Wos/OU commit Franks suspended/school board votes, Franks remains suspended

[AggiesAreWe]

mustang faithfull pray for him and his familey    night all

Yes.  And, don't just pray tonight.  Everyday at noon, many have chosen to pray for this individual, his family and the Mustang family!

One of the Silsbee players that was in the rape scandal was 17, was considered an adult, his name was plastered all over the media.

And that is wrong.  Not just because it was Silsbee...because he was a minor and the allegations.  These kids' futures can potentially be turned upside down by allegations and persecutions by adults.  I was one of the ones at bat for the Silsbee kids.  

Don't get me wrong, I am agreeing with you. I honestly didn't want anyone's name revealed, both in this case and the Silsbee case. I am just argueing the fact that these kids are minors. Bolton was a junior, 17 year old when the rape case came down, Franks is 17, all are what the law see's as not being a minor. They are considered adults now.

I disagree.  I believe that it depends on the charges.  Just like a 13 year-old can be charged as an adult in the case of murder.  There are no "charges". 

stang4life, you are correct. I apologize.

Trey's name has been released, which is sad, but we cannot do anything about that now.

[stang4life]

That's not good enough.  That's one of those old lawyer tricks where he makes a statement that is objected to and the judge orders the jury to disregard the statement.  I'm not implying that you put his name out there...this is directed to whatever vulture felt the need to disclose his name.

[Judex]

mustang faithfull pray for him and his familey    night all

Yes.  And, don't just pray tonight.  Everyday at noon, many have chosen to pray for this individual, his family and the Mustang family!

One of the Silsbee players that was in the rape scandal was 17, was considered an adult, his name was plastered all over the media.

And that is wrong.  Not just because it was Silsbee...because he was a minor and the allegations.  These kids' futures can potentially be turned upside down by allegations and persecutions by adults.  I was one of the ones at bat for the Silsbee kids.  

Don't get me wrong, I am agreeing with you. I honestly didn't want anyone's name revealed, both in this case and the Silsbee case. I am just argueing the fact that these kids are minors. Bolton was a junior, 17 year old when the rape case came down, Franks is 17, all are what the law see's as not being a minor. They are considered adults now.

you are wrong and need to just stop. 18 is the age of majority. in certain situations depending on the acts, the law sees fit to "charge" someone as an adult in the criminal arena. that does not make them an adult. he is still a minor for all other purposes if he is not yet 18.

[Bigdog]

That's not good enough.  That's one of those old lawyer tricks where he makes a statement that is objected to and the judge orders the jury to disregard the statement.  I'm not implying that you put his name out there...this is directed to whatever vulture felt the need to disclose his name.

Then direct your anger at the media outlet, not this site.  Its public knowledge and posting it or not posting in a thread is not going to make it any different.

[stang4life]

That's not good enough.  That's one of those old lawyer tricks where he makes a statement that is objected to and the judge orders the jury to disregard the statement.  I'm not implying that you put his name out there...this is directed to whatever vulture felt the need to disclose his name.

Then direct your anger at the media outlet, not this site.  Its public knowledge and posting it or not posting in a thread is not going to make it any different.

It is on this site and therefore my anger is directed on here and the media.  The point is it shouldn't be public knowledge.  I bet you would feel differently if it were nederland.  If this site didn't have his name on here...duh, I wouldn't be directing my anger towards this site, sherlock.

[EX-Ceauxch]

What good does it do to have a board when they always have a tie??? I thought that was the reason for having a odd number.

I agree. Let Dan Ray be the deciding vote. More people respect him in WOS than anyone else, IMO...

[AllSportsMom]

IMO if this wasn't about a good football player no one would have ever mentioned it & whoever the team was would play as normal as if all was well and no one would be missed. 

The other 2 parties involved were suspended from the game on Friday but they aren't in the public eye so their names aren't mentioned nor the group (band, drill team etc.) that didn't have them at the game.

I like others do not know what went down but all the secrecy makes everyone want to know.

The fact that the principal can suspend u from a football game but not school & then the school board gets involved about suspension from athletics & continues the suspension due to a tie for the remainder of the school year really doesn't make sense. Most boards have a tie-breaker rule so that this doesn't happen. Never heard of one that didn't. You'd think that either the superintendent should be the decision maker in the event of a tie or the President.

News is News... Good or Bad... People want to know... Basically, if there is something you don't want someone to find out about then you'd better think before you do it cuz 9 out of 10 times someone will find out...

[Guest rykerx144]

LOCK IT

No, we won't.  I wish like all get out that we could reveal what we believe are the details as, based upon the version has been revealed to me, it is favorable to Trey.  But as this appears to be headed to litigation, caution is paramount.

No, you won't lock it.  Just keep posting a MINOR's name and not the reason for the conflict of interest.  The conflict of interest, as stated at the meeting, was because of a conflict of interest because school board member Mary Hardin is the high school principal's mother (Paul Hardin).  We can drag the minor's name through four pages of posts, but can't post the reason stated at the meeting for a board member to abstain from voting that resulted in a tie.  Please, help with the logic here? 

'

that is not all you posted!

[tvc184]

Sure you do aaw...  And, he is 17, not 18.  I know that when my 17 year-old threatened to run away, the police stated that he had to be 18 to legally do it without me being able to file runaway charges.  Hmmmmmm.......

