AG back?

[Gonzo]

While I don't know the details of AGs problems In general I say we have no place for anyone who touches a woman provoked or not. And Gonzo if you had a daughter you would understand. This is exactly the question I wanted to ask Satt. What are we doing to address these issues with the players?

And Gonzo if you had a daughter you would understand.

I don't suspend the idea of justice and the standard of proof based on my personal relationships.

[appbio91]

While I don't know the details of AGs problems In general I say we have no place for anyone who touches a woman provoked or not. And Gonzo if you had a daughter you would understand. This is exactly the question I wanted to ask Satt. What are we doing to address these issues with the players?

I would rather lose with players with integrity than win with trash.

[ASUMountaineer]

I will just keep my mouth shut. I'm pretty sure I know what is going to happen. Will still stand by my statement, "You aren't a man if you hit a woman", even if underhanded crap happens in court. I see it everyday, so don't try to dispute me on this topic or any when it comes to the criminal justice system. Crap, guess I didn't stay quiet.

Who is disputing you? It appears you know more facts about this case than most of us. Is there evidence that he did indeed strike a female? I know essentially nothing of the case, that's why I'm asking.

[Saint3333]

The court of public opinion is a dangerous thing.

I don't think anyone wants a player that hits a woman on the team (I certainly do not), but can we let the people with the facts make the decision, first the court of law, and then the coach based upon the verdict.

The court will rule on 8/15 which is before the season starts. If found guilty I have no doubt that he will be dismissed permanently. That's good enough for me.

[JTApps1]

I don't believe anyone has pointed out the difference between Gray and earlier players (except HappyHippie's 4-8 comment) as to why some were slamming the earlier guys and willing to give Gray a second chance? --- I am not passing judgment on Gray as I know none of the details and if he indeed deserves a 2nd chance then that is fine - I am not seeking to question Coach Satterfield either as he has difficult decisions to make all the time - I am just asking about MMB members and their comments ---

The difference is Alex was suspended immediately. I believe the players from two years ago were allowed to play, then suspended, then reinstated, and then suspended again all during the season. It came off looking as if we only suspended them when it was convenient. As I said earlier there must have been some very strong evidence uncovered that will clear Gray of the charges. I don't believe Satterfield will put up with off the field issues.

[WVAPPeer]

I don't believe anyone has pointed out the difference between Gray and earlier players (except HappyHippie's 4-8 comment) as to why some were slamming the earlier guys and willing to give Gray a second chance? --- I am not passing judgment on Gray as I know none of the details and if he indeed deserves a 2nd chance then that is fine - I am not seeking to question Coach Satterfield either as he has difficult decisions to make all the time - I am just asking about MMB members and their comments ---

The difference is Alex was suspended immediately. I believe the players from two years ago were allowed to play, then suspended, then reinstated, and then suspended again all during the season. It came off looking as if we only suspended them when it was convenient. As I said earlier there must have been some very strong evidence uncovered that will clear Gray of the charges. I don't believe Satterfield will put up with off the field issues.

I agree with your response JT - I'm just a little confused as to why this alleged act is different from those others? - (not saying what the coaches did, should have done, or will do) - As I said, none of us knew or know all the facts but the earlier guys were trashed on here by some and this young man would be welcomed back if found not guilty --- I have 100% faith Coach Satterfield will do the right thing ---

[WVAPPeer]

While I don't know the details of AGs problems In general I say we have no place for anyone who touches a woman provoked or not. And Gonzo if you had a daughter you would understand. This is exactly the question I wanted to ask Satt. What are we doing to address these issues with the players?

And Gonzo if you had a daughter you would understand.

I don't suspend the idea of justice and the standard of proof based on my personal relationships.

If you have a daughter I will guarantee you that the young man she has dealings with regardless of the severity or nature of the happening will assuredly be GUILTY with little chance of proving himself innocent --- PERIOD !!! - ask any Daddy who has raised a daughter !!!

[Gonzo]

While I don't know the details of AGs problems In general I say we have no place for anyone who touches a woman provoked or not. And Gonzo if you had a daughter you would understand. This is exactly the question I wanted to ask Satt. What are we doing to address these issues with the players?

