PDA

View Full Version : Pacer Stephen Jackson in Process of being Charged



pacers20
10-11-2006, 01:55 PM
I-Team 8 has learned through the Marion County clerk's office that Indiana Pacer Stephen Jackson is in the process of being charged with crimes related to the Friday morning incident outside the strip club Club Rio.

The charges are felony criminal recklessness, misdemeanor battery and misdemeanor disorderly conduct.

The prosecutor's office will be holding a news conference and 24-Hour News 8 will report the details as they are known.

Los Angeles
10-11-2006, 01:57 PM
And there it is.

:censored: :censored: :censored: :censored: :censored: :censored: :censored: :censored: :censored: :censored: :censored: :censored: :censored:

imawhat
10-11-2006, 01:58 PM
That was coming, unfortunately.

Trader Joe
10-11-2006, 01:58 PM
Bye, bye season.

Frank Slade
10-11-2006, 01:58 PM
shoot :unimpress: the other shoe has dropped.

FSU-IU
10-11-2006, 01:59 PM
And there it is.

:censored: :censored: :censored: :censored: :censored: :censored: :censored: :censored: :censored: :censored: :censored: :censored: :censored:

But wait....I thought everyone said he was a victim, that he was innocent? This cannot be true...if it is, I might have to 'dump' somebody (did I use that correctly????).

FSU-IU
10-11-2006, 01:59 PM
Bye, bye season.

Because of Jackson??? Hardly................

Trader Joe
10-11-2006, 02:00 PM
But wait....I thought everyone said he was a victim, that he was innocent? This cannot be true...if it is, I might have to 'dump' somebody (did I use that correctly????).

The police said he was innocent. The prosecutor apparently does not agree.

Trader Joe
10-11-2006, 02:00 PM
Because of Jackson??? Hardly................

You think hes the only being charged? Doubt it.

Furthermore, this is going to distract the whole team.

Frank Slade
10-11-2006, 02:01 PM
The police said he was innocent. The prosecutor apparently does not agree.

Perhaps, and the F word was used.. Felony :(
Ok so you legal types, if they proceed with these charges, any chance he can plead down and have the Felony Conviction reduced ?

Phildog
10-11-2006, 02:02 PM
Where's all the Jackson guys now who had all this insider info about Steven Jackson doing "nothing wrong"?

imawhat
10-11-2006, 02:04 PM
Hey, I don't think this is worthy of rubbing into anyone's face, even if they were wrong.

Most of us feel bad enough already.

able
10-11-2006, 02:05 PM
AND THE SOURCE ???

Where is the link ? the I-Team 8 website has nothing on this.

Trader Joe
10-11-2006, 02:05 PM
Where's all the Jackson guys now who had all this insider info about Steven Jackson doing "nothing wrong"?

Insider info? I guess its insider info if the requirement is you have two eyes and can read. The cops said he was the victim the whole time.

Unclebuck
10-11-2006, 02:06 PM
I predicted this yesterday.

Although maybe this is good with Jax locked up, now all those Pacers fans who were going to abandon the Poacers can now come back. I'm sure in a few days ticket sales will sky rocket. Afterall we have to assume Jax is no longer on the team.

Mr. Sobchak
10-11-2006, 02:08 PM
AND THE SOURCE ???

Where is the link ? the I-Team 8 website has nothing on this.


http://wthr.com/Global/story.asp?S=5526053

Frank Slade
10-11-2006, 02:08 PM
AND THE SOURCE ???

Where is the link ? the I-Team 8 website has nothing on this.

http://www.wishtv.com/Global/story.asp?S=5526738

The prosecutor's office will be holding a news conference at 2:00 p.m.


Jackson, others charged in strip club fight

Oct 11, 2006 02:00 PM EDT


Stephen Jackson apologized to fans at practice Tuesday.

Indianapolis - Pacers player Stephen Jackson and two other men will be charged in connection with a fight outside a strip club last Friday. Marion County Prosecutor Carl Brizzi announced the charges Wednesday.

Jackson will be charged with criminal recklessness (a D felony), battery (an A misdemeanor) and disorderly conduct (B disdemeanor).

He could face up to three years in jail if he is convicted on the criminal recklessness charge.

