ALA's legislature getting involved w/ NCAA's sanctions (LINK)
- Thread starter law_bee
- Start date
law_bee
Dodd-Like
- Joined
- Nov 25, 2001
- Messages
- 6,402
Re: ALA\'s legislature getting involved w/ NCAA\'s sanctions (LINK)
this could get very interesting. I am sure ALA did some rule breaking, but I will not lose any sleep if the NCAA is brought down a peg or two.
Court oversite would be huge. I believe this would be good. It would force accountablility on the NCAA and some of their stupid regulations.
I am curious to see how 1. the ncaa responds 2. how far ALA will push this
ALA is one of the Old time schools and has much influence
this could get very interesting. I am sure ALA did some rule breaking, but I will not lose any sleep if the NCAA is brought down a peg or two.
Court oversite would be huge. I believe this would be good. It would force accountablility on the NCAA and some of their stupid regulations.
I am curious to see how 1. the ncaa responds 2. how far ALA will push this
ALA is one of the Old time schools and has much influence
bellyseries
Dodd-Like
- Joined
- Dec 28, 2001
- Messages
- 4,229
Re: ALA\'s legislature getting involved w/ NCAA\'s sanctions (LINK)
Thanks for the link, lawbee. This is interesting from several directions. One, is this really an item for a stste legislature? Two. we just had a schizophrenic, off his medicaton, go into a grammar school in Gwinnett County and smack a little girl in the head with a hammer. Georgia has radically reduced care and confinement of the mentally ill, largely because the legislature doesn't want to spend the money. But if somebody's local high school team is not winning enough championships, our legislature changes the classification system. THAT's worthy of attention and public debate.
By the way, a schizophrenic going off meds is highly predictable. If the guy could STAY on the meds, he wouldn't be a severe schizophrenic.
I love college football , I think it's an American treasure. But every now and then, in the good ole southern USA..... And I don't back off being a Southerner, either. I was born in Stonewall Jackson's home in Lexington Virginia, where R.E.Lee is buried.
OK, off soapbox.
Thanks for the link, lawbee. This is interesting from several directions. One, is this really an item for a stste legislature? Two. we just had a schizophrenic, off his medicaton, go into a grammar school in Gwinnett County and smack a little girl in the head with a hammer. Georgia has radically reduced care and confinement of the mentally ill, largely because the legislature doesn't want to spend the money. But if somebody's local high school team is not winning enough championships, our legislature changes the classification system. THAT's worthy of attention and public debate.
By the way, a schizophrenic going off meds is highly predictable. If the guy could STAY on the meds, he wouldn't be a severe schizophrenic.
I love college football , I think it's an American treasure. But every now and then, in the good ole southern USA..... And I don't back off being a Southerner, either. I was born in Stonewall Jackson's home in Lexington Virginia, where R.E.Lee is buried.
OK, off soapbox.
law_bee
Dodd-Like
- Joined
- Nov 25, 2001
- Messages
- 6,402
Re: ALA\'s legislature getting involved w/ NCAA\'s sanctions (LINK)
My issue is accountability. The NCAA answers to no one.
With regard to your legislature I can tell you this. I have to deal with politics in my job and they are a bunch of hacks. I would just assume they go after the NCAA as anything else. Every time I talk to one I feel like I need to go home and take a bath.
With regard to the guy being off his meds, this is right of my alley. I just had one of my clients evaluated by a psych. He wrote 5 pages, but only one word mattered Malingerer. This is derived from a French word and it means
malingerer
\Ma*lin"ger*er\, n. [F. malingre sickly, weakly, prob. from mal ill + OF. heingre, haingre, thin, lean, infirm, fr. L. aeger.] In the army, a soldier who feigns himself sick, or who induces or protracts an illness, in order to avoid doing his duty; hence, in general, one who shirks his duty by pretending illness or inability.
in the criminal defense world it means your client is lying.
I deal with people everyday that do very bad things. My understanding was this guy was trying to rape this little girl. In my opinion no meds in the world would have continually kept him straight.
In my briefcase now I have discovery materials about my client who, while out on bond for allegedly raping/child molesting his 14 y/o step-daughter, allegedly raped his estranged wife.
