Menu
What's new
By:
Filters
AllBuffs | Unofficial fan site for the University of Colorado at Boulder Athletics programs

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • Prime Time. Prime Time. Its a new era for Colorado football. Consider signing up for a club membership! For $20/year, you can get access to all the special features at Allbuffs, including club member only forums, dark mode, avatars and best of all no ads ! But seriously, please sign up so that we can pay the bills. No one earns money here, and we can use your $20 to keep this hellhole running. You can sign up for a club membership by navigating to your account in the upper right and clicking on "Account Upgrades". Make it happen!

Julmisse arrested Thursday, court appearance Friday - dismissed from the team

MtnBuff said:
Actually I have no problem if they have a strong bias in favor of the woman. My concern is if they have an unreasonable bias against the man because he is an athlete. In the past we have seen some decisions that at least had that look to them.
Click to expand...
Mtn, you are going back pretty far to find CU football players mistreated by either law enforcement or by campus admin.

My 2 kids were RAs at CU in dorms loaded with players. They were always treated fairly. In fact, a current starter could easily have been kicked out and a recent graduate as well. The admin works closely with the AD. Players will NOT be subject to a different standard than the rest of the student body. Period. And Mac goes well beyond what an ass clown like Butch Jones would to assure that this relationship stays intact.

Mac/Neuheisel/Barnett made and then kept a lot of enemies.
 
The other girl will be a key witness along with any other residents that witnessed the situation. The initial charges are there to hold him while the police and DA finish interviewing everyone and gather evidence. Maybe everyone should chill for a bit and let the process play out. The OEIC will conduct a separate investigation add will JA. He may be better off taking a red shirt year while this all plays out. I suspect it won't be a quick process.
 
buffaholic said:
Mtn, you are going back pretty far to find CU football players mistreated by either law enforcement or by campus admin.

My 2 kids were RAs at CU in dorms loaded with players. They were always treated fairly. In fact, a current starter could easily have been kicked out and a recent graduate as well. The admin works closely with the AD. Players will NOT be subject to a different standard than the rest of the student body. Period. And Mac goes well beyond what an ass clown like Butch Jones would to assure that this relationship stays intact.

Mac/Neuheisel/Barnett made and then kept a lot of enemies.
Click to expand...

This is good to hear because for a long time there was definitely a clear agenda against football players. Some recent cases like Tupou turned out to be reasonable, not what we wanted but reasonable.
 
Buffnik said:
I would if she had lost her **** and was trying to trespass somewhere or potentially assault someone. And she'd thank me for it after she calmed down.
Click to expand...

Would you apply this test to just your family? Or other women as well?

Be careful out there, Nilk.
 
hawg1 said:
Would you apply this test to just your family? Or other women as well?

Be careful out there, Nilk.
Click to expand...
Are we saying that you can't pull someone out of danger or prevent a crime or physical altercation these days by using physical means that don't actually hurt a person?
 
Buffnik said:
Are we saying that you can't pull someone out of danger or prevent a crime or physical altercation these days by using physical means that don't actually hurt a person?
Click to expand...

It depends on the circumstances. If they attack first, yes, your the means you suggest are warranted. If not, no, you are liable (as noted above).

I wonder what training CU players get on this kind of situation. I know they just met with Brenda Tracey as well as BPD.

To me, you.... 1) back away; 2) turn on your cellphone; and 3) call the police.
 
hawg1 said:
It depends on the circumstances. If they attack first, yes, your the means you suggest are warranted. If not, no, you are liable (as noted above).

I wonder what training CU players get on this kind of situation. I know they just met with Brenda Tracey as well as BPD.

To me, you.... 1) back away; 2) turn on your cellphone; and 3) call the police.
Click to expand...

Far and away the best response. Also very hard to do in the heat of the emotions for young people in who are learning how to deal with life on their own.
 
hawg1 said:
It depends on the circumstances. If they attack first, yes, your the means you suggest are warranted. If not, no, you are liable (as noted above).

I wonder what training CU players get on this kind of situation. I know they just met with Brenda Tracey as well as BPD.