And Gonzo if you had a daughter you would understand.

I don't suspend the idea of justice and the standard of proof based on my personal relationships.

If you have a daughter I will guarantee you that the young man she has dealings with regardless of the severity or nature of the happening will assuredly be GUILTY with little chance of proving himself innocent --- PERIOD !!! - ask any Daddy who has raised a daughter !!!

I don't doubt it, man. I don't doubt it.

But until the day my daughter is born, I'll be objective and avoid situational ethics. It's my duty.

[WVAPPeer]

Fair enough ---

[AppState89]

The court of public opinion is a dangerous thing.

I don't think anyone wants a player that hits a woman on the team (I certainly do not), but can we let the people with the facts make the decision, first the court of law, and then the coach based upon the verdict.

The court will rule on 8/15 which is before the season starts. If found guilty I have no doubt that he will be dismissed permanently. That's good enough for me.

I agree with you 100% Saint. He has the best atty in Boone,Tom Speed. Tom has always worked his magic, even when I was a student doing my intership at the courthouse. That was in 1989.

[Rekdiver]

First....any fool who would be stupid enough to hit my daughter wouldn't have to worry about football much less a long fulfilling life.

Now personal situations and relationships aside.....the pressure on women to drop charges rather than be vilified in a community is incredible and just compare that to the wrestlers in Gaston County that are just now brave enough to accuse the coach of sexual assault...or the altar boys who came forward after years to confront the priests....It's just isn't cut and dried /black and white. Being objective is fine but isn't it time that we gave women the benefit of the doubt rather than the other way round? I believe in innocent until proven guilty but if there is evidence and/or witnesses I don't want anyone to get off on a technicality or because they hire a better lawyer. As I said I don't know any of the details of AG's and I'm speaking in generalities not condemning him. BUT If I was Coach...I would say this: " No means no"" You never lay your hands on a woman" Treat women with respect as you would want your sister or mother to be treated" And if you ever get accused of any violation of a woman ..innocent or not you will never play ball at Appalachian. Amen!

[GoApps70]

That is about the dumbest thing I have ever read. Whether guilty or not, just to be charged, give me a break. Women use charges all the time against men. They get jealous or want revenge for something so they make things up. Not all the time, but I have seen guys that were innocent completely more than once in my lifetime be charged by women with something that was totally not true. One guy had over 20 witnesses that it wasn't true, but the woman didn't care, just to file against the guy and have him arrested was part of her vengeance. No one wants a woman to be abused or hurt, but to think that woman are always right and do not have an agenda is dumb as dirt.

[ASUMountaineer]

First....any fool who would be stupid enough to hit my daughter wouldn't have to worry about football much less a long fulfilling life.

Now personal situations and relationships aside.....the pressure on women to drop charges rather than be vilified in a community is incredible and just compare that to the wrestlers in Gaston County that are just now brave enough to accuse the coach of sexual assault...or the altar boys who came forward after years to confront the priests....It's just isn't cut and dried /black and white. Being objective is fine but isn't it time that we gave women the benefit of the doubt rather than the other way round? I believe in innocent until proven guilty but if there is evidence and/or witnesses I don't want anyone to get off on a technicality or because they hire a better lawyer. As I said I don't know any of the details of AG's and I'm speaking in generalities not condemning him. BUT If I was Coach...I would say this: " No means no"" You never lay your hands on a woman" Treat women with respect as you would want your sister or mother to be treated" And if you ever get accused of any violation of a woman ..innocent or not you will never play ball at Appalachian. Amen!

I can't support this line of thinking, sorry Rek.

As for the benefit of the doubt, I can't support that either. For one, I think women do get the benefit of the doubt more than they don't. Additionally, I don't want guilty people to be exonerated, but I do think our justice system is for the better if a guilty person gets off then if an innocent person gets convicted. That's why I can't support a "benefit of the doubt" position.

[T-Dog]

Not speaking to anyone specifically here, but in the past some on MMB have wanted blood from some of our players who got in trouble - especially with assaulting females --- what is different in this case? ---

For me it just depends if he is guilty or not. If not then I'm looking forward to having him back.