After charges are filed, an arrest warrant will be issued. Brizzi's office has contacted Jackson's attorney regarding Jackson's surrender to authorities.

Deon "Dino" Willford is charged with battery with a deadly weapon, failure to stop at the scene of a personal injury accident and operating without a license. Willford is being held on $80,000 bond and has an initial hearing on Friday.

Raymel Mattox, a friend of Jamaal Tinsley, is charged with possession of marijuana, battery and disorderly conduct.

The fight happened at Club Rio on West 38h Street as the four Pacers left the club. According to police reports, Pacer Stephen Jackson admitted to kicking handicapped suspect Quentin "Fingers" Willford during the fight. Jackson also fired his handgun before and after getting hit by a car driven by Deon Willford
WTHR (http://www.wthr.com/global/story.asp?s=5526053&ClientType=Printable)

Iceman1
10-11-2006, 02:08 PM
AND THE SOURCE ???

Where is the link ? the I-Team 8 website has nothing on this.

WIBC 1070 radio in Indianapolis just reported it.

Unclebuck
10-11-2006, 02:09 PM
Where's all the Jackson guys now who had all this insider info about Steven Jackson doing "nothing wrong"?

Who said that.

Mr. Sobchak
10-11-2006, 02:09 PM
On second thought that doesnt really say if hes being charged or not

Since86
10-11-2006, 02:11 PM
Where's all the Jackson guys now who had all this insider info about Steven Jackson doing "nothing wrong"?

If you get in a fight, your most likely being picked up on assualt and battery, no matter what the situation and should have been expected. Both are misdemeanor charge, so will either result in a fine or be completely dropped.

The criminal recklessness was expected from the beginning as well, because he shot in the air. A deal will be worked out, before he ever goes to court.

There goes the season????? Hardly. It will hardly be on the radar, and will get minimal attention.

tadscout
10-11-2006, 02:12 PM
I predicted this yesterday.

Although maybe this is good with Jax locked up, now all those Pacers fans who were going to abandon the Poacers can now come back. I'm sure in a few days ticket sales will sky rocket. Afterall we have to assume Jax is no longer on the team.

IF. IF he is convicted what happens to his contract? Is it voided? or are we stuck with it?

FSU-IU
10-11-2006, 02:13 PM
If he is charged - will it matter that he was on probation?

Jermaniac
10-11-2006, 02:13 PM
Bye, bye season.James White says YO

Kobe Bryant was charged with rape and he is 100 times more famous then Jack, and they still made the Finals.

able
10-11-2006, 02:13 PM
If you get in a fight, your most likely being picked up on assualt and battery, no matter what the situation and should have been expected. Both are misdemeanor charge, so will either result in a fine or be completely dropped.

The criminal recklessness was expected from the beginning as well, because he shot in the air. A deal will be worked out, before he ever goes to court.

There goes the season????? Hardly. It will hardly be on the radar, and will get minimal attention.

From what I've seen until now, it will be milked, milked and milked and someone is riding an election on his "toughness".

Unclebuck
10-11-2006, 02:14 PM
Can the Pacers void his contract. That is actually better for the Pacers than if they would have traded him over the summer

Trader Joe
10-11-2006, 02:14 PM
If you get in a fight, your most likely being picked up on assualt and battery, no matter what the situation and should have been expected. Both are misdemeanor charge, so will either result in a fine or be completely dropped.

The criminal recklessness was expected from the beginning as well, because he shot in the air. A deal will be worked out, before he ever goes to court.

There goes the season????? Hardly. It will hardly be on the radar, and will get minimal attention.

Minimal attention? If a felony charge gets slapped on a player in any pro league it will get national attention for the whole case. You can book that.

Phildog
10-11-2006, 02:15 PM
Who said that.

Go back to "Why some of us are sick of this".....and you might get a little sick to your stomach

ChicagoJ
10-11-2006, 02:15 PM
If he is charged - will it matter that he was on probation?

Pretty sure that requires a conviction. Lots of people get charged with things that don't stick.

FSU-IU
10-11-2006, 02:15 PM
From what I've seen until now, it will be milked, milked and milked and someone is riding an election on his "toughness".

So, in your mind, the prosecutor should thank Jackson for being such a dumbass and putting himself into that situation......ok, whatever floats your boat.

