'09 TN DL Daniel Hood (merged)

#452
#452
Tenacious D said:
Here's an excerpt from the Court's decision in his appealed decision, which I think best and most succinctly states Hood's role in the matter:


"Next, [the defendant] failed to protect his cousin when he could have easily done so, being in his own home, having his father just across the house from them. [The defendant] has shown virtually no remorse for the offenses in which his first cousin was the victim. These offenses being extremely cruel and vile."
(Emphasis mine)

Bear in mind, this is likely the least repulsive description of the events as can be found within the entirety of the previously posted document.

If you believe that it was merely a case of a mixed-up 13-year old boy who simply didn't know how to stop the act from occuring (or such similiar nonsense), how do you explain that he had, "shown virtually no remorse for the offenses..." during his jury trial (de novo) held in December 2004 - some 16 months after the incident, when Hood would have been 15 years old at the time?

If he didn't know that it was wrong and show remorse at the age of 15, when did he? When will the rest of you who are defending him come to a similiar realization?​
Click to expand...


The judge probably saw the kid for 15 minutes. How then can he make an accurate assessment of whether the kid feels remorse.

The judge put that line in there to help strengthen his conclusion that the sentence was reasonable. Judges don't like to get overturned on appeal and so there is always an element of persuasion in those opinions.

​
 
#453
#453
kidbourbon said:
I agree that what he did was wrong. I'm not saying it wasn't wrong b/c he was 13. But I don't think his level of culpability is such that it should stick with him for the rest of his life. From the record, I think it is reasonable to infer that:
1. The other kid was clearly quarterbacking the operation
2. He just went along with it.

And, at 13, he may have known it was wrong, but didn't appreciate the magnitude of how wrong it really was.

I certainly didn't do anything terribly reprehensible when I was 13, but I definitely remember smoking a lot of cigarettes behind the rec center just because the older kids were doing it.
Click to expand...
that's the really unfortunate thing about this, besides the scars that little girl will have to live with as a result of this.

but it's kind of like a cop told me once..."..when you cross state lines, just be cause you may not know of a particular traffic law, doesn't make you any less accountable to it. Now here's your ticket, have a nice day!"

He may not have known the magnitude then, but nonetheless, it's something he's going to have to live with the rest of his life.
 
#454
#454
First&Tenn said:
Putting aside for a second the absolutely horrible thing this kid did.

Do you understand what kind of PR nightmare putting him on the team would be?

ESPN and every coach recruiting against TN would use this kid as their poster-boy to turn people against the Vols.

I primarily don't want him because of what he did, but I also don't want him because of what his reputation and prior actions could do to the team. Plus, how are you going to tell the current players that we are looking for high quality people and then let this guy in?
Click to expand...


Valid points. I agree.
 
#455
#455
Ok, I am a pastor, so I would like to give an opinion...while God has graciously provided forgiveness for those who seek it, sins carry consequences for the rest of our lives. God can forgive a murderer, but does that bring the victim back to life? God can forgive this young man, but does that return this victim's innocense? I'm not saying he should or should not play, but I am saying that there is a reason that only God can truly forgive and forget.
 
#456
#456
hokuspocus said:
Ok, I am a pastor, so I would like to give an opinion...while God has graciously provided forgiveness for those who seek it, sins carry consequences for the rest of our lives. God can forgive a murderer, but does that bring the victim back to life? God can forgive this young man, but does that return this victim's innocense? I'm not saying he should or should not play, but I am saying that there is a reason that only God can truly forgive and forget.
Click to expand...
the forgetting.....yep, that's the tough one here.
 
#457
#457
hokuspocus said:
Ok, I am a pastor, so I would like to give an opinion...while God has graciously provided forgiveness for those who seek it, sins carry consequences for the rest of our lives. God can forgive a murderer, but does that bring the victim back to life? God can forgive this young man, but does that return this victim's innocense? I'm not saying he should or should not play, but I am saying that there is a reason that only God can truly forgive and forget.
Click to expand...

I agree, and would you agree that his forgiveness has nothing to do with whether or not he plays football for Tennessee?
 
#459
#459
Sorry, but I don't judge people for what they may or may not have done while a child. I'm 27 but when I was 13 I came from a broken home and had a troublesome childhood. I never committed the atrocities that this young man did, but I can certainly understand how a situation can quickly get out of hand and you somehow feel powerless which leads you to the easy way out of following along and hoping no one finds out. It's unfair that he will be stigmatized for quite some time if not the rest of his life, because of a series of events that happened so quickly that he didn't realize the full severity of his actions, or more appropriately, his non-actions. I see it more of a situation of him not being able to stand up to someone he obviously looked up to and I just can't blame him for that, especially these many years down the road. How can a man rectify his actions if he's never given a chance to do so. That's all I can say. You can pass judgement on me all you want. I'm a man and can take it, but just leave the kid alone...it's not for you to decide so your actions/words are futile.
 
