What!! Bama players paid!!!

#2
#2
$200 for 40+ autographs. The horror. The outrage. Only at Alabama! That’s it, I’m kneeling from now on
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#8
#8
volfannbama said:
I disgrace to the legal system. I hope whatever payment he received was worth it.

We are all at home in the air conditioning. Lol
Click to expand...

I love how he even went as far to say that it shouldn't even be a strike against them at Alabama. Not only is he not punishing them from a legal perspective, but their football coach shouldn't give them any kind of internal punishment either :)

And he also explicitly states that the reason he isn't punishing them is because they are football players.

And of course, I love the word "footbaw."
 
#9
#9
05_never_again said:
I love how he even went as far to say that it shouldn't even be a strike against them at Alabama. Not only is he not punishing them from a legal perspective, but their football coach shouldn't give them any kind of internal punishment either :)

And he also explicitly states that the reason he isn't punishing them is because they are football players.

And of course, I love the word "footbaw."
Click to expand...

I dont see how he wasnt dismissed from the state BAR?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#12
#12
volfannbama said:
I dont see how he wasnt dismissed from the state BAR?
Click to expand...

I don't see how you disbar him for that, but the size of the benefit of the doubt he gave those kids is enormous. They were lucky because nobody had clear possession of that stolen gun, and the DA didn't seem particularly interested in figuring out whose it was. There was more to pursue there, and then he explicitly states the reason he isn't doing it is because they are football players who have spent their teenage years working hard.

If I get pulled over tonight with half an ounce (admittedly a tiny amount, but it's still an illegal substance) of weed in my car and a gun in my lap which comes back as stolen, I guarantee you I don't get the "but he sits all day in front of a computer" treatment. LOL
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#13
#13
05_never_again said:
I don't see how you disbar him for that, but the size of the benefit of the doubt he gave those kids is enormous. They were lucky because nobody had clear possession of that stolen gun, and the DA didn't seem particularly interested in figuring out whose it was. There was more to pursue there, and then he explicitly states the reason he isn't doing it is because they are football players who have spent their teenage years working hard.

If I get pulled over tonight with half an ounce (admittedly a tiny amount, but it's still an illegal substance) of weed in my car and a gun in my lap which comes back as stolen, I guarantee you I don't get the "but he sits all day in front of a computer" treatment. LOL
Click to expand...

If i were the AG of that state, i would do an investigstion on it. No way he provides that sorry excuse without a payoff.

In my opinion, to not go to GJ, you need some legal means as to why you are not pressing charges.

So to me the reason to remove him from the AD or bar, would be based on the legal precedence he just set for future cases to be dismissed.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#14
#14
volfannbama said:
If i were the AG of that state, i would do an investigstion on it. No way he provides that sorry excuse without a payoff.

In my opinion, to not go to GJ, you need some legal means as to why you are not pressing charges.

So to me the reason to remove him from the AD or bar, would be based on the legal precedence he just set for future cases to be dismissed.
Click to expand...

From a legal perspective, he said he couldn't prove that they obtained the gun knowing it was illegal. I buy that, but he didn't seem particularly eager in walking down that path in the first place. By his own admission, the "main reason" he dismissed it is because they are football players. Perhaps the charges would have been dismissed anyway, but those guys got benefits of the doubt a regular person would not.
 
#15
#15
05_never_again said:
From a legal perspective, he said he couldn't prove that they obtained the gun knowing it was illegal. I buy that, but he didn't seem particularly eager in walking down that path in the first place. By his own admission, the "main reason" he dismissed it is because they are football players. Perhaps the charges would have been dismissed anyway, but those guys got benefits of the doubt a regular person would not.
Click to expand...
It does matter if he cant prove they obtained the gun knowing it was illegal. You only need to prove that they possessed the illegal firearm.
Even if you want to go to a lesser charge, you go with CCW violation.

Unless of course, you are paid off, then you do what this guy did.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#16
#16
volfannbama said:
If i were the AG of that state, i would do an investigstion on it. No way he provides that sorry excuse without a payoff.
Click to expand...

So, he couldn't possibly have just been an idiot?

In my opinion, to not go to GJ, you need some legal means as to why you are not pressing charges.
Click to expand...

His legal reasoning was insufficient evidence. His statement about air-conditioning was moronic, but it wasn't his actual legally binding decision.

As for a grand jury, how often is a DA going to bother with a grand jury for misdemeanors and/or a felony that might be bumped to a misdemeanor before it ever sees the inside of a courtroom?

