• 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.

cm husker

All American
5 Year Member
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.
That's certainly arguable.

And if we think it's on the sports team to add to the incentive structure that the judicial system establishes for the rest of society, then that's probably we have to come down. I"m just not personally sure that The Team needs to have that role, especially when it hurts the rest of the team, which did nothing wrong other than "not looking out for each other."

Team punishments, such as up-downs for everyone after a violation of team rules, makes sense to a degree, but mainly because there's no other structure out there shaping behavior.

I just have a problem punishing the whole team for a boneheaded, but ultimately harmless (in this real specific context) behavior.
 

TDFORNU

Junior Varsity
15 Year Member
My son is still at the University, and per him the word is that much of what was reported wasn't necessarily true per what he's hearing.

He tells me that he has heard that although it was reported that Caputo was found asleep at the wheel, in reality he was slumped forward because he was texting somebody.
Still blew a .103, slumped over the wheel or Asleep At The Wheel.

[video=youtube_share;D4vPoyL8njU]http://youtu.be/D4vPoyL8njU[/video]
 

Pop Corn

Old Timer
15 Year Member
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.
Actually, I just wanted to know if Bearkat thought Caputo was getting preferential treatment from a legal/law officer point of view.

I think your agenda has more to do with a hard-on for alcohol/driving related incidents. That is the only thing I have picked up from this "conversation". I don't know what your position is on Bo and the job he is doing, but I still suspect the dividing line to be pretty much as mentioned in the previous post. I probably should have said that was a generalized opinion rather then a carved in stone proclamation. My bad.
 

Bearkat Husker

Junior Varsity
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?
With out knowing what the chemical test was, hard to say. Caputo obviously took the required chemical test (otherwise he would have been charged with chemical breath test refusal). I would highly suspect he blew under .08 thus the reckless charge.
You can arrest someone for suspicion of DUI without breath and chemical tests...the observations of the officer of the suspect's behavior, (blood shot watery eyes, slurred speech, unsteady gait, ect) , but a key element in that is observing the suspect driving. In this case the suspect was parked, still a good DUI but without him blowing over .08 I again think thats why the lesser charge.
That report of a .103 on the Preliminary breath test and not getting the DUI probably means he was on his way down (BAC going down) and by the time he got to the jail to do the chemical breath test enough time went by that he was under .08
Long answer to short question... Probably not. In Sarpy that's how it is routinely done.
 

utsker

All Big 10
10 Year Member
Actually, I just wanted to know if Bearkat thought Caputo was getting preferential treatment from a legal/law officer point of view.

I think your agenda has more to do with a hard-on for alcohol/driving related incidents. That is the only thing I have picked up from this "conversation". I don't know what your position is on Bo and the job he is doing, but I still suspect the dividing line to be pretty much as mentioned in the previous post. I probably should have said that was a generalized opinion rather then a carved in stone proclamation. My bad.
My position on Bo....I like him but he aint perfect...can't think of any reason to get rid of the guy nor am I looking for any. I'm hoping he sticks around for a while and continues to grow as an HC and build the program back up to where we're a consistent Top 10 team...
 

RedRum

Varsity
5 Year Member
With out knowing what the chemical test was, hard to say. Caputo obviously took the required chemical test (otherwise he would have been charged with chemical breath test refusal). I would highly suspect he blew under .08 thus the reckless charge.
You can arrest someone for suspicion of DUI without breath and chemical tests...the observations of the officer of the suspect's behavior, (blood shot watery eyes, slurred speech, unsteady gait, ect) , but a key element in that is observing the suspect driving. In this case the suspect was parked, still a good DUI but without him blowing over .08 I again think thats why the lesser charge.
That report of a .103 on the Preliminary breath test and not getting the DUI probably means he was on his way down (BAC going down) and by the time he got to the jail to do the chemical breath test enough time went by that he was under .08
Long answer to short question... Probably not. In Sarpy that's how it is routinely done.
There is a reason why the filed breath test is not admissible. They don't meet the standard for a conviction by themselves. In one study the tests accurately predicted intoxication 83% of the time, while officers that administered field sobriety tests did it 81% of the time. The problem was the breath test incorrectly identified 16% intoxication when they were not.