My issue is accountability. The NCAA answers to no one.
With regard to your legislature I can tell you this. I have to deal with politics in my job and they are a bunch of hacks. I would just assume they go after the NCAA as anything else. Every time I talk to one I feel like I need to go home and take a bath.
With regard to the guy being off his meds, this is right of my alley. I just had one of my clients evaluated by a psych. He wrote 5 pages, but only one word mattered Malingerer. This is derived from a French word and it means
malingerer
\Ma*lin"ger*er\, n. [F. malingre sickly, weakly, prob. from mal ill + OF. heingre, haingre, thin, lean, infirm, fr. L. aeger.] In the army, a soldier who feigns himself sick, or who induces or protracts an illness, in order to avoid doing his duty; hence, in general, one who shirks his duty by pretending illness or inability.
in the criminal defense world it means your client is lying.
I deal with people everyday that do very bad things. My understanding was this guy was trying to rape this little girl. In my opinion no meds in the world would have continually kept him straight.
In my briefcase now I have discovery materials about my client who, while out on bond for allegedly raping/child molesting his 14 y/o step-daughter, allegedly raped his estranged wife.
bellyseries
Dodd-Like
- Joined
- Dec 28, 2001
- Messages
- 4,229
Re: ALA\'s legislature getting involved w/ NCAA\'s sanctions (LINK)
lawbee, I have no argument with your anecdote. The fact remains that a schizophrenic, by definition, is so badly organized mentally that taking meds is a problem for him. It isn't like, I've got a headache, so I'll take some aspirin, or I have diabetes, so I'll get my insulin shot. People with mental illness are not rational, by definition and in fact. It is also a fact that the incidence of sex crimes and violent crimes is no higher among mentally ill people than in the public at large. And finally your work causes you to deal with criminals. Aren't all of them, one way or another, malingerers?
lawbee, I have no argument with your anecdote. The fact remains that a schizophrenic, by definition, is so badly organized mentally that taking meds is a problem for him. It isn't like, I've got a headache, so I'll take some aspirin, or I have diabetes, so I'll get my insulin shot. People with mental illness are not rational, by definition and in fact. It is also a fact that the incidence of sex crimes and violent crimes is no higher among mentally ill people than in the public at large. And finally your work causes you to deal with criminals. Aren't all of them, one way or another, malingerers?
law_bee
Dodd-Like
- Joined
- Nov 25, 2001
- Messages
- 6,402
Re: ALA\'s legislature getting involved w/ NCAA\'s sanctions (LINK)
I believe people who demonstrate violent criminal behavior should be incarcerated no matter whether they have a mental disorder or not. I see the lawyers argue that the lady who drowned her 4 kids was insane and should not be in jail. I think when you cause 4 deaths you should go to prison. She called the police. This lady is a danger to society and for the purpose of protection violent criminals should be incarcerated.
I dont have a problem with this lady getting meds in prison. We can medially treat violent criminals but keep them locked up.
<font size="2" face="Arial, Verdana, Sans-Serif">well this guy thought it was in his best interest to act "not competent" so the judge ordered the evaluation. In this case the malingerer means that the doc felt Defendant was FAKING.
I believe people who demonstrate violent criminal behavior should be incarcerated no matter whether they have a mental disorder or not. I see the lawyers argue that the lady who drowned her 4 kids was insane and should not be in jail. I think when you cause 4 deaths you should go to prison. She called the police. This lady is a danger to society and for the purpose of protection violent criminals should be incarcerated.
I dont have a problem with this lady getting meds in prison. We can medially treat violent criminals but keep them locked up.
bellyseries
Dodd-Like
- Joined
- Dec 28, 2001
- Messages
- 4,229
Re: ALA\'s legislature getting involved w/ NCAA\'s sanctions (LINK)
This is a difficult topic, lawbee, and in all humility, I must say you have a steep learning curve in front of you if you pursue it. Law is a foundation of our civilizaion. That does not mean that it is the model for all human institutions, the pattern for relationships, or the lone philosophy by which we approach contrary human behavior.
