tvc184

She should have been criminally charged in the same incident.

The Nederland schedule shows a scrimmage tomorrow with HF at home for 5:00/6:15. Is 5:00 the JV scrimmage?

The case I mentioned with all the media was from some kind of tip or clue. In this area alone there might be miles of waterways to search and it could turn up nothing. In the cases like in PA where the two cars were found with bodies, there will likely be no criminal charges so potentially hundreds of thousands of dollars (if not into millions) would be spent to only “possibly” (assuming any results) buy some closure for a family. I am not minimizing that relief it would be. I wish there was a cost effective way to start systematically clearing areas. Maybe have a regional team like Jefferson, Hardin and Orange Counties with the many cities all putting in money and get some task force to start searching. It could be a location a day. I mean having a dedicated team trained in the technology and purchase of the equipment. Heck, there is probably grant money. The biggest problem would be finding someone to get the ball rolling with the research into the cost of the equipment, training, number of personnel needed, etc.

About 15 years ago Texas Equusearch (I think) was searching the canal along Hwy 82 for a specific vehicle and I think they found others but not the one they were looking for. For some reason there was a lot of news media out there but I don’t remember the case. I remember the search because I stopped there briefly to watch the show and ended up talking to the media (in what I thought was a casual conversation). Unfortunately they used me for a spokesman and quoted me in the newspaper after I answered a typically stupid media question with an intentionally stupid answer. That was a lesson learned. You are never off the record with the media. I remember several other cases where vehicles were found immediately that were submerged because someone witnessed the accident (or intentional act like a person getting rid of a stolen vehicle or trying to collect insurance money) or came upon the scene at night and saw the lights/taillights glowing under water before the battery went out. Any of those would have been missing had it not been for witnesses. It would be safe to say that hundreds (if not thousands) of missing vehicles and people could be found nationwide if waterways were searched. How much resources are going to be spent and who is going to spend it? Also, it would not take dive teams to do an extremely time consuming and labor intensive job. There is plenty of underwater drones with search capable sonar and cameras. I have seen one locally owned by a private company and it has been hired locally by agencies for specific tasks. I think that I have photos of it on my phone. Again however, who is going to pay? I think a good unit might run into hundreds of thousands of dollars.

My team came out on top but it was a back and forth thriller. It was one of those games as they say, it was a shame that one team had to lose.

Don’t confuse a majority Black campus by population with a historically Black school. For a history lesson, it goes back to a Supreme Court ruling 130 years ago in Plessy v. Ferguson. In that ruling the Supreme Court said that concept of “separate but equal” was not in itself discrimination and so state mandated segregation of the races was not unconstitutional under the 14th Amendment. (passed in 1868, right after the Civil War) So some states allowed or mandated separate schools for Blacks. Those separate schools were because Blacks weren’t allowed in other schools. That was the legality of the then historical Black schools. My mother graduated from Beaumont High School which was a (one of the) White campus in BISD and it later merged with Charlton-Pollard also of BISD, the historical Black school for that district. That created BCP. BCP then later combined with the other BISD high school, French, to form Central. (French was for a short time in FISD) So what was eventually Central high school was the combination of the two White high schools of BISD and the Black high school. So French ISD was taken into Beaumont ISD which was later taken into South Park ISD to form today’s BISD which started as 3 different districts. I believe that is the meaning of a historical Black school. It was a school created by forced segregation. That was overturned 62 years later by the Supreme Court case of Brown v. Board of Education, although I think it took the Civil Rights of 1964 to start enforcing it.

Maybe I am missing the question. Is the OP talking about a traditional home stadium that happens to be away from the high school campus or a borrowed stadium? After Hurricane Rita, Mid-County Madness was held in Pasadena. No, it didn’t feel like being in Bulldog Stadium. By the way, that was a game for the ages. A 5 minutes bus ride from the current campus to the stadium does.

