CSNbbs

Dubose bound over to the grand jury.

What did I tell you, folks?

Time and again I have seen a possession of drug paraphernalia charge tacked on to everybody in a house. Why not squeeze them and see what comes out?

But then when push comes to shove - you can't really prove that the stuff had anything to do with most of those people.

Oh well, no harm done. The system worked, right? No hard feelings, kid. You can go on with your life now.

Right.

(02-14-2013 11:25 PM)swvabucsfan Wrote: [ -> ]What did I tell you, folks?

Time and again I have seen a possession of drug paraphernalia charge tacked on to everybody in a house. Why not squeeze them and see what comes out?

But then when push comes to shove - you can't really prove that the stuff had anything to do with most of those people.

Oh well, no harm done. The system worked, right? No hard feelings, kid. You can go on with your life now.

Right.

Of course you are correct. It's a very sad state of affairs. Over-zealous prosecutors have been with us since the beginning of human laws, I guess, but it seems in the last 20 years or so, they've really gotten out of hand. They love to pose with their "team" in front of the cameras, and brag on their hard work and so forth and so on. And there's very little a defendant can do about it - except if it's especially egregious, with a good attorney, sue for false arrest. I think most of us who knew these details strongly suspected Cooley would have his charges dropped. That being said, he also was apparently receiving such packages. But for all we know, they could have been neckties. Yeah, I know - where there's smoke there's often fire. But there's a much higher bar for proof beyond a reasonable doubt.

[disclaimer: I'm not disparaging the hard work and high ethics of most law enforcement officers; however, this "posturing" and grandstanding isn't good for the profession, imo.]

Of course this happens after their basketball careers were terminated.

If this was Cooley's first implication in crime, I think reinstating him on the team would be acceptable. But it's not. Guilty or innocent this second time, there went his second chance. As for Dubose, even with charges dropped the seriousness is such that he does not belong on the team. Both students withdrew from the uni at their own choice, whatever pressure there may have been. They punished themselves, which suggests some guilt.

Yeah poor Cooley, he gets paired up with the drug dealer on the team last year and innoncently makes a false claim to the police. But hey thats okay come on back you have learned the your lesson. But oh no, he got stuck in the same room with the team OTHER drug dealer, what are the chances? I am sure poor Sheldon is just totally innoncent and claiming all that cash that was a stolen was just a huge mistake.

As for the posturing, it not grandstanding, you charge everybody with everything you can possiblly charge them with, it gives you more leverage when you are trying to make deals. In the end Cooley probably just wasn't worth it, but if they had wanted to take a hard line I am sure they could have got charges brought and probably had him pled out.

(02-15-2013 11:18 AM)RodShaw2 Wrote: [ -> ]As for the posturing, it not grandstanding, you charge everybody with everything you can possiblly charge them with, it gives you more leverage when you are trying to make deals.

This is the way that it is. However, this is wrong and just flat out immoral.
I'm not AT ALL claiming Cooley was innocent - only commenting on the propensity of prosecutors to scare defendants in this manner. Truly, in general, that attitude makes me sick. It's really both: a) trying to try cases in the court of public opinion; and b) libelous.

(02-15-2013 11:29 AM)posterformerlyknownasthedoctor Wrote: [ -> ]

(02-15-2013 11:18 AM)RodShaw2 Wrote: [ -> ]As for the posturing, it not grandstanding, you charge everybody with everything you can possiblly charge them with, it gives you more leverage when you are trying to make deals.

This is the way that it is. However, this is wrong and just flat out immoral.
I'm not AT ALL claiming Cooley was innocent - only commenting on the propensity of prosecutors to scare defendants in this manner. Truly, in general, that attitude makes me sick. It's really both: a) trying to try cases in the court of public opinion; and b) libelous.

a) this is the fist mention of the case in the press since the week they were arrested that is hardly trying the case in public.
b) Not libelous see privlege for police/DA and for the press qualified privilege

This is the justice system at work. We have checks and balances, which worked in this case. It will probably in the end work to the benefit of Dubose also.