DisplacedKnick
10-11-2006, 02:15 PM
Color me surprised - NOT.

I always thought once Dino & Fingers were caught we would find out that things weren't so cut and dried.

Oh well.

travmil
10-11-2006, 02:15 PM
Bye, bye season.

You're joking right? By all accounts, James White is ready to step in and start right now.

Trader Joe
10-11-2006, 02:15 PM
James White says YO

Kobe Bryant was charged with rape and he is 100 times more famous then Jack, and they still made the Finals.

I hope James is ready. I really hope he is.

Trader Joe
10-11-2006, 02:17 PM
You're joking right? By all accounts, James White is ready to step in and start right now.

Look I hope James is ready to ball this season, but forgive me if I am not completely ready to give a starting spot to a second round pick. I like James, but if we lose Jack it hurts.

DisplacedKnick
10-11-2006, 02:20 PM
If he is charged - will it matter that he was on probation?

Could raise the bond - not that he'll have any trouble paying it. The real problem comes if he's convicted as a repeat offender. That can impact his sentence.

Trader Joe
10-11-2006, 02:21 PM
Going once, Going twice, Going three times ;)

ChicagoJ
10-11-2006, 02:23 PM
Raymel Mattox, a friend of Jamaal Tinsley, is charged with possession of marijuana, battery and disorderly conduct.

That appears to clear Tinsley's name, BTW.

Let's not lose track of this fact in the uproar over Jackson.

DisplacedKnick
10-11-2006, 02:24 PM
Look I hope James is ready to ball this season, but forgive me if I am not completely ready to give a starting spot to a second round pick. I like James, but if we lose Jack it hurts.

Daniels will start at SG. But James will have to be ready to play.

Trader Joe
10-11-2006, 02:25 PM
That appears to clear Tinsley's name, BTW.

Let's not lose track of this fact in the uproar over Jackson.

Thank God.

Trader Joe
10-11-2006, 02:26 PM
Daniels will start at SG. But James will have to be ready to play.

Why isn't Daniels slated to start then tonight against the Nets?

Los Angeles
10-11-2006, 02:29 PM
Can the Pacers void his contract. That is actually better for the Pacers than if they would have traded him over the summer
Doubt they will. They didn't void Ron's contract.

I think the best option right now is to take the $28MM+ hit and waive him. Thank god I don't run the team, I don't have the necessary patience or temperament. :)

MagicRat
10-11-2006, 02:29 PM
That appears to clear Tinsley's name, BTW.

Let's not lose track of this fact in the uproar over Jackson.

That may cut the number of new kids' jerseys the wife is going to make me buy to 1................

Since86
10-11-2006, 02:29 PM
Minimal attention? If a felony charge gets slapped on a player in any pro league it will get national attention for the whole case. You can book that.

If it went to trial, of course it would get national attention, but it won't go to trial.

How many articles a day/week/month can a reporter write an article talking about an indictment? He's going to appear before a judge twice at the most, probably once. A deal will be reached between his lawyer and the prosecutor in less than a week, and he'll see a judge, to be sentenced, in less than a month.

I'd bet that he gets probation, a fine, and community service (again).

imawhat
10-11-2006, 02:30 PM
Carlisle is quoted as saying he wants to see what Daniels can do with the second unit (read the Mike Wells chat thread).


Back to the main story.....

I'm not sure how I feel about this (and I mean this in terms of the Pacers, not justice).

If it forces the Pacers to take action and they can jettison SJ, then great. If this only prolongues the situation and it keeps the cloud hovering over the team, then *&^%.

Frank Slade
10-11-2006, 02:30 PM
http://www.nba.com/media/playerfile/james_white.jpghttp://www.nba.com/media/playerfile/marquis_daniels.jpg
It's up to us.

Bball
10-11-2006, 02:31 PM
That appears to clear Tinsley's name, BTW.

Let's not lose track of this fact in the uproar over Jackson.

Unless Tinsley's friend shared and the team/league/police did a drug test....

-Bball

DisplacedKnick
10-11-2006, 02:33 PM
Why isn't Daniels slated to start then tonight against the Nets?

Might be Rick wanted to send him a message about going out to a bar and getting involved in a brawl.

