Jay Barker Arrested

[NoNC4Tubs]

Him, of course, also his family. Plus, anyone will try to tie this to Alabama football.

Yeah, a barner acquaintance sent me this story as soon as it broke...

I didn't respond.

 

[AlexanderFan]

agreed. but aside from his actions in the car, he was basically stalking her by being at her house, and then coming back again, which is a big no no and does not look good for him regardless.

Yea that’s the crux. You can drive away angry, but driving away angry at 1:15am after you see your seperated wife leave a party with someone else, looks really bad.

 

[AlexanderFan]

And also remember if both names are on the deed of the house he can come back anytime aslong as their is not a restraining order, happened to my son with his ex he kept the house and according to the law she had legal access

I wonder if this was a reason? It would provide a slightly better context for being around so late, and coming back.

Given her decent success in country music, she could’ve had a residence of her own she held on to, which throws all this out the window.

Regardless of context, they are getting divorced and have no children together, so an interaction with her in a non public place and without lawyers was stupid on his part.

 

[JayBama_in_PCOLA]

Yeah, a barner acquaintance sent me this story as soon as it broke...

I didn't respond.

Yep, anything to pile on BAMA football they’ll use it.

 

[4Q Basket Case]

Yeah, remember Hugh Freeze after things came out about him...?

The list is virtually endless.

 

[MILEHIGHTIDE]

In this era of media coverage many times in an attempt to be first with the story some of the old school journalism practices and standard due diligence ie verification of sources etc goes out of the window.

 

[Crimson1967]

He may have had a legal right to be there (if he is indeed co-owner) but going over at one in the morning hardly sounds like he was going over to pick up a few things.

Yes, rival fans are having fun with this. But let’s not act like we’d be sympathetic if this was Cam Newton or Peyton Manning.

 

[JohnD]

A variation on the quote from Dr. Johnson: “Religion is often the last refuge of the scoundrel.”

That was attributed to the avowed atheist Andy Rooney, I believe.

 

[4Q Basket Case]

That was attributed to the avowed atheist Andy Rooney, I believe.

The original quote from Samuel Johnson was, “Patriotism is the last refuge of the scoundrel.” I didn’t know Andy Rooney was the one that changed Patriotism to Religion, but it fits.

I miss him and James J. Kilpatrick.

 

[uafan4life]

agreed. but aside from his actions in the car, he was basically stalking her by being at her house, and then coming back again, which is a big no no and does not look good for him regardless.

You're assuming quite a bit there.

I could easily concoct a dozen or so realistic, believable, justifiable reasons both for him being there at 1:30 am as well as returning later that morning - simply involving a couple of text messages.

Of course, it's just as likely for that to NOT be the case but we, currently, have no evidence to indicate that the truth lies in either direction...

 

[92tide]

You're assuming quite a bit there.

I could easily concoct a dozen or so realistic, believable, justifiable reasons both for him being there at 1:30 am as well as returning later that morning - simply involving a couple of text messages.

Of course, it's just as likely for that to NOT be the case but we, currently, have no evidence to indicate that the truth lies in either direction...

i'm not assuming anything other than what we know from the reports. she had filed for divorce from him and they are separated, he was at her house waiting on her at 1:30 am and left in a rage, and then came back. that's pretty shady no matter how you look at it.

 

[uafan4life]

i'm not assuming anything other than what we know from the reports. she had filed for divorce from him and they are separated, he was at her house waiting on her at 1:30 am and left in a rage, and then came back. that's pretty shady no matter how you look at it.

Hypothetical Scenario:

At around midnight, Jay receives a text from Sara's phone asking him to come over and talk. In reality, it's one of her inebriated friends "playing a prank" on her soon-to-be ex-husband. He drives over, rings the bell, texts, and no answer but decides to wait a few minutes. After a period of time just long enough for him to get ****ed but before he decides to leave, he notices the new boyfriend's car. He loses his temper and recklessly backs out of the driveway and speeds off, not intending to hit anyone but just being reckless out of anger. After the police arrive, take statements, etc., a suggestion is made for her to ask Jay to come back to give a statement or whatever. She texts - or better yet, calls - Jay and makes the request, to which he agrees. He returns and is then arrested.

While he is still at fault for being reckless in this scenario, there's nothing inherently "shady" about his being at the house either time.

And while there is currently no evidence to suggest this scenario actually played out, there's also no evidence to indicate that it did not occur, much less could not have occurred.

