RS Fr Lee Wright Dismissed

[Gonzo]

that is a great point, with social media, the old ways of Universities, of just keeping everything hush, and maybe even sweeping infractions under the rug are done.

Well if he were a Tar Heel he'd have nothing to worry about.

[AppState89]

This is what he needs to be worried about.....

Felony PWISD MARIJUANA
Felony MAINTN VEH/DWELL/PLACE CS (F)
Traffic DRIVE AFTER CONSUMING < 21

Hate if for him, but I'm glad Satt kicked him off the team. Message needs to be sent.

[asu66]

that is a great point, with social media, the old ways of Universities, of just keeping everything hush, and maybe even sweeping infractions under the rug are done.

Privacy outside of one's home is mostly a thing of the past. Everyone is carrying a smartphone with still and video cameras. Every state, municipality, institution and most private businesses, restaurants and bars have hard-wired or wireless video security cameras covering every angle of every busy traffic intersection and every cash point/storage space/corridor/sidewalk/entrance/exit of buildings inside and out. Anywhere you go and everything you do is subject to be on digital video for recall at the "most inconvenient time." Everyone with any common sense knows this; but some choose to roll the dice thinking "it won't happen to me." Self-destructive behavior will eventually catch up with ya one way or another.

[bcoach]

I find it interesting that it is different for assault on a woman. In the AG case I was seeing he deserves his day in court, you know innocent until proven guilty. Not seeing that here.

[asu66]

I find it interesting that it is different for assault on a woman. In the AG case I was seeing he deserves his day in court, you know innocent until proven guilty. Not seeing that here.

As firemoose posted, "Unlike Gray and even Price these aren't person on person charges but charges based on driving and..." possession. Satterfield hasn't declared him guilty of a crime; just found him to have been in violation of team rules that are clearly defined in the ASU student-athletes' handbook. How many times have our football players ignored those rules in the last five or six years and got away with it? Satterfield has made yet another statement that he intends for the rules to be followed--or else. Perhaps our players should get it through their skulls that it isn't "business as usual" any more.

This is the SoCon version of the handbook, but I doubt the rule would have been watered down in the most recent version. It clearly states that a student-athlete may be dismissed from a team if charged with a felony. Their is a formal appeals process if the student wishes to have the dismissal reviewed.

http://irap.appstate.edu/sites/irap.app ... ndbook.pdf

It's my assumption that the LEO's, the DA and the head coach know a lot more about the situations, the evidence and the witnesses (if any) than any of us know. Gotta put trust in them to get it right. I'd say the first LEO phone call on the Wright situation went to Satterfield; and I'd imagine Satterfield went to the scene immediately.

The most serious charge against Gray, although troubling and disgusting to all of us, is a misdemeanor. I checked. That, alone, makes it a clear distinction from the Wright case.

Gray's court date is set for Sept. 15th. According to the handbook, he could be dismissed from the team if he's convicted of the two misdemeanor charges against him. It would be a judgement call by the AD and head coach.

[bcoach]

I find it interesting that it is different for assault on a woman. In the AG case I was seeing he deserves his day in court, you know innocent until proven guilty. Not seeing that here.

As firemoose posted, "Unlike Gray and even Price these aren't person on person charges but charges based on driving and..." possession. Satterfield hasn't declared him guilty of a crime; just found him to have been in violation of team rules that are clearly defined in the ASU student-athletes' handbook. How many times have our football players ignored those rules in the last five or six years and got away with it? Satterfield has made yet another statement that he intends for the rules to be followed--or else. Perhaps our players should get it through their skulls that it isn't "business as usual" any more.

It's my assumption that the LEO's, the DA and the head coach know a lot more about the situations, the evidence and the witnesses (if any) than any of us know. Gotta put trust in them to get it right. I'd say the first LEO phone call on the Wright situation went to Satterfield; and I'd imagine Satterfield went to the scene immediately.

The most serious charge against Gray, although troubling and disgusting to all of us, is a misdemeanor. I checked. That, alone, makes it a clear distinction from the Wright case.

Don't misunderstand my dismay. He should be off the team for violating rules. I just saw a lot of innocent till proven guilty in the AG deal. The whole day in court thing. Maybe we should put something in the team rule book about beating on women. I am also not arguing with you I see what you are saying. I just see a very large discrepancy with the law and how these things are looked at by the public and the university.

[WVAPPeer]

I find it interesting that it is different for assault on a woman. In the AG case I was seeing he deserves his day in court, you know innocent until proven guilty. Not seeing that here.

Awaiting Gonzo's ruling on this one ---

[asu66]

Don't misunderstand my dismay. He should be off the team for violating rules. I just saw a lot of innocent till proven guilty in the AG deal. The whole day in court thing. Maybe we should put something in the team rule book about beating on women. I am also not arguing with you I see what you are saying. I just see a very large discrepancy with the law and how these things are looked at by the public and the university.

I seem to be incapable of concise posts, sometimes. I think the difference between the two situations according to the handbook is that a student may be suspended from the team until the court ruling if charged with a misdemeanor. A student may be dismissed from the team if charged with a felony.

I think we're both wondering how an assault on a female could be only a misdemeanor. I suppose it depends on the degree of the assault. Was it slightly more than a gentle push against a wall, a hard slap in the face or a brutal beating?

[Gonzo]

I find it interesting that it is different for assault on a woman. In the AG case I was seeing he deserves his day in court, you know innocent until proven guilty. Not seeing that here.