Could be anything though - might have dogged it in practice, maybe because up to half an hour ago Rick figured he'd be coming off the bench during the season so he might as well adjust to that role, etc.

But unless we find out White was REALLY undervalued prior to the draft, I'd think Daniels would start over him during the season.

Evan_The_Dude
10-11-2006, 02:33 PM
That appears to clear Tinsley's name, BTW.

Let's not lose track of this fact in the uproar over Jackson.

I was already 99.9% sure that weed found in the Passenger seat of Tinsley's car couldn't have been his. I was just scared that it may beling to one of the other 3 guys. Glad it was none of them.

I was backing Jackson heavily, but now after hearing the truth I think we need to look into our options for getting him out of town. The facts that were brought out officially gives this team a bad name, and it's pretty much because of Jackson (as much as I hate admitting that). Jackson like Artest, has just not had a good tenure with the Pacers. As good of a player as he is, and as valuable as he can be to this team, I don't want him to be the next guy that we hold on to for too long because we fell in love with his talent.

I'm not saying trade him for nothing. But I think disciplinary action on behalf of the Pacers a must. I doubt that they can void his contract, I doubt they can get good trade value for him, but I do think they need to make an example out of him and show this behavior is unacceptable.

Trader Joe
10-11-2006, 02:35 PM
Might be Rick wanted to send him a message about going out to a bar and getting involved in a brawl.

Could be anything though - might have dogged it in practice, maybe because up to half an hour ago Rick figured he'd be coming off the bench during the season so he might as well adjust to that role, etc.

But unless we find out White was REALLY undervalued prior to the draft, I'd think Daniels would start over him during the season.

Hopefully White was undervalued due to his age. His athleticism his ridiculous.

Speed
10-11-2006, 02:35 PM
From what I've seen until now, it will be milked, milked and milked and someone is riding an election on his "toughness".


Yep, I said that over the weekend, he can make his mark, I"m not saying anything about it being warranted or not, but I'm just saying I figured as much.

Tinsley is off the hook for the dope.


Otherwise, Ladies and Gentlemen the captain has turned on the fasten seat belt sign, please lock your trays in the upright position, Flight 75 is now set for departure.......

imawhat
10-11-2006, 02:35 PM
If it went to trial, of course it would get national attention, but it won't go to trial.


Wrong. I'm 2100 miles away and I'm already hearing about it on the radio.


This isn't a small incident. It was covered all day on Friday in the midst of the baseball playoffs. And that's in Los Angeles, a city that is (was) fielding its most popular team in the playoffs.


It's not Kobe's story, but it's big. Stephen Jackson is not Kobe in they eyes of the media and the average person. Stephen Jackson is the guy who followed Ron Artest in the stands, and now pulls out guns at strip clubs in the middle of the night.

DisplacedKnick
10-11-2006, 02:36 PM
Doubt they will. They didn't void Ron's contract.

I think the best option right now is to take the $28MM+ hit and waive him. Thank god I don't run the team, I don't have the necessary patience or temperament. :)

Someone who knows more about the CBA will have to say if they'd be able to void it. But you'd think that if he was sentenced to serve time they'd have grounds.

I'm sure Pacer attorneys are scrambling. For sure they can't do a thing unless there's a conviction anyway.

Unclebuck
10-11-2006, 02:36 PM
Doubt they will. They didn't void Ron's contract.

I think the best option right now is to take the $28MM+ hit and waive him. Thank god I don't run the team, I don't have the necessary patience or temperament. :)

Artest was never charged with a felony, he was never in jail.

ChicagoJ
10-11-2006, 02:39 PM
Unless Tinsley's friend shared and the team/league/police did a drug test....

-Bball

Well, that's a possibility, I suppose.

Tinsley needs to use better judgment, too.

Jermaniac
10-11-2006, 02:39 PM
I dont know wtf is up with some of yall. Jack is still going to be starting for this team, these trials take ages to finish, and he aint gonna be going to jail anyway.

Since86
10-11-2006, 02:40 PM
Wrong. I'm 2100 miles away and I'm already hearing about it on the radio.


This isn't a small incident. It was covered all day on Friday in the midst of the baseball playoffs. And that's in Los Angeles, a city that is (was) fielding its most popular team in the playoffs.


