I'm rusty in this area, but I thought if you could show it rose above simple negligence (e.g., gross negligence or intentional) there are exemptions that will get your case heard on the merits. I know that out here the University of California system settled with the UC-Davis students who were pepper-sprayed because they had such a strong case to get over the sovereign immunity hurdle, and I know you can't generally contract away gross negligence+ for obvious policy reasons.
I haven't caught up on all the posts since yesterday but thanks for this post, Belle. Like so many I also struggle trying to make any kind of sense of why kids who have reached a point where they have so much to lose would do such stupid things. I appreciate your experience and perspective. I agree that it seems there must be some kind of external or other factor that makes them feel that it's not only okay to do it but also to get caught and to admit to it.
Oh I agree with you. I have never see one ask for YO until after they were indicted anyway. You usually ask for it if you plan to eventually plea and want the juvenile protections and less harsh sentence.
He isn't a "repeat offender" in terms of how it effects sentencing--like 3 strikes or changing the level of the felony because he hasn't been adjudicated yet. Since these crimes happened back to back they will likely be treated as a single event as far a procedure goes. The Sunday night BP gun incident won't make the class B felonies turn into Class A's. Obviously he will have more punishment/jail time but all cases will most likely run concurrent so it won't really matter. If he ever gets in trouble again it will be bad news though because of the prior felonies he will have at that time.
California is an oasis (as usual) in getting sovereign immunity waived. AL is still where the common law was in the 1300s and they litigate SI to the bitter end - and have won. Here, gross negligence would not help at all. If gross negligence were exceeded, it wouldn't help, because the primary actor would be considered no longer an agent of the state. I look for the Bishop cases here to go nowhere. With the Garrett case in place and the Johnson case in place in the state, the Sup. Ct. AL. and the SCOTUS (particularly this one) are going to apply the same rules. Ergo - no possible liability for UA. Hoever, following normal protocol, the three felony perps are now barred from campus...
Isn't the unlicensed firearm charge just a misdemeanor? Given what I know, I'm really puzzled that the charge was so light. It would seem that he could have been charged with more (and still could). I'll bet that, if the TPD had known what he was going to do the next 24 hours, he would have been charged more heavily. You're the expert in this area, but it seems to be a real stretch to me to consider the threatened robbery at the service station and the assault the next day a single incident...
THREE PITT FOOTBALL PLAYERS Charged in ‘Knockout Game’ Beating
Three Pitt football players – Running back Raymond E. Graham, 22, of Elizabeth, N.J., wide receiver Devin C. Street, 21, of Bethlehem, Pa., and cornerback Lafayette E. Pitts, 20, of East Pittsburgh, Pa., – were accused of beating a white student while playing the“knockout game.” The three players will remain active members of Pitt’s football team, according to Pitt spokesman E.J. Borghetti.
Education News reported:Rules are: Find white guy, punch him in the face, knock him out
NBC Sports had it half right: When he is on the football field, Lafayette Pitts is one of the most dangerous men in America.
Off the field, he is accused of being even more menacing. Pitts and two teammates from the University of Pittsburgh football team stand accused of playing the Knockout Game.
The Knockout Game is just one form of the black mob violence and lawlessness documented in more than 80 cities with more than 400 examples in the book “White Girl Bleed a Lot: The return of racial violence and how the media ignore it.”
Rules of the Knockout Game are pretty simple: Find a white guy. Make sure he looks defenseless. Punch him in the face. If he doesn’t get up, you win. And that is what three witnesses said the Pitt players did just a few weeks ago.
Last Friday, it was revealed they were charged with assault and conspiracy. Their court date is set for January. But that did not stop them from suiting up the next day for a big game against Notre Dame.
Yes I think carrying an unlicensed firearm is a misdemeanor unless it's at a school or something. Could be wrong...
Yep - max fine of $500, max sentence six months in jail.
Don't need to lock. Just move to Non-Sports. We have thicker skin and ...
If I understand things correctly, since Williams was not holding the gun when he made the threat, and since he did not make an explicit threat, the most he could have been charged with would be something like menacing--which is just a misdemeanor, and he would have been out on bond just as fast.
No, it can't be locked just because it's unpleasant...
I was the one who said it was unpleasant, at least AFAIC. It's very active and dynamic and there's just no reason to lock it here. If we lock it here, believe me, the discussion over the matter will continue on other sites...
That, or somebody isn't going to wake back up one day and it turns into murder. If this nonsense continues it's not a matter of if, but when.