Last edited:
#460
#460
jakez4ut said:
so angry.

your logic processes have failed you. you can't call up a comparison of us (those that obviously disagree with you) to the jews (the persecuters of Jesus Christ), and not see the absolutely ridiculous correlation of equating Hood (who you claim is persecuted here) to Christ (who was persecuted by the jews, er, us as you see it).
QUOTE]


Jesus was killed by the Romans, not the Jews, you mor*n........please keep your incorrect regiligious views to yourself, or at least take a history class........:eek:lol:
Click to expand...
 
#461
#461
head1 said:
Never had any legal problems not even a speeding ticket, and I have enforced the law for over 10 years. I have seen enough faces of victims of things like this that I will not just forgive someone that easily. You can sit behind your desks and talk about forgiveness but when you have seen this over and over first hand and what it does to people it wouldnt be so easy.

You can keep preaching forgiveness in here all you want, I am a Christian, probably spend more time in church than most of you going off on the Jesus tangent. God can forgive him but right now I dont feel like this kid needs to be a part of this University, period.

My letter is already in to Mike Hamilton and I am sure there will be plenty more. I am done with this its a losing battle some of you are just too high and mighty in your perfect worlds to see the problem this is.
Click to expand...

Seems like to me is you are saying' to heck with what Jesus says" it's what you think that counts! You are a hypocrite.
 
#462
#462
kidbourbon said:
The judge probably saw the kid for 15 minutes. How then can he make an accurate assessment of whether the kid feels remorse.

The judge put that line in there to help strengthen his conclusion that the sentence was reasonable. Judges don't like to get overturned on appeal and so there is always an element of persuasion in those opinions.

[/left]
Click to expand...

The judge isn't there to spend "quality time" with anyone. He is there to take the facts as presented to him and come to a conclusion. It sounds like he did just that.
 
#463
#463
tabrams said:
jakez4ut said:
so angry.

your logic processes have failed you. you can't call up a comparison of us (those that obviously disagree with you) to the jews (the persecuters of Jesus Christ), and not see the absolutely ridiculous correlation of equating Hood (who you claim is persecuted here) to Christ (who was persecuted by the jews, er, us as you see it).
QUOTE]


Jesus was killed by the Romans, not the Jews, you mor*n........please keep your incorrect regiligious views to yourself, or at least take a history class........:eek:lol:

Man killed Jesus because all the sin WE committed. We are ALL sinners! If we were't he would have died for NOTHING!
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
#464
#464
jakez4ut said:
that's the really unfortunate thing about this, besides the scars that little girl will have to live with as a result of this.

but it's kind of like a cop told me once..."..when you cross state lines, just be cause you may not know of a particular traffic law, doesn't make you any less accountable to it. Now here's your ticket, have a nice day!"

He may not have known the magnitude then, but nonetheless, it's something he's going to have to live with the rest of his life.
Click to expand...

Yeah, he has to live with it...he'll carry the situation on his shoulders for the rest of his life. But I don't think he should be denied any and all of life's opportunities b/c of his involvement in a very unfortunate situation at the age of 13.

Maybe he is just a perv. But if he's not, and the staff is able to make an assessment that the kid isn't sick and twisted and that's he's actually a decent 18 year old kid with a really unfortunate blackmark on his record, then I would be able to accept that as a reasonable conclusion.
 
#467
#467
wow, talk about an off topic thread. Can we turn the focus off of the right/wrong/religious/moral issues and try to confirm that an offer has been extended to him by the staff. Come on back to the fold everyone!
 
#468
#468
senracjr said:
tabrams said:
jakez4ut said:
so angry.

your logic processes have failed you. you can't call up a comparison of us (those that obviously disagree with you) to the jews (the persecuters of Jesus Christ), and not see the absolutely ridiculous correlation of equating Hood (who you claim is persecuted here) to Christ (who was persecuted by the jews, er, us as you see it).
QUOTE]


Jesus was killed by the Romans, not the Jews, you mor*n........please keep your incorrect regiligious views to yourself, or at least take a history class........:eek:lol:

Man killed Jesus because all the sin WE committed. We are ALL sinners! If we were't he would have died for NOTHING!
Click to expand...

That's fine to say MAN, but when you incorrectly talk about a group as doing something that they didn't do, then there is no place for that on this board. In fact, all this religion has nothing to do with football, or UT sports in general. I bet this thread gets the ax!!
:eek:lol:
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
#469
#469
kidbourbon said:
Yeah, he has to live with it...he'll carry the situation on his shoulders for the rest of his life. But I don't think he should be denied any and all of life's opportunities b/c of his involvement in a very unfortunate situation at the age of 13.