It's not Kobe's story, but it's big. Stephen Jackson is not Kobe in they eyes of the media and the average person. Stephen Jackson is the guy who followed Ron Artest in the stands, and now pulls out guns at strip clubs in the middle of the night.


No ****? Well I guess I'd better just stop then.:rolleyes:

Of course you're going to hear about it, today. Next week it won't even be on the radar. It will come up again when he goes infront of the judge. Other than that, it's not a story.

You honestly think I was saying it wasn't going to be a national story TODAY?:laugh:

DisplacedKnick
10-11-2006, 02:40 PM
Artest was never charged with a felony, he was never in jail.

Jax won't be in jail either. He'll go to the station, turn himself in, get booked and make bail.

Speed
10-11-2006, 02:40 PM
Why isn't Daniels slated to start then tonight against the Nets?

Marquis, to me, is more valuable off the bench to go in for the 1,2, or 3 if any those positions are struggling or have foul trouble.

imawhat
10-11-2006, 02:46 PM
You honestly think I was saying it wasn't going to be a national story TODAY?:laugh:



If it went to trial, of course it would get national attention, but it won't go to trial.

That is what you implied. And you're wrong anyways. It will continue to get attention until a bigger, more controversial story comes along.

Unclebuck
10-11-2006, 02:47 PM
Does anyone know, if Jax is convicted of a felony can the Pacers void his contract. Golden State voided Spree's contract and he wasn't charged with anything

travmil
10-11-2006, 02:47 PM
Look guys, if Kobe didn't do time for RAPING A WOMAN, Jax isn't doing time for this.:devil:

PacerFan31
10-11-2006, 02:49 PM
Look guys, if Kobe didn't do time for RAPING A WOMAN, Jax isn't doing time for this.:devil:

I have a feeling that won't be the case.

Especially since Brizzi is looking to show he's a hardass for the election.

imawhat
10-11-2006, 02:49 PM
Marquis, to me, is more valuable off the bench to go in for the 1,2, or 3 if any those positions are struggling or have foul trouble.


For indy0731:

(From the Mike Wells thread)Daniels would have likely been the starter against New Jersey, but Carlisle said he wants to bring him off the bench. I want to see him with that second group because I think he could be a real key guy for us with them.

Evan_The_Dude
10-11-2006, 02:49 PM
I dont know wtf is up with some of yall. Jack is still going to be starting for this team, these trials take ages to finish, and he aint gonna be going to jail anyway.

I agree that he won't go to jail. But I don't know about Jack starting for this team. It's possible, but you have to think that now that the facts are out in the public, the Pacers management is in a 'damned if you do, damned if you don't' position. They have to take some disciplinary action against Jack, otherwise they're going to REALLY look bad. They have to set an example to show that they're serious about changing their image and not letting nonsense go on. I hate to say that because I'm a big Jackson fan, but he f'ed up.

DisplacedKnick
10-11-2006, 02:51 PM
Look guys, if Kobe didn't do time for RAPING A WOMAN, Jax isn't doing time for this.:devil:

Kobe didn't have a tape or "perform" in front of a dozen or so witnesses.

Trader Joe
10-11-2006, 02:52 PM
For indy0731:

(From the Mike Wells thread)Daniels would have likely been the starter against New Jersey, but Carlisle said he wants to bring him off the bench. I want to see him with that second group because I think he could be a real key guy for us with them.

Ok, are we too assume that this would be the case if he has already known Jack would have these sort of charges against him?

able
10-11-2006, 02:52 PM
Otherwise then what's beow here teh CBA doesn't mentio the right to void a contrat,however, that is the standard version, who knows what clauses have been added. but it wont be that easy to void a contract and totally impossible without a conviction

ection 7. Unlawful Violence.
When a player is convicted of (including a plea of guilty, no contest, or nolo contendere to) a violent felony, he shall immediately be suspended by the NBA for a minimum of ten (10) games.

Top

Section 8. Counseling for Violent Misconduct.
(a) In addition to any other rights a Team or the NBA may have by contract or law, when the NBA and the Players Association agree that there is reasonable cause to believe that a player has engaged in any type of off-court violent conduct, the player will (if the NBA and the Players Association so agree) be required to undergo a clinical evaluation by a neutral expert and, if deemed necessary by such expert, appropriate counseling, with such evaluation and counseling program to be developed and supervised by the NBA and the Players Association. For purposes of this paragraph, “violent conduct” shall include, but not be limited to, sexual assault and acts of domestic violence.

