Discussion in 'Colorado Football Message Board' started by PacNWBuff, Jan 29, 2008.
some article about the cops letting the players run riot and refusing to prosecute. Several incidents involving Jerramy Stevens we sited.
It is a four-part series.
I wonder how UCLA is feeling about the Slick hire now ?
I expect they are giving that nervous, everything will be alright smile right about now.
That is an interesting (and frankly, frightening) read.
I imagine that this type of treatment of good players was (and possibly still is) far, far too common amongst the "big time" schools.
I just read the one long article about Stevens and I never realized what a screw-up he had become. It always amazes me that people with this much on the line can screw up so badly. Hell, if you want to party that much, call a cab or have a buddy drive you home. It's not like you can't afford the cab fare. :wow:
I find it interesting it is being brought up 8 years later given the fact that their school has all new personnel.
Unfortunately, I'm sure that's the case. :huh:
What's with the timing of these articles being released? These events happened 7-10 years ago, but now the paper decides to go forward with them? Odd timing, considering that Slick was just hired at a rival school.
Oops, BW beat me to the punch
I've been trying to figure that out and have come up with two potential theories. The first being the fact that Rick is back in college football. The second being that the fanbase and boosters were calling for TW's head at the end of the season. The intro to the series did emphasize that since TW took over the team, the arrests, etc. have gone down. So he has brought integrity back to the school although he is not winning.
Who the hell knows. I just hope that the CU non-scandal doesn't pop up in ten years after we think it has been put to rest.
Thanks for the links. I just read them and can understand now why all the UW people I know are going nuts.
I have a story to tell along these lines.
The University of Miami is a private school. They had their own police department, patches, badges, guns, cars the whole nine yards. FDLE (Fla Dept of Law Enforcement) certifies all police departments in the state. They were apparently the only private university in the country with a state sanctioned police department. The officers were on The U's payroll, a private entity. Now, here is where it gets interesting; UMPD officers could not arrest an athlete without permission from the Dean. Of course, this was an unwritten rule. Think back to the Dennis Erickson era....
In the early 90s FDLE started getting nervous about their liability and stopped certifying UMPD. It was nothing specific but it was privately known these kinds of shenanigans were taking place. UM has a big time law school and many alums were elected law makers. It was sticky.
I know this because I used to work for the City of Coral Gables and we used to certify their officers on training issues. Those guys used to bitch about that unwriten rule. Now, those officers all work for Coral Gables, who are contracted to patrol the campus, and the Dean cant say sh*t. UMPD, badges, cars, etc., are all gone.
But your right that it does happen at some big programs.
I'm wondering where the reporter was when this was all going on. This makes what supposedly happened at CU look like a church service.
Did anyone see the part about the safety's wedding? They went to some guys house, paid him $50 got married and went to Denny's. Now that is my idea of a wedding.
Yep. It's no wonder the NFL has so many off-field issues. These guys figure they can get away with just about anything by the time they reach that level.
Reading this makes me feel a little bit better about Rae Carruth.
Sounds to me like there is some culpability in the King County DA's office. Marie's case should have gone to trial. Neu and Hedges seems clueless about what Stevens was really doing. In fairness to at least Neu all the players that were having problems were Lambright recruits. Williams story is just sad. Justice caught up with Pharms. I am not so sure about Stevens.
If that were the Denver Post and CU in the article I think a lot of posters in this thread would be crying foul as I am sure most UW fans are/were. The Stevens Marie story bares some distant similarities to our own recent problems.
Kudos to the Seattle Times for their strong work.
So an NFL player who drives and blows a .20 (extreme DUI, per Arizona's laws), gets a 1 game suspension. That seems quite lenient.
starter at *ebraska = 1/2 game suspension
I remember a shirt that I saw a few people wearing to CU games back in the early 90's that listed like 5 or 6 fusker players on the front with each of their associated crimes, and then on the back was the quote, "Shoot one more person and you're off the team!" :lol:
I want that shirt:thumbsup:
maybe someone should make a ut shirt with this info.
Geeze... I just made it through the Stevens' stuff. That's pretty incredible, and I fail to see how if there was a DNA match between the fluids found on the alleged victim and Stevens' blood how no charges were filed.
I know that there are a couple people on here that are far more involved with lawyering than I and therefore more familiar with the law (so correct me if I'm wrong) but my understanding is that under Colorado State Law, if there is enough evidence to prosecute that charges are pressed in sexual assault cases regardless of the desires of the victim. Also, I'm fairly sure (from a presentation from my freshman year) that consent can be revoked at any time after the fact if the person has a "good" reason (read: was intoxicated).
Does anyone know if this doesn't apply in Washington state?
Secondly, reading this article made me re-evaluate my stance on the "scandal" here, specifically the party. Was there any hard evidence like the DNA evidence in the Stevens' case that anyone knows about? I'm sorry to bring this up because I'm sure everyone (like me) is hoping that this would just die as a subject.
My recollection from the infamous CU party is that rubbers were used, so no DNA. The sticking point here is that the host were the ones passing out the condoms.
Oh yea, I forgot the heading above all the players' names, it said "Nebraska's finest". I don't know how many times I've kicked myself for not buying one from those guys. I seem to recall they were selling 'em on a corner or in a parking lot.
Looks like the prosecutors felt like they could not convince a jury that there was no consent, or that the victim was in a state in which she was unable to consent.
If you are the AD at UCLA do you start looking for another job now or go down with Cap'n Rickie's ship??
It seemed to me as a layman that they had a victim; a witness that placed Stevens with the girl having sex with her; he had her panties; she was a virgin; his DNA was both in her anus and her vagina; she consented to a rape screen; she appeared to be druged. The prosecutions biggest hurdle was did she or did she not give consent sometime during intoxication. I think they had enough to let a jury decide. Whats curious is the DA agreeing to disclose statements and hold questioning at the suspects attorney's office.
Separate names with a comma.