« previous next »
Pages: 1 [2] 3

Author Topic: John Jay Follow-up  (Read 48480 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline DallasLJ

  • *
  • Posts: 568
  • FAN REACTION: +16/-15
Re: John Jay Follow-up
« Reply #25 on: January 11, 2016, 08:33:04 AM »
Quote from: BrendanP on January 11, 2016, 03:55:52 AM
Reading through some of this...I'm so glad I'm going to be a defense attorney and not a prosecutor.
  Better yet -- skip the criminal law side entirely -- and go civil litigation.  Much more fun!
Logged

Offline BrendanP

  • *
  • Posts: 350
  • FAN REACTION: +19/-252
  • Without officials... it is only recess.
Re: John Jay Follow-up
« Reply #26 on: January 14, 2016, 08:24:21 AM »
Wonder if they'll use the affluenza defense. :P
Logged

Offline TXMike

  • *
  • Posts: 8775
  • FAN REACTION: +229/-269
  • When you quit learning you quit living
Re: John Jay Follow-up
« Reply #27 on: January 14, 2016, 08:36:25 AM »
AT that school, the LAST thing they can use is the affluenza defense
Logged

Offline Joe Stack

  • *
  • Posts: 637
  • FAN REACTION: +33/-46
Re: John Jay Follow-up
« Reply #28 on: January 15, 2016, 03:19:21 PM »
Quote
go civil litigation.  Much more fun

Not for everyone. Having hearings cancelled, judges that are effectively bought out, opposing attorneys who have no problem destroying evidence or counseling their clients to lie, etc. Comparatively, dealing with irate coaches is easy.
Logged

Offline BrendanP

  • *
  • Posts: 350
  • FAN REACTION: +19/-252
  • Without officials... it is only recess.
Re: John Jay Follow-up
« Reply #29 on: January 15, 2016, 07:24:38 PM »
Quote from: Joe Stack on January 15, 2016, 03:19:21 PM
Not for everyone. Having hearings cancelled, judges that are effectively bought out, opposing attorneys who have no problem destroying evidence or counseling their clients to lie, etc. Comparatively, dealing with irate coaches is easy.

What about the ACLU?
Logged

Offline hefnerjm

  • *
  • Posts: 331
  • FAN REACTION: +19/-23
  • Everyone needs a student, a mentor, & a friend
Re: John Jay Follow-up
« Reply #30 on: January 27, 2016, 09:38:08 AM »
Quote from: DallasLJ on December 14, 2015, 07:19:00 PM
"Investigation regarding others involved in the assault is ongoing, and charges against player Michael Moreno and an unnamed juvenile are expected to be filed shortly," Arredondo said Monday.

  Coming . . . .


<crickets>
Logged
Coach: "I've been doing this 30 years!  I know the rules!"
Ref: "Are you married coach?"
Coach (suddenly offguard): "umm...yeah, why?"
Ref: "I've been married 30 years and my wife says there is still room for improvement"
Coach: "<silence>"

Offline TxJim

  • *
  • Posts: 495
  • FAN REACTION: +18/-22
Re: John Jay Follow-up
« Reply #31 on: May 30, 2016, 02:38:08 PM »
Quote from: hefnerjm on January 27, 2016, 09:38:08 AM

<crickets>

I have never heard how this was resolved. Anybody know here?
Logged
Sportsmanship is contagious - Let's have an epidemic!

Offline Aussie-Zebra

  • *
  • Posts: 526
  • FAN REACTION: +8/-3
  • Australian Gridiron Officials Association
    • Gridironwest
Re: John Jay Follow-up
« Reply #32 on: July 17, 2016, 03:15:01 PM »
All individuals involved in the incident have been punished for the assault against the sports official.  The coach involved received a conviction after he entered his plea of “guilt” in December 2015.  He was sentenced to one year of jail which was probated for 18 months.  He was ordered to pay restitution, a fine, court costs, and he was required to resign his teaching certificate.  The two players received their punishments in May 2016.  One player involved was a juvenile.  He was adjudicated as a juvenile delinquent based upon his plea of “true.”  The juvenile was ordered to pay restitution, and he was placed on a one year probation.  The other player was an adult.  He entered  a plea of “guilty”  and placed on one year deferred adjudication by the Court.  He was also ordered to pay restitution as well as fines and court costs.  Although the two players were handled by different criminal processes (Adult/Juvenile), their punishments were intended to match as closely as possible.  Decisions regarding whether or the students should ever participate in UIL activities into the future were not made at the court level.  The authority for such decisions belong to the UIL.  The results of the cases were reported to the UIL.