Were the guys from the past years guilty? - I don't remember anyone going to trial but many on here wrote them off as thugs ---

In one court or another, yes.

T Dog is right. Were they convicted? No. Were they even charged? No. But in the world of allegations of male on female sexual assault, the poor bastards were guilty until proven innocent.

Par for the course these days.

The players from the 2011 incident were found at fault in a student court hearing and barred from campus for 8 semesters. They didn't need to be found 100% guilty, just 51%. The student court no longer handles sexual assault cases because of how bad it was mishandled.

And if you're ever tried for a sexual assault, don't use the defense of "she didn't say 'no'" that the players used. It'll get that 51% on a student court of people half-trained in this mess, even if a real DA thinks there's no way of getting 100%, which is what happened there.

It's pretty well known that the first woman was talked into it months afterward. The second is more muddied as there was alcohol and sex and under the standard of consent on college campuses (which is much moreso on the man), universities have to pursue every little detail because if they don't, they lose their FAFSA funding.

There was poor judgment all around, including the coaching staff for burying their heads in the sand and the administration for screwing up the initial student court hearing and making the women tell their story over and over and over and over which isn't a 15-minute monologue and get out situation. Each time took several hours. Then after the procedural error was found after the first trial (which was laughable in how bad it was conducted), the players were brought back on campus without informing the ladies, which was an egregious mistake by Lori Gonzales. The second trial went better, but the damage was done.

There. Done. Over With. Move Along.

[WVAPPeer]

T-Dog - thank you for the explanation.

[AppDawg]

First....any fool who would be stupid enough to hit my daughter wouldn't have to worry about football much less a long fulfilling life.

Now personal situations and relationships aside.....the pressure on women to drop charges rather than be vilified in a community is incredible and just compare that to the wrestlers in Gaston County that are just now brave enough to accuse the coach of sexual assault...or the altar boys who came forward after years to confront the priests....It's just isn't cut and dried /black and white. Being objective is fine but isn't it time that we gave women the benefit of the doubt rather than the other way round? I believe in innocent until proven guilty but if there is evidence and/or witnesses I don't want anyone to get off on a technicality or because they hire a better lawyer. As I said I don't know any of the details of AG's and I'm speaking in generalities not condemning him. BUT If I was Coach...I would say this: " No means no"" You never lay your hands on a woman" Treat women with respect as you would want your sister or mother to be treated" And if you ever get accused of any violation of a woman ..innocent or not you will never play ball at Appalachian. Amen!

I can't support this line of thinking, sorry Rek.

As for the benefit of the doubt, I can't support that either. For one, I think women do get the benefit of the doubt more than they don't. Additionally, I don't want guilty people to be exonerated, but I do think our justice system is for the better if a guilty person gets off then if an innocent person gets convicted. That's why I can't support a "benefit of the doubt" position.

Two Words:
"Duke Lacrosse"

[WVAPPeer]

Two Words:
"Duke Lacrosse"

I do think that case was somewhat different because it wasn't a situation which involved only students at the same school -

[Rekdiver]

Okay.... being accused is out of line for expulsion..I'm wrong there.......But we need to have a staff who will do the right thing. And I think we have one and im sure the new Chancellor wont mess around either.

[bigCasu]

More than likely, Gray has fulfilled his duties on campus, whether through mediation, determining the real truth, or the complainant refusing to cooperate with prosecution, etc. Could be one of those items or mixture of many others not listed. Partially reinstated to me sounds like he can practice, lift and run with team until trial date, when likely the charge will be dismissed through a student deferral agreement. This looks very similar to the Jay Canty situation.

[AppState89]

I love this debate here. Good job all of you.

Most everyone is correct on their thinking. Women do have the advantage in court over men. Reason being, most of the time (NOT ALL), men are the ones who usually hit the woman. Happens more than most know, but it's never reported.

Guilty or not, hope a lesson has been learned here. Hope he can take this expierence and help others who might be thinking it's ok to hit a woman or man out of anger. I preach this 40+ hours a week to my offenders. Sometimes life's lessons can be harsh, but we choose the path we take. We know right from wrong.