Maybe he is just a perv. But if he's not, and the staff is able to make an assessment that the kid isn't sick and twisted and that's he's actually a decent 18 year old kid with a really unfortunate blackmark on his record, then I would be able to accept that as a reasonable conclusion.
Click to expand...

What about the assessment the other players make of him?

And, what about the assessment they make of our coaching staff for putting him on their team?

It's just a bad idea, morality arguments aside...
 
#470
#470
General Jack said:
I agree, and would you agree that his forgiveness has nothing to do with whether or not he plays football for Tennessee?
Click to expand...


His status with God has nothing to do with wearing the orange. However, the consequences of his action may affect his opportunity to wear it. If he's learned from his mistake and payed his penalty, then who can really deny him that opportunity. On the other hand, who knows if he really did either? I have a two year old daughter...if someone did something like that to her, they'd never have to worry about wearing anything again.
My sister was molested by one of our cousins. He's grown up to live a good life, become a husband and father, and served in the United States Navy. Today I believe he is a good person, but there was a day when I would have shot him on sight.
So I can see both sides. If the coaches believe that his character has changed, then I'll be cheering for him on Saturday. If not, then I hope they're decision reflects that. Either way, I will pray for this young man and hope he makes right decisions.
 
#472
#472
senracjr said:
angry.

your logic processes have failed you. you can't call up a comparison of us (those that obviously disagree with you) to the jews (the persecuters of Jesus Christ), and not see the absolutely ridiculous correlation of equating Hood (who you claim is persecuted here) to Christ (who was persecuted by the jews, er, us as you see it).
QUOTE]


Jesus was killed by the Romans, not the Jews, you mor*n........please keep your incorrect regiligious views to yourself, or at least take a history class........:eek:lol:

Man killed Jesus because all the sin WE committed. We are ALL sinners! If we were't he would have died for NOTHING!
Click to expand...
well that's certainly very Christian of you.
 
#473
#473
kidbourbon said:
The judge probably saw the kid for 15 minutes. How then can he make an accurate assessment of whether the kid feels remorse.

The judge put that line in there to help strengthen his conclusion that the sentence was reasonable. Judges don't like to get overturned on appeal and so there is always an element of persuasion in those opinions.

[/left]
Click to expand...

Good point about the judge't limited time with him, however, that's not the judges only knowledge of the defendant. Likely, he had read hundreds of pages of briefings, assessments and opinions of noted child / social workers, psychologists, case managers, etc. - and subsequently heard testimony from each as well - both those called on behalf of the prosecution and defense, alike.

While his time was limited, to be sure, it's not accurate to believe that this was the sole point of reference which was used in the formulation of his opinion.

Your comment about presuasive comments is also spot on, however, if a judge were truly afraid of being overturned on appeal, he would be most concerned with the use of prejudicial language that could most effectively substantiate a appellate claim on the grounds of judicial bias.

Simply, had the defendant's remorse been exampled in any way, supported by any evidence, or witnessed by any person, the judge would have avoided his chosen language at all costs. Obviously, he was confident in making such a strikingly unavoidable comment.

Please also notice that the case was, in fact, appealed......with the defense making no mention of the presiding judge exhibiting bias of any sort. Surely this would have been listed amongst their 20 some odd challenges, had they the faintest notion that such an accusation could be corraborated.

Your point was well taken, but the likliest reason for the judge to remark at his lack of remorse was due to the fact that the defendant had failed to exhibit it, and not for fear of being overturned by an appelate court.
 
#474
#474
volmanbill said:
The judge isn't there to spend "quality time" with anyone. He is there to take the facts as presented to him and come to a conclusion. It sounds like he did just that.
Click to expand...

Please point to the page in the opinion that shows where the judge was presented with facts related to this kid's level of remorse. Look real hard. Keep looking.

Oh, you can't find it either? Weird. I guess that was just the judge's opinion, then. That is crazy, because you said that judges come to conclusions based on facts presented to them, and you're obviously really smart and know a lot about criminal law.
 
#475
#475
hokuspocus said:
His status with God has nothing to do with wearing the orange. However, the consequences of his action may affect his opportunity to wear it. If he's learned from his mistake and payed his penalty, then who can really deny him that opportunity. On the other hand, who knows if he really did either? I have a two year old daughter...if someone did something like that to her, they'd never have to worry about wearing anything again.
My sister was molested by one of our cousins. He's grown up to live a good life, become a husband and father, and served in the United States Navy. Today I believe he is a good person, but there was a day when I would have shot him on sight.
So I can see both sides. If the coaches believe that his character has changed, then I'll be cheering for him on Saturday. If not, then I hope they're decision reflects that. Either way, I will pray for this young man and hope he makes right decisions.
Click to expand...

And the thread should end with that post.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top