You lack the context to logically determine that his actions were, in fact, "shady"...

...which means you are making assumptions...

 

[NoNC4Tubs]

Hypothetical Scenario:

At around midnight, Jay receives a text from Sara's phone asking him to come over and talk. In reality, it's one of her inebriated friends "playing a prank" on her soon-to-be ex-husband. He drives over, rings the bell, texts, and no answer but decides to wait a few minutes. After a period of time just long enough for him to get ****ed but before he decides to leave, he notices the new boyfriend's car. He loses his temper and recklessly backs out of the driveway and speeds off, not intending to hit anyone but just being reckless out of anger. After the police arrive, take statements, etc., a suggestion is made for her to ask Jay to come back to give a statement or whatever. She texts - or better yet, calls - Jay and makes the request, to which he agrees. He returns and is then arrested.

While he is still at fault for being reckless in this scenario, there's nothing inherently "shady" about his being at the house either time.

And while there is currently no evidence to suggest this scenario actually played out, there's also no evidence to indicate that it did not occur, much less could not have occurred.

You lack the context to logically determine that his actions were, in fact, "shady"...

...which means you are making assumptions...

Why don't we await for more information?

Please don't be offended as this is by no means a shot at you, but this kind of reminds me of when I read an awbern poster justifying $cam's theft of another student's laptop as a "misunderstanding"...

 

[uafan4life]

Why don't we await for more information?
...

Umm, that's exactly what I'm saying... ???

Right now, we don't know why he was there. He could have been lured there by a prank or even an intentional trap to make him look bad in the divorce. He also could have been there with a weapon contemplating something far worse.

At this point, drawing ANY conclusion constitutes making assumptions...

 

[crimsonaudio]

I, like probably everyone here, has left in a car completely peeved off.

Not weighing in on innocence / guilt, but he's not some hot-headed teen - he's almost 50.

Just saying...

 

[Evil Crimson Dragon]

At this point, Jay's best bet is to disappear from the public eye and keep his nose clean..............and stay away from the soon to be ex

 

[Probius]

Yeah, a barner acquaintance sent me this story as soon as it broke...

I didn't respond.

That's just low down and dirty. This reminds of attending the 2005 Iron Bowl and the Barners were yelling, "Be like Prothro! Break a leg!"

 

[selmaborntidefan]

Yeah, a barner acquaintance sent me this story as soon as it broke...

I didn't respond.

Anyone who employs Bruce Pearl and Cam Newton loses all right to ever complain about anyone else ever again.

 

[selmaborntidefan]

Hypothetical Scenario:

At around midnight, Jay receives a text from Sara's phone asking him to come over and talk. In reality, it's one of her inebriated friends "playing a prank" on her soon-to-be ex-husband. He drives over, rings the bell, texts, and no answer but decides to wait a few minutes. After a period of time just long enough for him to get ****ed but before he decides to leave, he notices the new boyfriend's car. He loses his temper and recklessly backs out of the driveway and speeds off, not intending to hit anyone but just being reckless out of anger. After the police arrive, take statements, etc., a suggestion is made for her to ask Jay to come back to give a statement or whatever. She texts - or better yet, calls - Jay and makes the request, to which he agrees. He returns and is then arrested.

While he is still at fault for being reckless in this scenario, there's nothing inherently "shady" about his being at the house either time.

And while there is currently no evidence to suggest this scenario actually played out, there's also no evidence to indicate that it did not occur, much less could not have occurred.

You lack the context to logically determine that his actions were, in fact, "shady"...

...which means you are making assumptions...

Where your scenario falls apart is the old rule about how nothing good happens after 11pm.

And per the story is was 130am.

(I don't disagree with you regarding "wait and see" but AT A MINIMUM even your scenario IN MY OPINION would constitute poor judgment on Barker's part).

 

[uafan4life]

Where your scenario falls apart is the old rule about how nothing good happens after 11pm.

And per the story is was 130am.

Tons of good things happen after 11:00 pm.

That's an absurd adage, not a rule.

(I don't disagree with you regarding "wait and see" but AT A MINIMUM even your scenario IN MY OPINION would constitute poor judgment on Barker's part).

It is most likely an example of poor judgment.

My point, however - which should be obvious given the comment(s) I have been referencing/quoting - is that we haven't even been proffered a reason from anyone involved as to why he was supposedly there in the first place, so any assumption on his intent, e.g., stalking, shady, etc., is wholly and merely that: a simple assumption...