• You do not need to register if you are not going to pay the yearly fee to post. If you register please click here or log in go to "settings" then "my account" then "User Upgrades" and you can renew.

Locked due to no posts in 60 days. Report 1st post if need unlocked No Dui for our center!

Status
Not open for further replies.

bilsker

Tom Osborne
15 Year Member
Do we know he was in fact drunk?

Often a DUI becomes a reckless because the blood test comes back low or right around the .08.

I do not know about Joe Kelly, but Gary Lacey was hardly soft on UNL student athletes.....the children of cops, well that's a different story
And when was that blood test administered? And hour...two...after he parked his car to nap or text? So when he pulled into the Ustop he was over the limit but luckily for him enough time passed for that reading to get under .08.

As for the "texting" thing? Must have been a REAL LONG text for someone to see it, call the police and then for the police to get there...even it it's just 5 minutes that's a long arse text.
 

Sprint23r

Red Shirt
5 Year Member
Based on where he was arrested I doubt anyone called the police. Where he was at is practically in the parking lot of one bar and only 2 blocks from another. The cops are all over that area that time of night. Enough time could have passed for him to be under the limit by the time they took the test that counts. The one that had him at .103 however doesn't count so all it provides is probable cause. He screwed up obviously and hopefully he learns from it but he hasn't done or benefitted anymore than countless other non-athletes have in this city over the years. If he got a break because he is an NU athlete then I have a number of friends that I didn't realise were playing for Nebraska. I need to hit them up for passes.
And when was that blood test administered? And hour...two...after he parked his car to nap or text? So when he pulled into the Ustop he was over the limit but luckily for him enough time passed for that reading to get under .08.

As for the "texting" thing? Must have been a REAL LONG text for someone to see it, call the police and then for the police to get there...even it it's just 5 minutes that's a long arse text.
 

HuskerDynasty

Junior Varsity
5 Year Member
And when was that blood test administered? And hour...two...after he parked his car to nap or text? So when he pulled into the Ustop he was over the limit but luckily for him enough time passed for that reading to get under .08.

As for the "texting" thing? Must have been a REAL LONG text for someone to see it, call the police and then for the police to get there...even it it's just 5 minutes that's a long arse text.
I guess you don't have any teenage kids.
 

beans

Scout Team
15 Year Member
Reckless driving while not driving is the appropriate charge? He was drunk and in control of a running vehicle. That's DUI for your or me.
My point is the law was looking for a charge they evidently feel is appropriate for the situation. Justice often takes into account the overall character and record of an individual. Unless, there's something we (or I) don't know there isn't anything extraordinary about this happening. Go sit in a courtroom for a day or two and you'll find a lot more people getting "probation" or diminished charges than you will people getting the full extent of the law. This especially applies to a young person. First, because they don't have a lifetime of mistakes and second, we tend to believe young people deserve second chances because we don't want them to spend a lifetime despising the system.

Obviously, it doesn't work for everyone. Let's trust it does for the Caputos and Lauren Cooks. Then, everyone wins.
 

utsker

All Big 10
10 Year Member
My point is the law was looking for a charge they evidently feel is appropriate for the situation. Justice often takes into account the overall character and record of an individual. Unless, there's something we (or I) don't know there isn't anything extraordinary about this happening. Go sit in a courtroom for a day or two and you'll find a lot more people getting "probation" or diminished charges than you will people getting the full extent of the law. This especially applies to a young person. First, because they don't have a lifetime of mistakes and second, we tend to believe young people deserve second chances because we don't want them to spend a lifetime despising the system.

Obviously, it doesn't work for everyone. Let's trust it does for the Caputos and Lauren Cooks. Then, everyone wins.
I've seen first hand how Be Are Oh Kay Eee the justice system is. But that shouldn't stop Bo from suspending him.
 

Pop Corn

Old Timer
15 Year Member
I just love street lawyers on this board. I'll come at you from a police officer perspective:
Yes, a decent attorney, based on the evidence, may be able to work a deal, but that's after charges are filed. In this case, the County Attorney filed lesser charges, now the plea deal comes into play.

The public information out is the suspect blew a .103 on a PRELIMINARY BREATH TEST. This test is done in the field and the result is not admissible in and of itself in court. After you're arrested, you are required to take a chemical breath test of your blood, breath or urine. That result is in 99% of cases what the prosecutor bases the DUI charge on. If it's .08 or above, most likely going to be charged with DUI. IF below .08, a lesser reckless charge is usually filed. WE DON'T KNOW WHAT THE CHEMICAL TEST RESULT WAS. I would guess it was lower than .08. That's most likely why the reckless charge.

Caputo still has his driver's license confiscated per the Administrative License Revocation law in Nebraska, and his insurance will be high. With a Reckless conviction (class 3 misd), he will lose 5 points off his driver's license.

I do agree with Blisker that special things happen to special people. I've seen it firsthand.
Interesting information. Sounds like you know what you are talking about.

The bolded line begs the question though: Do you believe Caputo is receiving special treatment or is the charge consistent with what most anyone would be charged with under similar circumstances?
 

IMfanFORnu

Scout Team
5 Year Member
Interesting information. Sounds like you know what you are talking about.