Later studies brought that number down to just under 5% incorrect, but they were also done in a controlled, supervised environment which is not what happens in the field. Even 5% is not enough to hold up without supporting evidence. So .103 on a field test does not mean he was at .103 to start with and it "came down". If you are jury, you don't even know that number exists, and rightfully so.

The next question is reckless driving. So if you pull over your car into a parking lot and put it in park to make a text, that's reckless? That's what the built-in safties are for in-dash DVD players. Seems like a strange charge that is way to vague.
 

bilsker

Tom Osborne
15 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
The first thing I thought of with your first question was "Lawrence Phillips" but then you headed that off with your "assault" paragraph. ;)

That said I guess it's a fair point but as most people say...there is and should be a higher standard. Like it or not players are the face of the U. They are "role models" for kids. They KNOW THE DEAL when they sign on the dotted line. And trotting a guy out on the field after committing crimes (DUI is a serious crime) gives the U a black eye. Are all DUIs, crimes, etc. created the same? No. MIP, in my opinion isn't as big a deal as DUI and DUI isn't necessarily as bad as beating a woman, etc.
 

bilsker

Tom Osborne
15 Year Member
And on the "teenage kids" thing. I don't have any that I created but I'm around 2 of them on a rather constant basis and YES I know their damn faces are buried in their god-forsaken phones at all waking hours. Hell, even I text quite a bit...and have never slumped over a steering wheel to do so.
 

cm husker

All American
5 Year Member
The first thing I thought of with your first question was "Lawrence Phillips" but then you headed that off with your "assault" paragraph. ;)

That said I guess it's a fair point but as most people say...there is and should be a higher standard. Like it or not players are the face of the U. They are "role models" for kids. They KNOW THE DEAL when they sign on the dotted line. And trotting a guy out on the field after committing crimes (DUI is a serious crime) gives the U a black eye. Are all DUIs, crimes, etc. created the same? No. MIP, in my opinion isn't as big a deal as DUI and DUI isn't necessarily as bad as beating a woman, etc.
I'm surprised that you could read the post... it's almost indecipherable. I need to stop writing on an ipad because autocorrect is killing me.

I suppose it is about lines, and I personally, from what I've read, wouldn't put Caputo on the suspension side. I don't know all the facts, though. I do know that DUI is serious, and there are serious consequences in the "civilian" world. I don't know that the team has a responsibility to reinforce those consequences.

Should band members and scholarship students who are also "role models" for kids be suspended?

Do we honestly think 17 year olds are really going to look at a suspension or non-suspension as a "message" about DUIs?

I think where the criminal justice system has a mechanism for punishment, we should leave the two separate, unless the nature of the offense itself indicates the player lacks the character necessary to be on the team (at least until he completes ABC and proves he should have a chance).

But to be fair, I'm generally not a believer in punishment for the sole purpose of deterrence, mainly because I don't think it's particularly effective.
 

cm husker

All American
5 Year Member
And on the "teenage kids" thing. I don't have any that I created but I'm around 2 of them on a rather constant basis and YES I know their damn faces are buried in their god-forsaken phones at all waking hours. Hell, even I text quite a bit...and have never slumped over a steering wheel to do so.
I"d just say be careful about relying on police report wording. There are certain key phrases that show up in cases like this.... usually to establish PC or add evidence to the file that will later be testified to. Not saying it's necessarily inaccurate, but it's certainly a slanted perspective. "Slumped over the wheel" could have just easily been leaning his elbows against the wheel.

Heck, even the "car was running" is open to interpretation. If his lights were on, but the engine was off, it could be written up as "car was running." Did anything say that the engine was actually idling? Again, not saying the police are lying, but they have a job to do and they will structure the report to support that job.

From a practical perspective, i've slept in the car few times.... I don't recall ever leaning forward over the wheel to sleep.
 

huskrthill

Crap
5 Year Member
From a practical perspective, i've slept in the car few times.... I don't recall ever leaning forward over the wheel to sleep.
I'd say that a nearly 300 lb man, even in good physical shape, would have a hard time getting his tummy out of the way to lean that far forward. Leaning backwards is much more likely if he were passed out/sleeping.
 

cm husker

All American
5 Year Member
So many people struggle with autocorrect... can't that feature be disabled?
I can, but then my errors would be even more egregious. At least with A/C, they are mostly limited to word tense, punctuation, and the occasional substituted homonym.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top