(b) Any player who, after being notified in writing by the NBA that he is required to undergo the clinical evaluation and/or counseling program authorized by Section 8(a) above, refuses or fails, without a reasonable explanation, to attend or participate in such evaluation and counseling program within seventy-two (72) hours following such notice, shall be fined by the NBA in the amount of $10,000 for each day following such seventy-two (72) hours that the player refuses or fails to participate in such program.

Top

Section 9. Firearms.
(a) Whenever a player is physically present at a facility or venue owned, operated, or being used by a Team, the NBA, or any League-related entity, and whenever a player is traveling on any NBA-related business, whether on behalf of the player’s Team, the NBA, or any League-related entity, such player shall not possess a firearm of any kind. For purposes of the foregoing, “a facility or venue” includes, but is not limited to: an arena; a practice facility; a Team or League office or facility; an All-Star or NBA Playoff venue; and the site of a promotional or charitable appearance.

(b) Any violation of Section 9(a) above shall be considered conduct prejudicial to the NBA under Article 35(d) of the NBA Constitution and By-Laws, and shall therefore subject the player to discipline by the NBA in accordance with such Article.

DisplacedKnick
10-11-2006, 02:52 PM
I have a feeling that won't be the case.

Especially since Brizzi is looking to show he's a hardass for the election.

However it goes, this won't be close to a resolution by election day.

Pacesetter
10-11-2006, 02:54 PM
This is worse than I thought.

Los Angeles
10-11-2006, 02:56 PM
I second imawhat.

Jackson is being held up as a true villain. Not a guy like TO who everyone hates because he is selfish. He's also not a guy like Kobe who half the nation supported in one way or another.

No, the kid gloves are off.

Jackson is the new poster child of "everything that's wrong with the NBA and pro sports in general." He's a villain that EVERYONE can hate.

Now tell me, if you were a fan of another team, would you accept him if he were traded to your team? No. jackson went from negative trade value ("We'll take him if you give us Granger") to absolutely bottomed out (We wont' take him even if you throw in Granger")

ChicagoJ
10-11-2006, 02:57 PM
Otherwise then what's beow here teh CBA doesn't mentio the right to void a contrat,however, that is the standard version, who knows what clauses have been added. but it wont be that easy to void a contract and totally impossible without a conviction


Easy?

No. But if DW/Bird/the Simons want to, they'll find a way.

Its obvious now that they didn't try really hard to void Ron's contract.

That was before the "its up to us" ad campaign.

Right now, "Its up to us" means its time for their lawyers to move quickly to put this to rest.

However, it probably does require a conviction, not just an indictment.

Maybe they can suspend him with pay (IOW, bench him) until the process is resolved?

DisplacedKnick
10-11-2006, 02:58 PM
Maybe they can suspend him with pay (IOW, bench him) until the process is resolved?

They can put him on the inactive list and tell him to stay away. He gets his money though.

travmil
10-11-2006, 02:59 PM
Kobe didn't have a tape or "perform" in front of a dozen or so witnesses.

This is the type of response that one hopes to avoid by oh, I don't know, putting a devil smiley at the end of their post....

Since86
10-11-2006, 02:59 PM
That is what you implied. And you're wrong anyways. It will continue to get attention until a bigger, more controversial story comes along.

Where did I imply that? The post that I replied to specifically had "during the whole trial," and I my whole post mirrored that theme.

You're just looking to argue, and I'm not gonna sit here and argue with you.

You think it will go to trial, I don't. Neither one of us is "wrong," YET, so good day.

DisplacedKnick
10-11-2006, 03:05 PM
This is the type of response that one hopes to avoid by oh, I don't know, putting a devil smiley at the end of their post....

There's nothing left to do about this except drag what humor you can out of it.

Well, that and I have to somehow avoid talking to my sister for the next 6 months or we'll have to have another "What's wrong with Indiana's basketball players?" conversation.

imawhat
10-11-2006, 03:06 PM
Ok, are we too assume that this would be the case if he has already known Jack would have these sort of charges against him?


Yeah, I think he truly wants to see him with that second unit.

