• 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!

Henley booted from bubs after assault charges

Well whatever he did, or however he did it, it resulted in bodily harm which made it assault. So maybe Everett could have just said stop assaulting defenseless people, which is pretty much the same thing in my book.
a simple statement of "I thought he/she/they was going to hurt me" or "he/she/they said he was going to hurt me"
 
The quoted charges against him say "assault causing bodily harm". How can he be charged with bodily harm if he didn't inflict bodily harm? That doesn't make sense.
Because that's just a summary title. In law, titles don't rule or make the law. The language does. Google. Everything show that there doesn't have to be touching or contact. In fact, even a threat can be deemed to be assault.
 
Don't agree that it's low or childish. If there are alot of legal problems, it does reflect on the program and the standards of recruiting. Same with coaches. And how the problems are handled are also reflective of the program. For example, MSU's poor or awful handing of the 2 football coach dui's reflected very poorly on the MSU program and its administration. And, a message board is on the internet. This is what many people do on the internet.
💯
I think the main takeaway from this thread (other than proving bubz fans have no decency whatsoever) is that since BH 2.0, UM has run a very clean and respectable program while MSdui is nothing but a tipped over trash can.
 
The quoted charges against him say "assault causing bodily harm". How can he be charged with bodily harm if he didn't inflict bodily harm? That doesn't make sense.
without reading the arrest affidavit you don't know. the other party simply has to say the other party inflicted pain or threatened to inflict pain. unless there are witnesses or video evidence the police will ultimately error on the side of caution..
 
Because that's just a summary title. In law, titles don't rule or make the law. The language does. Google. Everything show that there doesn't have to be touching or contact. In fact, even a threat can be deemed to be assault.
I know this is true. When I was in high school a friend of a friend was convicted of felony threat with assault by telling another kid he was gonna have his friends beat the kid up for calling them the n word even though he didn’t.
 
Well color me stupid for thinking that "assault causing bodily harm" actually meant causing bodily harm. I obviously have too much common sense to be involved with the legal system.
Why didn’t you read the blurb I posted when I quoted the police resort? It specifically said assault didn’t have to be touching or contact. I had fed it to you.
 
Well color me stupid for thinking that "assault causing bodily harm" actually meant causing bodily harm. I obviously have too much common sense to be involved with the legal system.
Not stupid at all. The posters are referring to causing the “reasonable apprehension” of bodily harm. In other words, no contact needs to be made nor bodily harm caused. For example, taking a swing and missing. It’s a subsection of the assault statute in MT.

Now, if the arrest log (or whatever it’s called) includes the language “causing bodily harm” when no such harm was caused because the conduct merely caused “reasonable apprehension”, I agree it can be misleading and/or confusing.
 
Not stupid at all. The posters are referring to causing the “reasonable apprehension” of bodily harm. In other words, no contact needs to be made nor bodily harm caused. For example, taking a swing and missing. It’s a subsection of the assault statute in MT.

Now, if the arrest log (or whatever it’s called) includes the language “causing bodily harm” when no such harm was caused because the conduct merely caused “reasonable apprehension”, I agree it can be misleading and/or confusing.
My guess (from a guy who was admitted to a number of law schools but chose not to attend), is that he caused bodily harm.
 
My guess (from a guy who was admitted to a number of law schools but chose not to attend), is that he caused bodily harm.

That was my understanding as well. Which is why I did not understand why we got off in the weeds about whether or not it actually involved bodily harm. In either case, not a good look and he probably deserved to get kicked off the team. I am reasonably confident that the same thing would have happened at UM, at least I hope so.
 
pmfa is a no bond arrest you have to appear before the judge which generally if a weekend arrest means seeing the judge on Monday unless they are so busy they have weekend arraignments. Generally after they see the judge they are released with no contact stipulations....95% of the time the other party asks the judge to remove the no contact order and they honeymoon starts all over again....
I never lift a no contact order unless the attorney sets a hearing to modify conditions and I have an opportunity to hear from victim.
 
I feel bad for all the women stuck in these situation and have no means to get out.
To 'get out,' just 'GET THE F OUT!' There is plenty of help available. Law Enforcement, the Courts, Social Welfare agencies. Will it be easy? No, but ya gotta take that first step. None of this 'drop the charges' shit, 'lets start over' or 'we can work it out.' They just end up a statistic.
Found this quote if Google: "The Chinese philosopher Lao Tzu said; “The journey of a thousand miles begins with one step”".He wasn’t wrong, because you won’t get anywhere unless you start the journey."
One can quit being abused, or even quit drinking, drugs, or being a Liberal.
 
Back
Top