The bolded line begs the question though: Do you believe Caputo is receiving special treatment or is the charge consistent with what most anyone would be charged with under similar circumstances?
2 separate issues:


-- first legal issue --> same treatment as anyone with a good attorney

-- second issue -- Football (?? suspension) some have argued Bo appears to be handling this case differently-- potentially different treatment
 

Pop Corn

Old Timer
15 Year Member
2 separate issues:


-- first legal issue --> same treatment as anyone with a good attorney

-- second issue -- Football (?? suspension) some have argued Bo appears to be handling this case differently-- potentially different treatment
Again, interesting response. My intent was for Bearkat to answer the question from a legal/law officer perspective, not how Bo is dealing with it.

I think that if the question had been directed toward how Bo is handling it, the responses would be pretty well defined by what kind of job you think Bo was doing overall. Those who think he is doing a good job as a head coach and those who don't will answer the question relevant the their personal agenda.
 

RedBlack&Blue

Varsity
5 Year Member
Our justice system is a joke.

The exact same charge leveled at somebody who can't afford as good of an attorney would bring a DUI.

Yeah, money's great. More power to him. Just workin' the system. Don't fault him ... but the system's a joke.
 

cm husker

All American
5 Year Member
From a normative perspective:

Why should a student-athlete be punished by his/her team as well as the justice system?

In other words, if a kid missing a team meeting, team punishment is necessary because there's been no criminal/judicial consequence.

On the other hand, you could obviously say that a person who assaults someone may not have the character necessary to remain on the team, and therefore there are some criminal offenses that are so serious that they require expulsion, not as a punishment, but rather as a mode of removing a threat (i.e. someone the team can't trust or rely on).

I don't think a reckless driving or non-aggravated DUI offense falls in the latter category.

So, why not let the judicial system mete out punishment, as it would any other student, and leave team punishment off the table?

In my opinion, team punishment should generally not hurt the team, but rather correct the individual (e.g. individualized physical punishment for missing meetings).

Suspensions should only be brought down when someone's absence actually helps the team by removing a determent, at least until he proves he can be a valuable part of the team again and earns his way back. A simple "offense = 1 game" approach doesn't really get much done, in my opinion.

On an unrelated note: Many U's don't even suspend a player for a game after a drug policy violation: http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball/story/15947307/mcmurphys-law-inconsistency-epitomizes-aq-school-drug-policies
 

utsker

All Big 10
10 Year Member
Again, interesting response. My intent was for Bearkat to answer the question from a legal/law officer perspective, not how Bo is dealing with it.

I think that if the question had been directed toward how Bo is handling it, the responses would be pretty well defined by what kind of job you think Bo was doing overall. Those who think he is doing a good job as a head coach and those who don't will answer the question relevant the their personal agenda.
No personal agenda here against Bo...just against the alcohol thingy. Just curious about who you think is protestin the lack of suspension that has an agenda against Bo.
 

cm husker

All American
5 Year Member
Our justice system is a joke.

The exact same charge leveled at somebody who can't afford as good of an attorney would bring a DUI.

Yeah, money's great. More power to him. Just workin' the system. Don't fault him ... but the system's a joke.
I don't agree with your tone or use of this case as a vehicle for the message, but I generally agree with your sentiment.

Our system doesn't need to be changed, but our pro bono/public defense bar needs to be strengthened significantly. It's terribly bad right now, and that's detrimental to everyone.

On a related note, civil representation for the poor, especially when going up against government bureaucracy, should be bolstered. Access denied means justice denied.
 

utsker

All Big 10
10 Year Member
From a normative perspective:

Why should a student-athlete be punished by his/her team as well as the justice system?

In other words, if a kid missing a team meeting, team punishment is necessary because there's been no criminal/judicial consequence.

On the other hand, you could obviously say that a person who assaults someone may not have the character necessary to remain on the team, and therefore there are some criminal offenses that are so serious that they require expulsion, not as a punishment, but rather as a mode of removing a threat (i.e. someone the team can't trust or rely on).

I don't think a reckless driving or non-aggravated DUI offense falls in the latter category.

So, why not let the judicial system mete out punishment, as it would any other student, and leave team punishment off the table?

In my opinion, team punishment should generally not hurt the team, but rather correct the individual (e.g. individualized physical punishment for missing meetings).

Suspensions should only be brought down when someone's absence actually helps the team by removing a determent, at least until he proves he can be a valuable part of the team again and earns his way back. A simple "offense = 1 game" approach doesn't really get much done, in my opinion.

On an unrelated note: Many U's don't even suspend a player for a game after a drug policy violation: http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball/story/15947307/mcmurphys-law-inconsistency-epitomizes-aq-school-drug-policies
I'm thinking that hurting the team will more than likely instigate actions by fellow team members to prevent infractions...they'd do a better job of looking after each other.
 

RedBlack&Blue

Varsity
5 Year Member
I don't agree with your tone or use of this case as a vehicle for the message, but I generally agree with your sentiment.

Our system doesn't need to be changed, but our pro bono/public defense bar needs to be strengthened significantly. It's terribly bad right now, and that's detrimental to everyone.

On a related note, civil representation for the poor, especially when going up against government bureaucracy, should be bolstered. Access denied means justice denied.
Indeed.

And you're right, the facts of the Caputo case are unknown to us.
 

TDFORNU

Junior Varsity
15 Year Member
Not that I EVER plan on being pulled over for DUI, but I want the name of his lawyer.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top