To me, you.... 1) back away; 2) turn on your cellphone; and 3) call the police.
Click to expand...
So holding someone back from starting a fight is assault? Crazy world we live in these days.
 
NBDefektor said:
So AJ admits to grabbing the girl by the arm to escort her out. The woman says the same. So that's not in dispute.

Out here in CA, that's a battery. That's the letter of the law. So like it or not, if the definition of battery over in CO is the same as over here, he is guilty of domestic violence since they had a dating relationship at one point.

So while it's not exactly the crime of the century, he isn't "innocent" like I've read in a post of two on here. Quite the opposite, actually. And given the current culture at CU, that bodes extremely bad for AJ.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure that's battery. theres an intent element, usually.
 
hawg1 said:
I think it depends on intent which is hard to know. Others know better than me.
Click to expand...
Well, if you're a lot bigger and stronger than the person you led away from a situation and you don't hurt the other person... it's pretty clear to me that there was no intent.
 
Also, this gets me to a broader point: victimless crime. If there's no injury to person or property, you cannot say that a crime of assault or violence occurred. That's completely illogical.
 
I took Nik's side in this same argument last night with the wife. She felt strongly that if a guy puts his hands on her, it's DV. My point is that you got to have Violence to have Domestic Violence. I was unable to convince her, as usual.
 
buffaholic said:
I took Nik's side in this same argument last night with the wife. She felt strongly that if a guy puts his hands on her, it's DV. My point is that you got to have Violence to have Domestic Violence. I was unable to convince her, as usual.
Click to expand...
Ask her if it's domestic violence if a woman pokes her finger into the chest of her boyfriend/husband/ex or grabs his arm or pushes him? Whether she should go to jail for that?

I understand that there's a double standard and I accept that. If I said certain things to my wife and she slapped me in the face, I'd find it ridiculous to call the cops on her. But reverse that situation and I'd feel as though I was guilty of assault and so I would never do that.
 
DBT said:
And his current GF was in his apartment. There is a case for him trying to protect her. I think his concern that his former GF would go after his current GF is legit. Sounds like he was trying to diffuse the situation before it got out of hand. I hope he has an attorney at his hearing.
Click to expand...
Good point, but unless the threat of an assault was imminent, "Defense of Another" probably wouldn't be an available defense. "Choice of Evils" is another possible defense (I had to break the law and grab her to prevent the greater harm about to occur), but you can't have any options - like closing the door and calling the police. If he told her not to come back and she barged back in and threatened to break something, he could try "Defense of Property", but would have to say he didn't initially tell the cops that, because he didn't want to get her in trouble.

Every officer will tell you women are just as dangerous and have to be watched just as closely as men, in DV situations.This one clearly couldn't control her jealousy that night and had a real clear motive to make up parts of her story. When you are picking the jury, you make a repeat point, "obviously this is sexist, and men can just as bad - sex doesn't matter, but what does that saying, 'hell knows no fury, like a woman scorned' mean?", and you talk about what jealousy can do to people

I wish the kid well, he probably thought he was doing the right thing
 
I had a girlfriend in college hit me with a pretty solid right cross one night when we were at a party. It's fair to say I deserved it for my behavior at the party, but that's a different conversation. At the time, I saw stars, gathered myself, looked her in the eye and said "I'll let you have that one, but you ever hit me like that again, then you are no longer a lady. I will hit you back." She walked away.

I would probably have served jail time if I really had hit her back.
 
cu2x said:
Good point, but unless the threat of an assault was imminent, "Defense of Another" probably wouldn't be an available defense. "Choice of Evils" is another possible defense (I had to break the law and grab her to prevent the greater harm about to occur), but you can't have any options - like closing the door and calling the police. If he told her not to come back and she barged back in and threatened to break something, he could try "Defense of Property", but would have to say he didn't initially tell the cops that, because he didn't want to get her in trouble.