What is a historical Black high school in reference to this thread? In my opinion those were high schools for Black students because they were not allowed in White schools. I believe that most or probably all of them for sports played in the Prairie View Interscholastic League because like the high schools, Black high schools were not allowed in the current UIL. These schools no longer exist and any reference to them as a throw-back honor would truly be for a “former” historical Black high school. In Jefferson County I can think of three school districts with historical Black high schools but maybe there were others. Those were PAISD Lincoln, BISD Charlton Pollard (not to be confused with BCP) and SPISD Hebert. Hebert Panthers (Blue/Gold?) Charlton-Pollard Bulldogs (Blue/White?) Lincoln Bumblebees (Purple/Gold) Any others?

That was not a historical Black high school.

….. which is all explained in the song, Third Rock From The Sun.

That was certainly possible but…… We will never know the “what if” answer? Would Neumann have applied a year earlier? Did he think it was time in his career? Even if so, would other candidates have applied year earlier that would have been more attractive? Was the school board the same? I think it was an old Japanese proverb, “When a butterfly flaps it wings….”.

I believe the human body builds tolerances to almost everything. EDIT: tpyo bills to builds. Voice recognition almost got it….

The super secret but apparently everyone knows about it missile was probably inspired by a bow hunter. [Hidden Content]

Yep, I think that is what I said and understood in the sections that I listened to. And the no playoffs, if I heard correctly, is not a penalty but a rule (like I think you said earlier). A school can’t make the playoffs in a lower classification and for this year, they are stuck in that lower classification because it was too late (like you said earlier). I was reading another sports forum where a few people were angry with the UIL, it was some underhanded dealings toward Alto, they were cheating the kids and blah blah. I don’t think so. It was unfortunate but the UIL didn’t do anything wrong toward Alto.

Timing!! If Nederland wouldn’t have held onto August for another year, they would likely have never interviewed a coach name Larry Neumann. I think it worked out in the long run…..

That is what I kind of understood and it was brought up in part of the hearing that I listened to. The UIL in the hearing said that the coaches knew back in December what district they would be in. I didn’t listen to the entire hearing but I am reasonably certain that the UIL committee didn’t get the case until early August or over 7 months after the mistake was made Also from what I understood, the UIL didn’t punish Alto except to put them on (I think) 3 years of probation. The chairman said in the meeting, probation is pretty much, we will have our eye on you for 3 years to make sure this doesn’t happen again. Alto was caught up in a severely limited time frame leaving almost no option for this year. I didn’t hear where Alto was accused of intentionally falsifying the numbers. In fact if that could be proven, it is likely a felony. The UIL drew an attendance line for divisions and Alto by their own mistake fell on the wrong side of the line. Someone needs to listen to the entire 70 minute hearing and report back….. 😀

If anyone wishes to listen to the one hour and 10 minutes meeting, this is it. You can drag it down to about the 18 minutes remaining point and get the rules discussion and results and see if I understood it correctly. [Hidden Content]

I listened to most of the UIL meeting online. This if what I got from the meeting and action. 1. Alto was represented and under oath admitted the violation whether intentional or accident. It happened. 2. The UIL did not ban nor take a vote ban Alto. The ban is an automatic rules violation and UIL rules are that a school is not eligible for post season or honors if placed in a lower division by falsifying the numbers (again, intentional or otherwise). 3. Alto suggested simply changing to the correct 2A Div 1 where they were supposed to be. THAT is what seems like the main discussion focused on after the investigation phase. Okay, they messed up but do you punish the students? What is the relief? 4. The UIL committee voted unanimously that there simply was no time. If I understood what was being said in the meeting, the UIL committee had no authority to change the realignment. Alto could technically change districts however scrimmages start this coming Friday (realistically with no effect on the district) but the regular season in a couple of weeks. There is no time for two districts to throw out there schedules and start over. The false numbers were reported this month so the UIL was up against a severe time constraint. Basically it was, sorry Alto but this was turned in to late to correct. 5. Alto is not banned from post season next year but by the same rule, Alto is not allowed to compete in the lower division. You can’t have a 2A Div 1 school potentially winning the 2A Div 2 district they are currently in or even state championship. Can we imagine… The new 2A Div 2 state champion is, 2A Div 1 Alto!!! 🤣 6. Alto will be allowed to compete in 2A Div 1 next year however…… Alto has to find any district in their region that will accept them. If they do, then each member school from the district committees in BOTH districts must unanimously accept releasing Alto from their current district and being accepted into the new district. So any school from either district has essentially veto power and again, this was not a vote but a UIL rule. We know locally those district committees have life and death authority over rules violations locally. Was it Nederland a few years ago who had to forfeit a district game because of an ineligible transfer player and it took them out of the playoffs? If I remember correctly, paperwork for the transfer was submitted and like Alto, intentional or not, the district committee gets to make the call. They voted for the forfeiture. To make it short, the UIL did not vote to ban Alto, UIL rules did that automatically. You can’t play and qualify in a lower division due to the mistake. Alto has the option of correcting it next year but they have to find a district to accept them and then both districts will have to unanimously accept the change.