Awaiting Gonzo's ruling on this one ---

I stand by my (this nation's) principles. Although getting caught with contraband is vastly different than a he-said-she-said DV charge. Nothing short of huge police oversight in the stop or arrest will get him out of this one.

[WVAPPeer]

I find it interesting that it is different for assault on a woman. In the AG case I was seeing he deserves his day in court, you know innocent until proven guilty. Not seeing that here.

Awaiting Gonzo's ruling on this one ---

I stand by my (this nation's) principles. Although getting caught with contraband is vastly different than a he-said-she-said DV charge. Nothing short of huge police oversight in the stop or arrest will get him out of this one.

But - he would still be on your team? ---

[bcoach]

Don't misunderstand my dismay. He should be off the team for violating rules. I just saw a lot of innocent till proven guilty in the AG deal. The whole day in court thing. Maybe we should put something in the team rule book about beating on women. I am also not arguing with you I see what you are saying. I just see a very large discrepancy with the law and how these things are looked at by the public and the university.

I seem to be incapable of concise posts, sometimes. I think the difference between the two situations according to the handbook is that a student may be suspended from the team until the court ruling if charged with a misdemeanor. A student may be dismissed from the team if charged with a felony.

I think we're both wondering how an assault on a female could be only a misdemeanor. I suppose it depends on the degree of the assault. Was it slightly more than a gentle push against a wall, a hard slap in the face or a brutal beating?

I am just very happy with the decision Scott has made on Lee Wright and terribly disappointed in the AG decision. It may be classified as a misdemeanor but sets a very bad example. This kind of an attitude results in beating a woman unconscious getting you a two game suspension and smoking pot gets you six games in the NFL. Now I see a similar although not as sever example on the team I love. I am not condemning Scott, I think he is a good man. I do think he has made a bad decision in this area.

[bcoach]

I find it interesting that it is different for assault on a woman. In the AG case I was seeing he deserves his day in court, you know innocent until proven guilty. Not seeing that here.

Awaiting Gonzo's ruling on this one ---

I stand by my (this nation's) principles. Although getting caught with contraband is vastly different than a he-said-she-said DV charge. Nothing short of huge police oversight in the stop or arrest will get him out of this one.

So in one case you are " kind of innocent till proven guilty"? Are there degrees of innocent till proven guilty?

[Gonzo]

I find it interesting that it is different for assault on a woman. In the AG case I was seeing he deserves his day in court, you know innocent until proven guilty. Not seeing that here.

Awaiting Gonzo's ruling on this one ---

I stand by my (this nation's) principles. Although getting caught with contraband is vastly different than a he-said-she-said DV charge. Nothing short of huge police oversight in the stop or arrest will get him out of this one.

But - he would still be on your team? ---

It's not my team and I don't know all the facts. With a damning felony(ies) I'd lean towards suspension.

[Gonzo]

I find it interesting that it is different for assault on a woman. In the AG case I was seeing he deserves his day in court, you know innocent until proven guilty. Not seeing that here.

Awaiting Gonzo's ruling on this one ---

I stand by my (this nation's) principles. Although getting caught with contraband is vastly different than a he-said-she-said DV charge. Nothing short of huge police oversight in the stop or arrest will get him out of this one.

So in one case you are " kind of innocent till proven guilty"? Are there degrees of innocent till proven guilty?

The post you responded to clears up your question. I can't dumb it down for you much more.

[AppGrad78]

In cases in which I don't have all the information -- that's almost 100 percent of the time when it involves a legal dispute -- then I defer to the judgement of those who do. Coach Satterfield more than likely has all the information in these two cases. I don't. I respect his ability to make the right decision.

[bcoach]

I find it interesting that it is different for assault on a woman. In the AG case I was seeing he deserves his day in court, you know innocent until proven guilty. Not seeing that here.

Awaiting Gonzo's ruling on this one ---

I stand by my (this nation's) principles. Although getting caught with contraband is vastly different than a he-said-she-said DV charge. Nothing short of huge police oversight in the stop or arrest will get him out of this one.

So in one case you are " kind of innocent till proven guilty"? Are there degrees of innocent till proven guilty?

The post you responded to clears up your question. I can't dumb it down for you much more.

Just wanted to make sure there were different degrees.

[AtlAppMan]

Don't worry, be happy. Looks like Wright is going to be hanging out with Ricky Williams.

Sat has to take a firm hand now. Part of his challenge is to clean up some of the off field issues that has harmed our team in recent years. I am not saying we will not have other players in the future that make bad decisions but Sat has to be direct, fair and decisive with his team rules. I have no reason to doubt his decisions at this point.

[JTApps1]

I find it interesting that it is different for assault on a woman. In the AG case I was seeing he deserves his day in court, you know innocent until proven guilty. Not seeing that here.

How is it any different at this point? Gray was kicked off the team immediately following his arrest as well. So Satt has been consistent in the regard.

[NewApp]

I find it interesting that it is different for assault on a woman. In the AG case I was seeing he deserves his day in court, you know innocent until proven guilty. Not seeing that here.

How is it any different at this point? Gray was kicked off the team immediately following his arrest as well. So Satt has been consistent in the regard.

Gray was reinstated for a period of time wasn't he? Gray was suspended while this guy was kicked off the team.

[bcoach]

I find it interesting that it is different for assault on a woman. In the AG case I was seeing he deserves his day in court, you know innocent until proven guilty. Not seeing that here.

How is it any different at this point? Gray was kicked off the team immediately following his arrest as well. So Satt has been consistent in the regard.

Maybe I have been misled. I was led to believe that he is back practicing with the team.