Every officer will tell you women are just as dangerous and have to be watched just as closely as men, in DV situations.This one clearly couldn't control her jealousy that night and had a real clear motive to make up parts of her story. When you are picking the jury, you make a repeat point, "obviously this is sexist, and men can just as bad - sex doesn't matter, but what does that saying, 'hell knows no fury, like a woman scorned' mean?", and you talk about what jealousy can do to people

I wish the kid well, he probably thought he was doing the right thing
Click to expand...
I'll be shocked and dismayed if this ever goes to a trial. Haha.
 
Buffnik said:
Ask her if it's domestic violence if a woman pokes her finger into the chest of her boyfriend/husband/ex or grabs his arm or pushes him? Whether she should go to jail for that?

I understand that there's a double standard and I accept that. If I said certain things to my wife and she slapped me in the face, I'd find it ridiculous to call the cops on her. But reverse that situation and I'd feel as though I was guilty of assault and so I would never do that.
Click to expand...

Having met both you and your wife, I'm pretty sure you would never do that anyway...without having to think about the legal ramifications beforehand.
 
My ex called the police drunk one night, accusing me of domestic violence. Had my left eye not been swollen shut and 5 discernable bite marks not been on my body, I would have been taken to jail in spite of the fact that all I had done was cover up as best I could. For good or bad, the male is generally guilty until proven innocent.




.
 
Last edited:
bombay said:
My ex called the police drunk one night, accusing me of domestic violence. Had my left eye not been swollen shut and 5 discernable bite marks not been on my body, I would have been taken to jail in spite of the fact that all I had done was cover up as best I could. For good or bad, the male is generally guilty until proven innocent.




.
Click to expand...
Damn man, haven't heard one like that.
 
cu2x said:
Good point, but unless the threat of an assault was imminent, "Defense of Another" probably wouldn't be an available defense. "Choice of Evils" is another possible defense (I had to break the law and grab her to prevent the greater harm about to occur), but you can't have any options - like closing the door and calling the police. If he told her not to come back and she barged back in and threatened to break something, he could try "Defense of Property", but would have to say he didn't initially tell the cops that, because he didn't want to get her in trouble.

Every officer will tell you women are just as dangerous and have to be watched just as closely as men, in DV situations.This one clearly couldn't control her jealousy that night and had a real clear motive to make up parts of her story. When you are picking the jury, you make a repeat point, "obviously this is sexist, and men can just as bad - sex doesn't matter, but what does that saying, 'hell knows no fury, like a woman scorned' mean?", and you talk about what jealousy can do to people

I wish the kid well, he probably thought he was doing the right thing
Click to expand...
Thanks. Good post.
 
bombay said:
My ex called the police drunk one night, accusing me of domestic violence. Had my left eye not been swollen shut and 5 discernable bite marks not been on my body, I would have been taken to jail in spite of the fact that all I had done was cover up as best I could. For good or bad, the male is generally guilty until proven innocent.

Amen to that. Glad you didn't get in trouble for your own sake.



.
Click to expand...

BuffLuKe said:
Damn man, haven't heard one like that.
Click to expand...

What do you mean? I posted almost exactly the same thing haha. He got lucky the cop wasn't an idiot.
 
Here's an example of what a Title IX office can do in today's climate. USC kicker Matt Boermeester, who made the game winning field goal in the Rose Bowl, is no longer on the football team or enrolled in school because of an incident where he and his girlfriend were "playing around." This is a prime example of why men on campus, especially athletes, should never put themselves in a position where your fate lies in the hands of a disciplinary board. I can't imagine how upset Boermeester and Katz must be.

http://www.ocregister.com/2017/07/3...-school-after-title-ix-investigation-finding/
 
SerenityBuff said:
Here's an example of what a Title IX office can do in today's climate. USC kicker Matt Boermeester, who made the game winning field goal in the Rose Bowl, is no longer on the football team or enrolled in school because of an incident where he and his girlfriend were "playing around." This is a prime example of why men on campus, especially athletes, should never put themselves in a position where your fate lies in the hands of a disciplinary board. I can't imagine how upset Boermeester and Katz must be.

http://www.ocregister.com/2017/07/3...-school-after-title-ix-investigation-finding/
Click to expand...
Unbelievable.

Have we lost all sense?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top