So to me the reason to remove him from the AD or bar, would be based on the legal precedence he just set for future cases to be dismissed.
Click to expand...

You honestly expect the local bar to disbar an elected official for declining prosecution of 4 non-violent offenses, 3 of which were misdemeanors while the 4th may well have ended up a misdemeanor? You expect him to be disbarred despite the fact that he elected to make those decisions?
 
#17
#17
volfannbama said:
It does matter if he cant prove they obtained the gun knowing it was illegal. You only need to prove that they possessed the illegal firearm.
Click to expand...

No. In Louisiana (where the arrest took place) and Alabama (where the gun was obtained), it is an affirmative defense if the accused didn't know that the gun was stolen, and he believed he was obtaining it legally. The DA would have had to prove that Robinson knew that the gun was stolen when he acquired it (or that Robinson, himself, stole it).
 
#18
#18
volfannbama said:
It does matter if he cant prove they obtained the gun knowing it was illegal. You only need to prove that they possessed the illegal firearm.
Even if you want to go to a lesser charge, you go with CCW violation.

Unless of course, you are paid off, then you do what this guy did.
Click to expand...

What bamawriter said. He'd have to prove that Robinson or Jones knew or should have known the gun was stolen when they obtained it. I see how that is difficult to prove. He didn't seem interested at all in trying to figure it out, but he had enough legal basis to drop the charge. If he wanted to walk down that path, he certainly could have, and most likely would have if we are talking about a regular Joe.

He made up his mind that he didn't want to nail them then looked for legal justification to back up the decision. The most amazing thing about the whole deal is that he basically admitted as such.
 
#19
#19
bamawriter said:
So, he couldn't possibly have just been an idiot?



His legal reasoning was insufficient evidence. His statement about air-conditioning was moronic, but it wasn't his actual legally binding decision.

As for a grand jury, how often is a DA going to bother with a grand jury for misdemeanors and/or a felony that might be bumped to a misdemeanor before it ever sees the inside of a courtroom?



You honestly expect the local bar to disbar an elected official for declining prosecution of 4 non-violent offenses, 3 of which were misdemeanors while the 4th may well have ended up a misdemeanor? You expect him to be disbarred despite the fact that he elected to make those decisions?
Click to expand...

An idiot shouldnt be a DA.

The grand jury is not "bothered." A grand jury is convened monthly to ensure probable cause exist in cases to proceed with a crimianl proceeding. This would have been just another case on the GJ docket. The charge for the firearm was a felony.

I was expect an investigation on him for the excuse given. He has now set a precedence that he is willing to overlook criminal activity, without trial or charge, with favoritism for someone who plays football. Something that should not ve allowed in our legal system.
 
#20
#20
05_never_again said:
What bamawriter said. He'd have to prove that Robinson or Jones knew or should have known the gun was stolen when they obtained it. I see how that is difficult to prove. He didn't seem interested at all in trying to figure it out, but he had enough legal basis to drop the charge. If he wanted to walk down that path, he certainly could have, and most likely would have if we are talking about a regular Joe.

He made up his mind that he didn't want to nail them then looked for legal justification to back up the decision. The most amazing thing about the whole deal is that he basically admitted as such.
Click to expand...
He could still charge him with possession and not have prove anything about the knkwledge of it being stolen.

The DA was disgraceful.

But in turn, what Alabama and the NCAA allows in order to have a good football team is disgraceful as well.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#22
#22
bamawriter said:
That'll have to wait until the massive jaywalking sting is wrapped up.
Click to expand...



That was going on at about the same time this came out (see below). Throw in several other infractions including an assistant coach who is now serving a show cause due to recruiting violations while coaching at Alabama. I think it shows why Alabama is winning. Until the NCAA puts a stop to this, it is going to continue. What is sad about the Gumps is they have always felt like they have a right to cheat.

The NCAA Committee on Infractions called the University of Alabama a "serial repeat violator" with an "abysmal infractions track record" and an "extensive recent history of infractions cases unmatched by any other member institution in the NCAA," in responding to the school's textbook appeal, according to documents released today.
Promoted Links*

More on UA's textbook appeal: NCAA Committee on Infractions tagged UA as a 'serial repeat violator' with an 'abysmal' record | AL.com
 
#23
#23
Seriously, had this been uncovered while they were in school they would have been instructed to pay the money to charity and none would have missed any playing time. Johnny Manziel got 5 figures for signing swag and he sat out one half.

8 years later and it's even less relevant.
 
#25
#25
These kids should be allowed to sign autographs for money. Hell it's their signature. The NCAA is a joke
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top