t=80142ways heard it was Goetz (thanks for the spelling) who ruined the diploma privilege. Thanks for the correction. I agree he has a healthy opinion of himself lol.
I know, he’s very good but also a big bobcat fan.
Dutch Lane said:
Yup, went to MSU undergrad. So did some other very smart people, including this one from Miles City (who went to high school with my mom and aunt): Maurice Hilleman.
"Maurice Ralph Hilleman (August 30, 1919 – April 11, 2005) was an American microbiologist who specialized in vaccinology and developed over 40 vaccines, an unparalleled record of productivity.[1][2] Of the 14 vaccines routinely recommended in current vaccine schedules, he developed eight: those for measles, mumps, hepatitis A, hepatitis B, chickenpox, meningitis, pneumonia and Haemophilus influenzae bacteria.[1] He also played a role in the discovery of the cold-producing adenoviruses, the hepatitis viruses, and the cancer-causing virus SV40.
He is credited with saving more lives than any other medical scientist of the 20th century.[3][4][5] Robert Gallo described him as "the most successful vaccinologist in history".[3]"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maurice_Hilleman
Herd said:
Don't think the conference had a policy on this subject.
UM Student-Athlete Handbook. Over 100 pages long.
https://s3.amazonaws.com/sidearm.sites/gogriz.com/documents/2017/10/28/2017_18_SA_Handbook.pdf
The Code (selected portions):
II.
Policies on Misconduct for University of Montana Student-Athletes
Four types of misconduct may affect your ability to participate in the University's intercollegiate
athletic program: "Category I Violations", "Category II Violations", and “Category III Violations”
are associated with criminal charges. Violations of University policies and procedures, whether
or not criminal charges are filed, may also affe
ct your ability to participate in the University’s
intercollegiate athletic program.
A.
Category I Violation
A Category I violation occurs in any situation where an individual:
Is charged with a felony and, in looking at the totality of the circumstances, it is
reasonable to believe the person committed the act (e.g., rape, sexual assault, other
felony assault, felony theft, felony DUI, etc.).
Preliminary Action:
The Athletic Director or his/her designee shall take
preliminary action to temporarily suspend a student-athlete from participation in
practice, competition, and/or access to athletic department services when a
student-athlete has been charged with a felony. The suspension is indefinite
pending the outcome of criminal proceedings and disciplinary action by the ACT,
which as soon as possible shall be informed by the AD or designee of the
temporary suspension and meet to discuss the issue. In cases where charges
have not been filed, but reasonable evidence exists that a student-athlete may
have committed a Category I violation (e.g., other specific and credible
information exists such as arrest record, statements of law enforcement officers,
University records, third-party or witn
ess statements, or acknowledgement by the
student-athlete), the ACT shall convene and determine preliminary action.
B.
Category II Violation
A Category II violation occurs in any situation where an individual:
Is charged with a non-felony criminal offense (e.g., misdemeanor assault, misdemeanor
DUI, misdemeanor theft, etc.) and, in looking at the totality of the circumstances, it is
reasonable to believe that the person committed the act; or
Violates a term of probation or other condition imposed by a court in a criminal
proceeding; or
Is found to have engaged in conduct that is deemed inappropriate, reckless, inciting, or
malicious (e.g., vandalism, destruction of Un
iversity property, etc.) which could bring
embarrassment to the team, the Department
of Athletics, or the campus community.
C.
Category III Violation
A Category III violation occurs in any situation where an individual:
Is charged with or receives a citation for a “disorderly-person” offense and, in looking at
the totality of the circumstances, it is reasonable to believe that the person committed
the act (e.g., open container, false identification, public urination, underage possession
of alcohol, disorderly conduct, resisting arrest, etc.).
D.
University Policy, Procedure or Rule Violation
Violations of University policies, rules, or procedures occur in any situation where an
individual:
10
III. Penalty Schedule
Table 1. Penalty Schedule: Mandatory Minimum Sanctions
Category I
Category II
Category III
First Offense
Dismissal from
team
Minimum suspension
of 10% of scheduled
contests
One or more of the following
depending on nature of
offense:
-Mandatory alcohol/drug
counseling
-Community Service
-Letter of apology
-Behavior contract
-Restitution
-Parent/guardian notification
-Suspension from practice
activities
-Suspension from team
activities
Second
Offense
Minimum suspension
of 30% of scheduled
contests
Minimum suspension of 10%
of scheduled contests
Third Offense
Dismissal from team
Minimum suspension of 25%
of scheduled contests
Fourth
Offense
Dismissal from team
Sanctions for Category I, II, and III violations shall follow the schedule above, with the following
guidelines.
Category II and III violations are each considered within a rolling two-year period in
order to determine which offense (first, second, etc.) has been committed. Category I
violations are not subject to any rolling period of time and are always acted upon.
For multi-sport student-athletes, sanctions will be imposed during the season in
which the offense occurs or in the immediately next sport season if the offense
occurs out of season.
The withholding of information in an attempt to evade punishment under this penalty
schedule is subject to further penalties as appropriate.
In cases where there is ambiguity about the Category status of a penalty or about
whether the Penalty Schedule should be invoked at all, the ACT will use all available
information to determine whether the violation is Category II or III.
Nothing in this code shall be construed to prevent the University and the Department
of Athletics from imposing disciplinar
y sanctions. The Penalty Schedule provides
minimum penalties. Additional or more severe penalties can be imposed at the
discretion of the ACT based on the severity of the act and aggravating
circumstances. When an offense involves alcohol and/or danger to others (i.e., DUI,
physical violence), more severe penalties are likely to be imposed.
The ACT may revoke or modify athletically-related financial aid as a consequence of
any and all Category I and II misconduct. Action to revoke or modify athletically-
related financial aid will be in accordance with NCAA procedures and University
procedures, as outlined in the Student-Athlete Handbook.
GRIZZLY ATHLETICS
STUDENT-ATHLETE HANDBOOK