(02-15-2013 11:45 AM)etsubuc Wrote: [ -> ]This is the justice system at work. We have checks and balances, which worked in this case. It will probably in the end work to the benefit of Dubose also.

I am sure they are working hard on Dubose to find out where those packages were going and who was on the other end. Dubose is small fish
they are going to try and use him to climb the chain, I am sure he will be served up a nice deal if he helps them.

He should've learned his lesson in February. He may not have been involved, but he knew what was going on in that house. If he can get a waiver, maybe they look at giving him one last shot, but two instances he's been around shenanigans that have left black eyes on the program. If he's wrong place at the wrong time twice, I don't really want him around anyway because that tells me he's incredibly unlucky or incredibly stupid.

(02-15-2013 11:42 AM)RodShaw2 Wrote: [ -> ]

(02-15-2013 11:29 AM)posterformerlyknownasthedoctor Wrote: [ -> ]

(02-15-2013 11:18 AM)RodShaw2 Wrote: [ -> ]As for the posturing, it not grandstanding, you charge everybody with everything you can possiblly charge them with, it gives you more leverage when you are trying to make deals.

This is the way that it is. However, this is wrong and just flat out immoral.
I'm not AT ALL claiming Cooley was innocent - only commenting on the propensity of prosecutors to scare defendants in this manner. Truly, in general, that attitude makes me sick. It's really both: a) trying to try cases in the court of public opinion; and b) libelous.

a) this is the fist mention of the case in the press since the week they were arrested that is hardly trying the case in public.
b) Not libelous see privlege for police/DA and for the press qualified privilege

All it takes is one mention and/or one charge. Many, many, people, despite our Constitution, jump to conclusions about guilt or innocence right away. (All one has to do is to read the comments section of the JC Press online version to see this in spades.)
Prosecutors KNOW that if they file certain charges, that those charges will be stuck in the minds of potential jurors, perhaps even subconsciously. It's a psychological ploy on at least two levels. This is the status quo - but it shouldn't be.

(02-15-2013 12:15 PM)Buccaneerlover Wrote: [ -> ]He should've learned his lesson in February. He may not have been involved, but he knew what was going on in that house. If he can get a waiver, maybe they look at giving him one last shot, but two instances he's been around shenanigans that have left black eyes on the program. If he's wrong place at the wrong time twice, I don't really want him around anyway because that tells me he's incredibly unlucky or incredibly stupid.

Even if it was bad luck that doesn't explain away his claim that he had money stolen during that robbery. Nothing can explain that away.

(02-15-2013 12:29 PM)RodShaw2 Wrote: [ -> ]

(02-15-2013 12:15 PM)Buccaneerlover Wrote: [ -> ]He should've learned his lesson in February. He may not have been involved, but he knew what was going on in that house. If he can get a waiver, maybe they look at giving him one last shot, but two instances he's been around shenanigans that have left black eyes on the program. If he's wrong place at the wrong time twice, I don't really want him around anyway because that tells me he's incredibly unlucky or incredibly stupid.

Even if it was bad luck that doesn't explain away his claim that he had money stolen during that robbery. Nothing can explain that away.

Agreed. I'm sure he likely saw his words as the least of several evils, but that doesn't excuse lying.

(02-15-2013 01:12 PM)posterformerlyknownasthedoctor Wrote: [ -> ]

(02-15-2013 12:29 PM)RodShaw2 Wrote: [ -> ]

(02-15-2013 12:15 PM)Buccaneerlover Wrote: [ -> ]He should've learned his lesson in February. He may not have been involved, but he knew what was going on in that house. If he can get a waiver, maybe they look at giving him one last shot, but two instances he's been around shenanigans that have left black eyes on the program. If he's wrong place at the wrong time twice, I don't really want him around anyway because that tells me he's incredibly unlucky or incredibly stupid.

Even if it was bad luck that doesn't explain away his claim that he had money stolen during that robbery. Nothing can explain that away.

Agreed. I'm sure he likely saw his words as the least of several evils, but that doesn't excuse lying.