In a case like Kansas, I think it’s just the opposite. I read a couple of news articles and I’m not sure exactly what the outcome/vote means, but votes like this could be hugely detrimental to the Democrats.

With extremely restricted demographics….

I am not sure who isn’t ready for that conversation but….. In reference to an officer being injured, it is not a special set aside for just police officers. It also involves EMT and firefighters. That additional penalty is because they have to be out there at all times a day or night and take the additional risk. When these cases come up, people often cite police this or police that. No special blah blah blah. That is okay but maybe what most people do not realize is that almost everyone can be covered by the same laws according to the circumstances. When it happens to a member of their family then all of a sudden the law makes sense and people often want it prosecutor “to the extent of the law” and I am not talking about police families. If somebody says something like, I’m going to kick your butt, it is a Class C Assault. It is roughly the equivalent of a traffic citation and no jail time can be assessed and it has a maximum of a $500 fine. If you say those exact same words to a person who “might” testify in let’s say in a traffic citation case (the witness saw a vehicle accident), that barely a crime threat just got bumped to a third degree felony and up to 10 years in prison. Let’s see, a $500 fine or 10 years because a person might have witnessed a traffic accident? Let’s say we have the same class C threat, I am going to kick your butt..… but you yell it at a referee at a high school football game. Oops, it is not a $500 fine maximum but now up to a $2000 fine and six months in jail. That is not for actually doing anything, that is for a comment to a protected status person. Am EMT is treating you and you were swinging your arms around screaming and you hit the EMT causing a red mark on his cheek. You did not intend to do it but you were acting recklessly when you caused the minor injury. A misdemeanor?No, we are back to 10 years in prison for something that was not necessarily intentional. Got mad a Hagar while discussing Trump and slapped him? Oops, 10 years in prison. Why? No matter the physical ability, how good of shape they’re in, how much ability they have to defend themselves or anything else, it is a felony to cause even pain to someone 65 or older. Let’s say a guy grabs a $3 item out of a shopping cart and runs away. Again a class C theft. Turn to run away from the same minor crime and as he does so, bumps into a 65 year old woman and she gets a minor scratch on the arm that needs no more treatment than being wiped off with alcohol. A $500 fine? No… up to 99 years in prison for recklessly injury a person 65 older after shoplifting. Let’s see, a $500 fine or 99 years in prison? Special treatment? I could go on for paragraphs….. So while we are all entitled to our opinions on punishments, it is often said that police are getting special treatment. That is absolutely true in some cases but almost all members of the public are afforded that same protection. People want to make it a police law when there are dozens of laws protecting regular people due to circumstances. Opinion is personal but it should be made from a perspective of knowledge, not ignorance. Also, and there is no way to prove it, but while under oath during questioning to choose a jury (voir dire), the question is almost always asked, can you consider the entire range of punishment? For example is a death penalty case. If under oath during questioning a prospective witness says I will not consider it as penalty because I don’t believe in the death penalty, that person can be rejected with cause. A jury can assess punishment but they do not get to determine the law. In my opinion aperson who testified under oath that he will consider all legal penalties but in reality will not do so, commits a crime. You can’t prove it but a jury is supposed to look at the law the way to written, not legislate from the jury room.