<font size="2" face="Arial, Verdana, Sans-Serif">This is what I said in my initial response to the Ala legislature post. My point is that if the perpetrator had been confined properly in the first place, we would not have had the tragedy in Gwinnett. And I am saying that he wasn't properly confined because the Georgia legislature will not spend tyhe apprpriate money.
This is a difficult topic, lawbee, and in all humility, I must say you have a steep learning curve in front of you if you pursue it. Law is a foundation of our civilizaion. That does not mean that it is the model for all human institutions, the pattern for relationships, or the lone philosophy by which we approach contrary human behavior.
law_bee
Dodd-Like
- Joined
- Nov 25, 2001
- Messages
- 6,402
Re: ALA\'s legislature getting involved w/ NCAA\'s sanctions (LINK)
If a man breaks into your house at 2:00am and comes at you with a knife you can
a. ask him to leave
b. attempt to call the police
c. grab the nearest weapon (hopefully a handgun/shotgun) and disable the intruder
you may thank this is some over simplification, but the rate of recidivism is UNBELIEVABLE
I cannot remember the last time I had a client charge with a violent crime that did not have at least 2 arrests for violent offenses on his record.
Many lawyers believe that most career criminals have a mental disorder.
This is probably true. The point is there are MANY who deal with the same mental issues that do not demonstrate violence on the public.
When it comes to security I take a utilitarian perspective. The good of the many must out weigh the good of the few or the one.
I am a criminal defense lawyer and I would fight to the death to protect the right of the accused to have an advocate to protect himself from the state. However I do not believe that mental illness should be a defense UNLESS you did not know that what you are doing was wrong. And in violent cases I would still probably want some type of lock down facility.
I am not going to give a free pass to someone who harms an innocent person just b/c they have mental issues.
The lady that killed her 5 kids had been thinking about it for 2 years. She knew it was wrong that is why she called the police. If we were to give her a free pass could you guarantee me that she would never harm another human being? If not I am for accountability.
I have an attorney in my office that almost went to med school and studies human behavior at length. These are issues that have been discussed ad nauseam. With my job I encounter the true deviants of society. One of my coworkers just picked up a case where an 8 y/o boy was anally sodomized when he attempted to go to the restroom. A 35 y/o neighbor snuck up on him.
Does this Defendant have psych issues? I am sure he does. Was he raped growing up. I am sure he was.
But now I ask? Should he be given a lesser sentence b/c of these issues?
I am glad I am not a judge. I have the luxury of fighting for my client then going home. I have seen my clients get 20 years of confinement and I have seen my clients walk away free men.
I will say again that when people do bad things that they know are bad they should be punished.
You may think I am oversimplifying it but based on my experience this is the way you have to do it until some better way is introduced.
If a man breaks into your house at 2:00am and comes at you with a knife you can
a. ask him to leave
b. attempt to call the police
c. grab the nearest weapon (hopefully a handgun/shotgun) and disable the intruder
you may thank this is some over simplification, but the rate of recidivism is UNBELIEVABLE
I cannot remember the last time I had a client charge with a violent crime that did not have at least 2 arrests for violent offenses on his record.
Many lawyers believe that most career criminals have a mental disorder.
This is probably true. The point is there are MANY who deal with the same mental issues that do not demonstrate violence on the public.
When it comes to security I take a utilitarian perspective. The good of the many must out weigh the good of the few or the one.
I am a criminal defense lawyer and I would fight to the death to protect the right of the accused to have an advocate to protect himself from the state. However I do not believe that mental illness should be a defense UNLESS you did not know that what you are doing was wrong. And in violent cases I would still probably want some type of lock down facility.
I am not going to give a free pass to someone who harms an innocent person just b/c they have mental issues.
The lady that killed her 5 kids had been thinking about it for 2 years. She knew it was wrong that is why she called the police. If we were to give her a free pass could you guarantee me that she would never harm another human being? If not I am for accountability.
I have an attorney in my office that almost went to med school and studies human behavior at length. These are issues that have been discussed ad nauseam. With my job I encounter the true deviants of society. One of my coworkers just picked up a case where an 8 y/o boy was anally sodomized when he attempted to go to the restroom. A 35 y/o neighbor snuck up on him.
