J. Lattimer fully reinstated

ClimbIowa

Member
Aug 14, 2008
580
11
18
Anthony Hubbard... That is all. :spinny:

Cyclone fans would be applauding Fran if his convicted felon was put back on the team (assuming Latt and Hubbard switched places for this criminal activity) with no meaningful, institutional punishment. At least we can all agree on that.
 

rholtgraves

Well-Known Member
Sep 25, 2009
11,201
6,751
113
Cyclone fans would be applauding Fran if his convicted felon was put back on the team (assuming Latt and Hubbard switched places for this criminal activity) with no meaningful, institutional punishment. At least we can all agree on that.

Am I missing something? I didn't know Hubbard was kicked off of Iowa for getting arrested.
 

CyDude16

Well-Known Member
Oct 2, 2008
22,486
11,753
113
Heads in the sky
Cyclone fans would be applauding Fran if his convicted felon was put back on the team (assuming Latt and Hubbard switched places for this criminal activity) with no meaningful, institutional punishment. At least we can all agree on that.

Because you know armed robbery on a 70 year old is on the same level of a fight that ended up getting a felonious assault charge against another college student, and getting a interference with official acts charge a few years later. Just when I thought I could hear it all!
 

Max57

Well-Known Member
Dec 18, 2008
1,082
266
83
Somewhere on Hwy 30
I just hope Lattimer can get by someone on 9/10 and get a hit on Vandenberg. Then there will be serious wringing of hands and knashing of teeth. Who cares what posters from somewhere else think now?
 

bigcyfan82

Active Member
Aug 30, 2008
970
31
28
Des Moines
So what did happen? Why on Earth could you not tell the actual story if you witnessed it? That is, if you did witness it.

It's not my place to say. I respect Latt (and dont want him to kick my ***). But believe me, it wasn't as serious as everyone thinks. It will probably never come out...so i guess you will never know :twitcy:
 

Tre4ISU

Well-Known Member
SuperFanatic
SuperFanatic T2
Dec 30, 2008
28,201
9,319
113
Estherville
Point 1 - I'll agree with that one. That was a major f up on his part. Whatever, it happened, it was a single time thing.

Point 2 - if he did indeed interfere or influence an investigation, why wasn't he charged with something? How come the prosecution, or the state, or the investigators, go after him or the ones involved? You're reaching here, and you know it. You want to let the legal system run its course when it comes to ISU athletics, or when it proves something nasty is going on in Iowa's, but when it doesn't, you claim to know something that you really don't. The fact that nobody but a few ISU fans made a big deal about KF's involvement in the rape fiasco means one thing - his involvment was limited, and he cooperated to the extent he could.

Point 3 - if Doyle is so incompetent, why have the players not filed lawsuits against him? Again, see point 2. You're making assumptions about a situation you again know nothing about. If he was indeed incompetent, he'd be gone, and he'd be facing charges of some sort. Instead, not one of those 13 players have left the team, all have returned to full health, and none have had any complaints with him.

Wrong. Willie Lowe left.
 

Tre4ISU

Well-Known Member
SuperFanatic
SuperFanatic T2
Dec 30, 2008
28,201
9,319
113
Estherville
It's not my place to say. I respect Latt (and dont want him to kick my ***). But believe me, it wasn't as serious as everyone thinks. It will probably never come out...so i guess you will never know :twitcy:

I guess I don't really care if we know and you may have a perfectly good explanation for not telling the real story, but I don't understand why you wouldn't have told the real story when all the rumors were running rampant. If it was less serious than the rumors, then I would have thought Lattimer would have wanted the true story out.
 

bigcyfan82

Active Member
Aug 30, 2008
970
31
28
Des Moines
I guess I don't really care if we know and you may have a perfectly good explanation for not telling the real story, but I don't understand why you wouldn't have told the real story when all the rumors were running rampant. If it was less serious than the rumors, then I would have thought Lattimer would have wanted the true story out.

ive been telling people to relax and that it wasn't as big of a deal as it sounded the whole time! and as for your last point...i don't really know...Latt doesn't really give a **** about that kind of stuff. He just wants to play football and crush some skulls!
 

ClimbIowa

Member
Aug 14, 2008
580
11
18
Because you know armed robbery on a 70 year old is on the same level of a fight that ended up getting a felonious assault charge against another college student, and getting a interference with official acts charge a few years later. Just when I thought I could hear it all!