And no, the officer does not get to go in front of the grand jury to plead his case. If indicted, that is for a trial court. Other officers involved may testify in front of the grand jury as long as they are not facing the accusation. A few years ago my partner shot and killed the guy about 10 feet in front of me. A couple of other officers were on scene in addition to the officer that fired the shot. I was the first person to testify in front of the grand jury and eventually, the other officers and witnesses also. That also was a very clear cut case of self-defense and the officer was No Billed.

As to this specific case, Texas law on self-defense does not say you have to prove self-defense. If a claim of self-defense is made, Texas law requires the DA to prove that self-defense did not exist beyond a reasonable doubt. That is for a police officers and civilians equally. A No Bill by the GJ simply means that they do not believe there’s at least probable cause to prove the accusation. A True Bill is returning an indictment. In a case such as this, if an indictment was returned the DA would have to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the police officers were not reasonably trying to stop deadly force against themselves. It does not matter if there were other options. It only matters that a reasonable officer faced with the same circumstances would believe that deadly force was reasonable to protect themselves. One of the officers involved I trained both in the police academy and on the streets when he was a rookie. The other officer involved, I trained him in the academy and was his supervisor but in a different agency. I have spoken with some of the officers that were familiar with the case and/or were there and work in Mid-County (who I also trained) and I believe what was reported on the news, is what happened. The police were chasing a stolen car and the car rammed the police car either intentionally or unintentionally. The deceased jumped out with a gun in his hand. I have seen all kinds of silly Facebook comments about, what was his intent by having the gun in hand or whatever. It basically does not matter. What would a reasonable officer believe faced with those circumstance where they were chasing a felon and after he is forced to stop, gets out with a gun in hand?

When the police make an arrest, with or without a warrant, they are not filing charges. They are making what is an accusation arrest. I used to hear the news media say something like, the suspect got out of jail on an accusation or accusation bond. I don’t recall them using that phrase anymore. For example a person commits a robbery and is caught by the police. The suspect is brought to jail and booked by the officer describing the probable cause as to why the officer thinks the suspect committed the crime. A judge will be in probably the next morning, read the person his rights, review the probable cause affidavit and then set bail. At that time, the DA has not reviewed the case or if a felony like a robbery, the grand jury has not heard the case. It is probably believed by many people that once the police make an arrest, charges have been filed. That is not correct. Then the investigation begins as I described above with the case being submitted to the DA for review. Sometimes a detective after gathering information about the reported crime, might submit the case to the DA recommending that no charges be filed because there is not enough evidence to prove the crime. In that case the charges are simply dropped.

All of this goes to the 10th Amendment of the Constitution. Unless it is specifically mentioned in the Constitution, a state can do it it wishes. I think about half the states have the grand jury process for a felony. That means that a grand jury has to return an indictment for there to be a felony charge. In some states they don’t have a grand jury or they only refer to them in maybe controversial cases. In those states the District Attorney can bring somebody up on felony charges just on his opinion. Of course probable cause is needed. I believe Florida is such a state. The George Zimmerman case I believe is a good example because the special prosecutor indicted him just on her signature. It is my opinion that she did not bring it to a grandjujury because she knows they would have no build the case and the case would have been closed. Texas is a mandatory GJ state. It also serves a somewhat political purpose in cases like this because a DA can say, I did not make the decision. The police do not bring charges on anyone. That is done through the DA. The police are just in investigative body. They take pictures, fingerprints, interview witnesses and so on. In the years I was in investigations, I would do all of that and then when I thought I had done what I could, I would present the case to the DA if I thought there was sufficient evidence to prove a case. There were three options for the district attorney after a detective submitted a case. One would be to refuse the case out right for any reason including they just don’t wish to tie up the court, they could accept the charges or they can send the case back to the detective requesting more information. Depending on that additional information, they would again either except or reject the case. If it was a misdemeanor, an assistant DA intake attorney would review the case and decide if they wish to go ahead with the charges. If the DA accepted the case from the detective and it was a felony, that means they would go forward but like mentioned, Texas is a mandatory GJ state so the DA has to accept what he believes is a good case and then present it to the GJ.