What were the greater evils? If you or your roommate gets drug money stolen in an armed robbery, you don't say anything about it to the police. The police would have never known about the money without him speaking up. There was nothing to gain by it, it is not like the police refund people stolen money.

My guess is themoney was stolen but since they didn't have any proof they had the money or a reason why they had that much money the smart thing to do would have been to just keep quiet.

(02-15-2013 12:15 PM)Buccaneerlover Wrote: [ -> ]He should've learned his lesson in February. He may not have been involved, but he knew what was going on in that house. If he can get a waiver, maybe they look at giving him one last shot, but two instances he's been around shenanigans that have left black eyes on the program. If he's wrong place at the wrong time twice, I don't really want him around anyway because that tells me he's incredibly unlucky or incredibly stupid.

Correct.. he let his team down last year when he filed a false police report.. I felt for our guys when they fought so hard in the conference tourney and came within 6 points or so of beating Belmont without him... At that time I wished Cooley was there and hoped he would come back for his senior year.. I thought he was ready to have a big year.. but now I see it would have been better if they had not given him a second chance.. but he had a second chance and hurt this young team even more that the veteran team of last year.. I agree with Bartow's comments last night.. I wish him well but he is no longer part of our team. Maybe he has learned a life lesson from all this..

I seriously think Cooley has been J.C. Ward/Dubose's patsy,or maybe they threatened him,his family,friends,and other people in his life.(Drug dealers,hitmen,and other dangerous people.)

(02-15-2013 01:31 PM)RodShaw2 Wrote: [ -> ]

(02-15-2013 01:12 PM)posterformerlyknownasthedoctor Wrote: [ -> ]

(02-15-2013 12:29 PM)RodShaw2 Wrote: [ -> ]Even if it was bad luck that doesn't explain away his claim that he had money stolen during that robbery. Nothing can explain that away.

Agreed. I'm sure he likely saw his words as the least of several evils, but that doesn't excuse lying.

What were the greater evils? If you or your roommate gets drug money stolen in an armed robbery, you don't say anything about it to the police. The police would have never known about the money without him speaking up. There was nothing to gain by it, it is not like the police refund people stolen money.

My guess is themoney was stolen but since they didn't have any proof they had the money or a reason why they had that much money the smart thing to do would have been to just keep quiet.

As I see it (not knowing the full truth) the greater evils (*in his mind*) were:

1. Telling the partial truth, which would have been bad for him, *if* he was involved.
2. Telling the *full* truth, which would not only have been bad for him, but for Ward (I assume), and maybe even for Dubose.
3. Telling the *full* truth, and then cooperating with the authorities, which would have resulted in #2 above, and then perhaps put his own safety, and/or those others involved, at risk.

All those options are assuming he talked at all. I agree that it would have been better if he had not said anything. But....the fact the he did meant either he was stupid, or covering for others, or truly didn't know what had happened. The truth could have been any of those, or perhaps even a combination of 2 or 3 of those.

(Had not seen the post immediately above mine when I posted.)

It is immoral and unethical to charge a case that you cannot prove in order to coerce a guilty plea to lesser charges or in the hope that something will turn up. Most folks however will cheer on a prosecutor who does this to “THEM”. Heck the prosecutor does this on “Law & Order” all the time to get those bad guys. But people will do a complete 180 and start screaming about “government tyranny” when someone does it to “US”, or our sons or our daughters. In the real world, the difference between "THEM" and "US" is pretty hard to spot. It is ancient wisdom that we shouldn't treat "THEM" differently than we would want "US" to be treated.

I am not saying that anything improper was done here. I have no knowledge of the details of Cooley’s case. I am only noting, as I did when the charges were first announced, that possession of drug paraphernalia charges get made frequently, but are proven far less often.

At a minimum, Cooley’s recklessness and stupidity are pretty evident here.

But he is also a hardworking young man, with a talent for basketball who developed his basketball skills well. He was near the top of the D1 stats in steals, could slash to the hoop and was developing an effective perimeter shot. He always seemed to give it 100% on the floor. I hope that he gets the chance to continue to develop those skills.

It would probably be best for all concerned, Sheldon included, if he developed them somewhere other than ETSU.