Absolutely. You're simply not giving credit to Lattimer for intentional acts that could easily have killed the victim and did result in serious injury.
 

jbhtexas

Well-Known Member
Oct 20, 2006
14,321
4,370
113
Arlington, TX
I guess I don't really care if we know and you may have a perfectly good explanation for not telling the real story, but I don't understand why you wouldn't have told the real story when all the rumors were running rampant. If it was less serious than the rumors, then I would have thought Lattimer would have wanted the true story out.

Aren't these proceedings part of the public record? If somebody really wanted to know, couldn't they make a records request or go over to the courthouse and look it up? Or are the details of the plea bargaining and dismissal of charges not public?
 
  • Like
Reactions: CyDude16

Tre4ISU

Well-Known Member
SuperFanatic
SuperFanatic T2
Dec 30, 2008
28,201
9,319
113
Estherville
Cyclone fans would be applauding Fran if his convicted felon was put back on the team (assuming Latt and Hubbard switched places for this criminal activity) with no meaningful, institutional punishment. At least we can all agree on that.

Lat didn't spend 4 years in prison. Not even close to a good comparison, not to mention stupid in general.
 

Tre4ISU

Well-Known Member
SuperFanatic
SuperFanatic T2
Dec 30, 2008
28,201
9,319
113
Estherville
Absolutely. You're simply not giving credit to Lattimer for intentional acts that could easily have killed the victim and did result in serious injury.

I intentionally punched someone in the face once. If I would have hit them just right, they could have died. Should I be in prison? Point is, it's not about what could have happened. It never is. It's about what did happen. I don't think it's an extremely close comparison but maybe this should be compared more to the Clayborn incident rather than any other one. Of course, maybe not though because Clayborn was "provoked."
 

Tre4ISU

Well-Known Member
SuperFanatic
SuperFanatic T2
Dec 30, 2008
28,201
9,319
113
Estherville
Aren't these proceedings part of the public record? If somebody really wanted to know, couldn't they make a records request or go over to the courthouse and look it up? Or are the details of the plea bargaining and dismissal of charges not public?

Don't really know, don't really care. I was just saying if I was Lattimer, when the rumors were running around, I would have no problem with the real story being shared. I do understand not wanting it to be dragged out again.
 

jbhtexas

Well-Known Member
Oct 20, 2006
14,321
4,370
113
Arlington, TX
I intentionally punched someone in the face once. If I would have hit them just right, they could have died. Should I be in prison? Point is, it's not about what could have happened. It never is. It's about what did happen.

Interesting, but I disagree. If you shoot somebody and they don't die, you won't be charged with murder, but you can be charged with attempted murder, and be sent to prison. In some cases (like murder, rape, fraud, bribery just to name a few), what could have happened is deemed to be serious enough that even attempting it is a crime.

If what could have happened didn't matter, nobody would ever be charged for attempted <insert crime here>, and they'd only be charged for actually doing the crime.
 
Last edited:

Tre4ISU

Well-Known Member
SuperFanatic
SuperFanatic T2
Dec 30, 2008
28,201
9,319
113
Estherville
Interesting, but I disagree. If you shoot somebody and they don't die, you won't be charged with murder, but you can be charged with attempted murder, and be sent to prison. In some cases (like murder, rape, fraud, bribery just to name a few), what could have happened is deemed to be serious enough that even attempting it is a crime.

If what could have happened didn't matter, nobody would ever be charged for attempted <insert crime here>, and they'd only be charged for actually doing the crime.

I agree and my example was very simple, but attempted murder and murder 1 are two way different penalties. That's what I'm saying.
 

ClimbIowa

Member
Aug 14, 2008
580
11
18
I intentionally punched someone in the face once. If I would have hit them just right, they could have died. Should I be in prison? Point is, it's not about what could have happened. It never is. It's about what did happen. I don't think it's an extremely close comparison but maybe this should be compared more to the Clayborn incident rather than any other one. Of course, maybe not though because Clayborn was "provoked."

That's a terrible argument. What actually happened was a felony because it involved a serious bodily injury. You don't get to pretend that felony assault is anything close to misdemeanor assault because it's not. Hubbard got a stiffer sentence because firearms require it. Lattimer got a felony because he put his victim in the hospital with a host of injuries that were individually enough for a felony charge. Clayborn could have been charged with a felony, but he stopped after injuring the victim. Lattimer decided he should body slam the guy a few times after knocking him out. Not quite the same thing.