That is not correct information if that is what the officer(s) gave you.

A 17 year old is not a runaway in Texas and has not been for at least 30 years and probably more. They are criminally adults at 17 and not a runaway. As a parent, you are responsible for their room and board until they are 18.

[Guest rykerx144]

LOCK IT

No, we won't.  I wish like all get out that we could reveal what we believe are the details as, based upon the version has been revealed to me, it is favorable to Trey.  But as this appears to be headed to litigation, caution is paramount.

No, you won't lock it.  Just keep posting a MINOR's name and not the reason for the conflict of interest.  The conflict of interest, as stated at the meeting, was because of a conflict of interest because school board member Mary Hardin is the high school principal's mother (Paul Hardin).  We can drag the minor's name through four pages of posts, but can't post the reason stated at the meeting for a board member to abstain from voting that resulted in a tie.  Please, help with the logic here? 

Explain to me how Franks is a MINOR? He is a senior in high school, therefore he is at least 17 years old, could be 18. Those are legal ages of an adult in the state of Texas.

I honestly wished no names would have been brought out, but they did.

Sure you do aaw...  And, he is 17, not 18.  I know that when my 17 year-old threatened to run away, the police stated that he had to be 18 to legally do it without me being able to file runaway charges.  Hmmmmmm.......

that is not true!!!

[tvc184]

I disagree.  I believe that it depends on the charges.  Just like a 13 year-old can be charged as an adult in the case of murder.  There are no "charges". 

14, not 13. 15 for most other felonies.

[Guest rykerx144]

I dont understand your logic here?  This site did not release the name and did not allow it to be posted until it was already released by other major media outlets in the area.  I hate that you feel like you have to point out this site and vent your anger toward us when we are not to blame.

I have a bigger problem with you coming in here and venting your anger by quoting laws that are not true and providing information that is false to the public that you are obviously not qualified to give.  I think you are trying to make a good point but are pointing the finger at the wrong people. 

[tvc184]

Yeah, it is not like the problem magically goes away if setxsports doesn't have it. That is especially true since this site has been very good not to air it publicly until it is released from another source.

Sounds like shooting the messenger.

[EX-Ceauxch]

Man, don't u guys sleep?

[Guest rykerx144]

yea!  When I get off work!!  shhhhhhh  LOL

[EX-Ceauxch]

Ok, me too.

[hookem14]

Me too

[tvc184]

Man, don't u guys sleep?

I sleep during the even years.

[stang4life]

I disagree.  I believe that it depends on the charges.  Just like a 13 year-old can be charged as an adult in the case of murder.  There are no "charges". 

14, not 13. 15 for most other felonies.

Well, funny that when I worked at TYC...we had of 13 and 14 year olds who were charged as adults from murder to rape.  But, even at 15...

[speveto]

i would like to see all schools not allow cell phones in  schools that goes for teachers also.back in my days in school we did not know what a cell phone was and we did fine

    yes, skipper, I know, back then you used smoke signals.

[skipper]

lol speveto. what i was trying to say there should BAN cell phones  on campus , thay have ban  me smokeing now i got to go across the street lol

[elhector1]

I have a couple of problems here....

1.  A few posters, in discussing the ages of the people involved, start bringing up what is considered an adult, or the age of majority.  In doing so, to bolster their argument, they use phrases and examples that refer to crimes and felonies.   In this situation, where rumor is rampant because the full details are nor known, such speculation can lead to additional rumor and confusion that the actions were criminal.  They were not.  Speculation about age should be about what the school regards as an adult. NO CRIME WAS COMMITTED, NO FELONY WAS COMMITTED, NO MISDEMEANOR WAS COMMITTED.

2.  As to releasing the name of one individual, why was this?  Was it because he is a good player, which shows the dual edge of this forum?   We wouldn't discuss him if he wasn't good, so his name was released because he is good?   Also, if the school rules consider him a student, isn't that considering him a minor, especially at age 17?  If this is the case, didn't whoever release his name also violate the cherished "code of conduct" that WOS-C has in place?  And if they did violate the code of conduct, should they be suspended from work WITHOUT pay?  

[KFDM COOP]

#1 Names were NOT supposed to be released...

#2 This didn't even happen at School

#3 Everything is going to work out, but that's all i can say right now.

[WOSHIGHc/o2001]

This is a complete shame.  The school board knew that the vote was going to be split, so they should have just called the meeting off.  That was just a waste of people's time.  This is going to effect Track as well, not just football.  He could graduate early and enroll at OU in the Spring.  Going to school and not being able to participate in extracurricular activities isn't very fun.  I don't believe that this applies in his situation, but taking away extracurricular activities is how kids get in trouble.  If they don't have anything better to do, why not make bad decisions.  Decisions that would actually warrant a suspension.

[KFDM COOP]

This is a complete shame.  The school board knew that the vote was going to be split, so they should have just called the meeting off.  That was just a waste of people's time.  This is going to effect Track as well, not just football.  He could graduate early and enroll at OU in the Spring.  Going to school and not being able to participate in extracurricular activities isn't very fun.  I don't believe that this applies in his situation, but taking away extracurricular activities is how kids get in trouble.  If they don't have anything better to do, why not make bad decisions.  Decisions that would actually warrant a suspension.

Does this shock you? Things are going to be fine, trust me.