 
Burnet County Attorney
« Last Edit: July 17, 2016, 05:59:13 PM by Aussie-Zebra »
Logged
For every coach that thinks we got it wrong there's another that thinks we got it right.

Offline DallasLJ

  • *
  • Posts: 568
  • FAN REACTION: +16/-15
Re: John Jay Follow-up
« Reply #33 on: July 17, 2016, 07:15:26 PM »
Was that a Press Release?  Found where?
Logged

Offline Aussie-Zebra

  • *
  • Posts: 526
  • FAN REACTION: +8/-3
  • Australian Gridiron Officials Association
    • Gridironwest
Re: John Jay Follow-up
« Reply #34 on: July 18, 2016, 06:28:23 PM »
Email from County Attorney.

I am interested to hear what the UIL has done.
« Last Edit: July 19, 2016, 02:02:47 PM by Aussie-Zebra »
Logged
For every coach that thinks we got it wrong there's another that thinks we got it right.

Offline DallasLJ

  • *
  • Posts: 568
  • FAN REACTION: +16/-15
Re: John Jay Follow-up
« Reply #35 on: July 19, 2016, 09:53:48 PM »
Quote from: Aussie-Zebra on July 18, 2016, 06:28:23 PM
Email from County Attorney.

I am interested to hear what the UIL has done.
  I could look it up again, but memory says there was a hearing in October / November at which the Coach did not participate.  He had resigned from his position.  The UIL suspended his teaching creditenals for 3 years from when he appears before the UIl . . . so he may never be back in coaching in the public schools.  As for the kids, both were sent to an alternative school through the fall semester, and were allowed to return to the main HS in January.  The Senior was barred from all sports the remainder of the school year. The Sophomore was also suspended for the rest of the year,  and I believe he could request permission after that, which may or may not be granted as a matter of right.
Logged

Offline TexDoc

  • *
  • Posts: 1861
  • FAN REACTION: +98/-26
Re: John Jay Follow-up
« Reply #36 on: July 20, 2016, 08:47:32 AM »
Quote from: DallasLJ on July 19, 2016, 09:53:48 PM
  I could look it up again, but memory says there was a hearing in October / November at which the Coach did not participate.  He had resigned from his position.  The UIL suspended his teaching creditenals for 3 years from when he appears before the UIl . . . so he may never be back in coaching in the public schools.  As for the kids, both were sent to an alternative school through the fall semester, and were allowed to return to the main HS in January.  The Senior was barred from all sports the remainder of the school year. The Sophomore was also suspended for the rest of the year,  and I believe he could request permission after that, which may or may not be granted as a matter of right.

Just for clarification, the UIL cannot affect any teaching credentials.  That is strictly up to the TEA.  Those two agencies are not directly connected.
Logged

Offline Welpe

  • *
  • Posts: 1860
  • FAN REACTION: +28/-11
John Jay Follow-up
« Reply #37 on: July 20, 2016, 11:34:17 PM »
All in all, not a bad set of sentences. Glad to hear it was resolved.
Logged

Offline Joe Stack

  • *
  • Posts: 637
  • FAN REACTION: +33/-46
Re: John Jay Follow-up
« Reply #38 on: January 18, 2017, 02:48:27 PM »
Logged

Offline getnbetter

  • *
  • Posts: 49
  • FAN REACTION: +0/-1
Re: John Jay Follow-up
« Reply #39 on: January 19, 2017, 08:29:35 AM »
Well, that's disappointing...
Logged

Offline Etref

  • Administrator
  • ***
  • Posts: 2427
  • FAN REACTION: +88/-29
  • " I don't make the rules coach!"
Re: John Jay Follow-up
« Reply #40 on: January 19, 2017, 01:45:28 PM »
Logged
" I don't make the rules coach!"

