J. Lattimer fully reinstated

[Tre4ISU]

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.

What a saint.

 

[Tre4ISU]

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.

This also speaks to my point that if what Latt did in Ames was anything serious at all, he would have been in much more legal trouble.

 

[ClimbIowa]

And the previous poster is right about what could have happened mattering. Hubbard got 4 years because of the gun his partner in crime carried. That penalty is stiff exactly because of what can happen.

 

[ClimbIowa]

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."

What a saint.

You're bad at arguing.

 

[ClimbIowa]

This also speaks to my point that if what Latt did in Ames was anything serious at all, he would have been in much more legal trouble.

Part of you problem stems from misunderstanding what constitutes assault in Iowa. You can beat some unconscious in Iowa without being guilty of assault. You can also not touch a person and be found guilty.

 

[tube1]

Exactly! The pitchfork crowd continues their perfect streak of always being wrong about the punishment players will receive. Coaches (and those of us who post on here who actually pay attention to past punishments instead of freaking out everytime someone gets in trouble) make the right call once again, and the whiny old church ladies are wrong as usual.

Unless its Ferentz right?

 

[tazclone]

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!

Just to get facts straight. Lattimer was not in a fight. Him and another football player beat the hell out of a kid because the kid was a "yell leader." The kid did nothing to deserve the beating and did not fight back. Lattimer **** pounded him breaking his jaw and putting him in the hospital because he was a "yell leader." Lattimer admitted to as much and felt remorse. That is much different than getting in a fight

 

[tazclone]

What a saint.

He's right. What Lattimer did in Hutchinson was disgusting.

 

[Tre4ISU]

And the previous poster is right about what could have happened mattering. Hubbard got 4 years because of the gun his partner in crime carried. That penalty is stiff exactly because of what can happen.

No, he got what he got because that is the penalty for armed robbery. He didn't get in trouble for anything but that. The armed robbery is what actually happened. That is not what could have happened.

 

[Tre4ISU]

Part of you problem stems from misunderstanding what constitutes assault in Iowa. You can beat some unconscious in Iowa without being guilty of assault. You can also not touch a person and be found guilty.

Oh, ok, well in Lattimers case that's irrelevant.

 

[CYVADER]

You're bad at arguing.

you're bad at choosing what message board to post on

 

[CyDude16]

Just to get facts straight. Lattimer was not in a fight. Him and another football player beat the hell out of a kid because the kid was a "yell leader." The kid did nothing to deserve the beating and did not fight back. Lattimer **** pounded him breaking his jaw and putting him in the hospital because he was a "yell leader." Lattimer admitted to as much and felt remorse. That is much different than getting in a fight

When did this happen at ISU? Exactly. Besides an interference with official acts charge and a seat belt violation he hasn't done anything. He expressed remorse for his actions at JUCO. Move the hell on.

 

[CyDude16]

And the previous poster is right about what could have happened mattering. Hubbard got 4 years because of the gun his partner in crime carried. That penalty is stiff exactly because of what can happen.

You play the hypothetical card, but ignore the facts.... Nice.

 

[ClimbIowa]

You play the hypothetical card, but ignore the facts.... Nice.

Hpyothetical question aren't some sort of gimmick and I accepted all the facts. Other than those mistakes, you made a fine rebuttal.

 

[josh777]

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:

That was my point, love the guy who comes into a thread and states, "I can't tell what happened but trust me..." Why even post?

 

[CyDude16]

That was my point, love the guy who comes into a thread and states, "I can't tell what happened but trust me..." Why even post?

Then if you really want to know, go to the story county court house and look at the police report?

It is really to hard to put 2+2 and if it would have been a bigger issue, the facts would have been released?

Some people these days.

 

[bigcyfan82]

That was my point, love the guy who comes into a thread and states, "I can't tell what happened but trust me..." Why even post?

Because I know what actually happened, perhaps?

 

[CyDude16]

Hpyothetical question aren't some sort of gimmick and I accepted all the facts. Other than those mistakes, you made a fine rebuttal.

Hypotheticals dont matter after the fact... do they?

 

[tazclone]

When did this happen at ISU? Exactly. Besides an interference with official acts charge and a seat belt violation he hasn't done anything. He expressed remorse for his actions at JUCO. Move the hell on.

I was just responding to a poster that claimed he got in a fight. That was it. It wasn't a fight. It was a senseless beating. I have no issue with what the punishment was and never have. Always stated it would depend on his probationary status from his previous run in with the law. If he finished his punishment then the past is the past.
So why don't you just relax and move the hell on.

 

[CyDude16]

I was just responding to a poster that claimed he got in a fight. That was it. It wasn't a fight. It was a senseless beating. U have no issue with what the punishment was and never have. Always stated it would depend on his probationary status from his previous run in with the law. If he finished his punishment then the past is the past.
So why don't you just relax and move the hell on.

Oh I am. No worries about that guy. Im glad he didnt get suspended.. And the coaching staff agrees.