Does this Defendant have psych issues? I am sure he does. Was he raped growing up. I am sure he was.
But now I ask? Should he be given a lesser sentence b/c of these issues?
I am glad I am not a judge. I have the luxury of fighting for my client then going home. I have seen my clients get 20 years of confinement and I have seen my clients walk away free men.
I will say again that when people do bad things that they know are bad they should be punished.
You may think I am oversimplifying it but based on my experience this is the way you have to do it until some better way is introduced.
law_bee
Dodd-Like
- Joined
- Nov 25, 2001
- Messages
- 6,402
Re: ALA\'s legislature getting involved w/ NCAA\'s sanctions (LINK)
As a citizen you want to MAKE SURE the right person is prosecuted for the crime. Then there should be some scenario where the punishment fits the crime.
Someone chases a little boy through the house then grabs him overpowers him and takes his body and puts it into a tub. Then they take his little head and they shove it underwater repeatedly. They tune out the yells and the screams for help.
You find out later that the person suffers from a mental disorder.
How do you want to punish that person?
I have to advise people that it is in their best interest to go to prison for 5, 10, or even 20 years, because if they were to go to trial they would get double or triple that sentence. I am in the trenches. I am not in a laboratory asking myself if this drug could do this or that drug could do that.
I have another client that is 20 years old 5'4", 135 lbs. He took a baseball bat and busted out a window of a car. There was a guy and a girl in the car. There was also cocaine in the car. Probably a drug deal gone bad. Normally this would be a boot camp case. But on this particular night the a sliver of glass flew in the guy's eye. He lost vision in that eye. The initial offer was boot camp, but when the prosecutor found out about the injury the offer went to 15 years probation to serve 5 years in prison. By law he must serve at least 90% of that sentence.
My client is uncooperative and does not want to go to prison (currently he is in county jail). My client believes that bad things will happen to him in prison. My client is correct with this assumption, to be blunt he will be raped many times. I may end up going to trial on this case. If I go to trial and lose then my client will at least get 10 years in prison and may actually get 20 years to serve.
I apologize for venting but these are the issues I deal with and it helps me to talk them out. I do not discuss these things with my wife.
<font size="2" face="Arial, Verdana, Sans-Serif">Law is a foundation of our civilization. That does not mean that it is the model for all human institutions, the pattern for relationships, or the lone philosophy by which we approach contrary human behavior.</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Arial, Verdana, Sans-Serif">Law is the foundation of our society. If you remove them then you lose ALL. The most basic principle of government is to protect.
As a citizen you want to MAKE SURE the right person is prosecuted for the crime. Then there should be some scenario where the punishment fits the crime.
Someone chases a little boy through the house then grabs him overpowers him and takes his body and puts it into a tub. Then they take his little head and they shove it underwater repeatedly. They tune out the yells and the screams for help.
You find out later that the person suffers from a mental disorder.
How do you want to punish that person?
I have to advise people that it is in their best interest to go to prison for 5, 10, or even 20 years, because if they were to go to trial they would get double or triple that sentence. I am in the trenches. I am not in a laboratory asking myself if this drug could do this or that drug could do that.
I have another client that is 20 years old 5'4", 135 lbs. He took a baseball bat and busted out a window of a car. There was a guy and a girl in the car. There was also cocaine in the car. Probably a drug deal gone bad. Normally this would be a boot camp case. But on this particular night the a sliver of glass flew in the guy's eye. He lost vision in that eye. The initial offer was boot camp, but when the prosecutor found out about the injury the offer went to 15 years probation to serve 5 years in prison. By law he must serve at least 90% of that sentence.
My client is uncooperative and does not want to go to prison (currently he is in county jail). My client believes that bad things will happen to him in prison. My client is correct with this assumption, to be blunt he will be raped many times. I may end up going to trial on this case. If I go to trial and lose then my client will at least get 10 years in prison and may actually get 20 years to serve.
I apologize for venting but these are the issues I deal with and it helps me to talk them out. I do not discuss these things with my wife.