Offline saumpire75

  • *
  • Posts: 7
  • FAN REACTION: +1/-0
Re: John Jay Follow-up
« Reply #41 on: January 19, 2017, 09:23:59 PM »
Logged

Offline Aussie-Zebra

  • *
  • Posts: 526
  • FAN REACTION: +8/-3
  • Australian Gridiron Officials Association
    • Gridironwest
Re: John Jay Follow-up
« Reply #42 on: January 19, 2017, 11:50:24 PM »
Quote
"He will remain on probation and one violation would be cause for automatic dismissal from the UIL program"

What would constitute a violation ?
Logged
For every coach that thinks we got it wrong there's another that thinks we got it right.

Offline hefnerjm

  • *
  • Posts: 331
  • FAN REACTION: +19/-23
  • Everyone needs a student, a mentor, & a friend
Re: John Jay Follow-up
« Reply #43 on: January 20, 2017, 09:48:55 AM »
Quote from: Aussie-Zebra on January 19, 2017, 11:50:24 PM
What would constitute a violation ?

from the first article:
"He will remain on probation, meaning any unsportsmanlike conduct would result in Rojas’ automatic dismissal from UIL activities."

Presumably, that would mean any UNS penalty would violate his UIL probation and be cause for dismissal?

http://www.mysanantonio.com/sports/high_school/high_school_football/article/UIL-permits-Jay-player-in-referee-incident-to-10862646.php
Logged
Coach: "I've been doing this 30 years!  I know the rules!"
Ref: "Are you married coach?"
Coach (suddenly offguard): "umm...yeah, why?"
Ref: "I've been married 30 years and my wife says there is still room for improvement"
Coach: "<silence>"

Offline TxSkyBolt

  • *
  • Posts: 2007
  • FAN REACTION: +45/-46
John Jay Follow-up
« Reply #44 on: January 20, 2017, 10:49:31 AM »
Doubtful


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Logged

Offline TexDoc

  • *
  • Posts: 1861
  • FAN REACTION: +98/-26
Re: John Jay Follow-up
« Reply #45 on: January 20, 2017, 11:02:14 AM »
Quote from: hefnerjm on January 20, 2017, 09:48:55 AM
from the first article:
"He will remain on probation, meaning any unsportsmanlike conduct would result in Rojas’ automatic dismissal from UIL activities."

Presumably, that would mean any UNS penalty would violate his UIL probation and be cause for dismissal?

http://www.mysanantonio.com/sports/high_school/high_school_football/article/UIL-permits-Jay-player-in-referee-incident-to-10862646.php

If that were accurate, it would be really easy to get rid of him the first play of the season that he plays.  But, I doubt that's what the UIL means.
Logged

Offline TxBJ

  • *
  • Posts: 429
  • FAN REACTION: +10/-6
John Jay Follow-up
« Reply #46 on: January 20, 2017, 02:54:16 PM »
For those of you in the SA area, do you foresee a lot of officials scratching that school for the upcoming season?
Logged

Offline TexDoc

  • *
  • Posts: 1861
  • FAN REACTION: +98/-26
Re: John Jay Follow-up
« Reply #47 on: January 23, 2017, 07:13:55 AM »
Quote from: TxBJ on January 20, 2017, 02:54:16 PM
For those of you in the SA area, do you foresee a lot of officials scratching that school for the upcoming season?

Highly unlikely.
Logged

Offline TxSkyBolt

  • *
  • Posts: 2007
  • FAN REACTION: +45/-46
John Jay Follow-up
« Reply #48 on: January 23, 2017, 09:09:34 AM »
Likely


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Logged

Offline TexDoc

  • *
  • Posts: 1861
  • FAN REACTION: +98/-26
Re: John Jay Follow-up
« Reply #49 on: January 23, 2017, 10:09:11 AM »
Quote from: TxSkyBolt on January 23, 2017, 09:09:34 AM
Likely


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

You might get a few to scratch the school, but not many.  It's pointless really.  What statement are you making and who, really, does it hurt?  Those other kids on both teams for whatever game don't deserve it.  Time to let it go.
Logged
Pages: 1 [2] 3
« previous next »