We'll see what happens now.

3rdStrike
10-11-2006, 03:09 PM
James White says YO




Exactly. I'll put this another way:

this is the worst thing to happen to Jackson, and the best thing to happen to the Pacers.

This gives the Pacers an excuse to, ....no, it almost forces them to part ways with Jackson. O'Neal, Reggie, Carlisle, and Bird openly expressed their disappointment and that was BEFORE this latest news came in.

James White WILL take off (no pun intended). Jackson was only going to be taking PT away from him, in my opinion. Flight will prove to be the steal of the '06 draft, and a fan favorite.

imawhat
10-11-2006, 03:10 PM
Easy?

No. But if DW/Bird/the Simons want to, they'll find a way.

Its obvious now that they didn't try really hard to void Ron's contract.

That was before the "its up to us" ad campaign.

Right now, "Its up to us" means its time for their lawyers to move quickly to put this to rest.

However, it probably does require a conviction, not just an indictment.

Maybe they can suspend him with pay (IOW, bench him) until the process is resolved?


Also, there was still value in Ron's contract, and they planned to support Ron throughout. Now the team has been publicly and privately warned (which is partly what you're saying, Jay), and I don't know if there's value in Jax's contract.

Best case realistic scenario, imo, is that we can void his contract and rid ourselves of the cloud (unless someone is willing to take him for an expiring contract or something.

tadscout
10-11-2006, 03:11 PM
This was just updated into the WTHR article...


After charges are filed, an arrest warrant will be issued. Jackson is expected to turn himself over to authorities in court Thursday at 9:00 am. Jackson has hired high-profile attorney Jim Voyles.

If convicted of the charges, Jackson would be in violation of his prior parole convictions. Prosecutor Carl Brizzi has talked with prosecutors in Detroit who plan to put Jackson in a violation status. He could serve 93 days in jail in connection with the Detroit brawl in 2004.


http://www.wthr.com/Global/story.asp?S=5526053&nav=menu188_1

Trader Joe
10-11-2006, 03:15 PM
This was just updated into the WTHR article...



http://www.wthr.com/Global/story.asp?S=5526053&nav=menu188_1

Game set match. Jack is toast.

FrenchConnection
10-11-2006, 03:16 PM
This is all about the prosecutor getting some good high profile face time in the press. Jackson will probably see jail time because of politics.

Pacesetter
10-11-2006, 03:16 PM
My prayers for Steve, this has got to be the low point of his life!

RamBo_Lamar
10-11-2006, 03:16 PM
Well there's one good decision Jack has made - he got the right Attorney.
If anyone can extricate him from the legal mess he's in, it's Voyles.

If he doesn't get out of it altogether, he'll at least get the felony charge
busted down.

Los Angeles
10-11-2006, 03:17 PM
There it is - it's not this case that causes the problem, it's violation of the terms of his suspension.

Either way, I hope we're done with him.

Pacesetter
10-11-2006, 03:20 PM
This is all about the prosecutor getting some good high profile face time in the press. Jackson will probably see jail time because of politics.

If Jackson contributed to the melee, and the others involved do time or are convicted, why should he get a free pass? Justice for the rich and poor. The bottomline is AGAIN, he had no business in the Club at that time of morning with a gun, especially carrying a gun. He only has himself to blame, and when it comes down to it, it may also be Brizzi working on his resume, but everybody in pro sports should know by now, if they put themselves in a bad situation, they might become the weakest link!

I was told by a friend that Club is the Walmart of strip clubs, lap dances for a dollar. I'm sure they could have avoided the clientele there by going to a better Club. But I digress ....

imawhat
10-11-2006, 03:21 PM
This is all about the prosecutor getting some good high profile face time in the press. Jackson will probably see jail time because of politics.

You could be right. Since Pacers mgmt. hasn't set an example, I'm glad the prosecutor will.

Trader Joe
10-11-2006, 03:22 PM
You could be right. Since Pacers mgmt. hasn't set an example, I'm glad the prosecutor will.

See Brizzi is already winning votes.

FSU-IU
10-11-2006, 03:24 PM
This is all about the prosecutor getting some good high profile face time in the press. Jackson will probably see jail time because of politics.

Sorry to burst your rant...but this is about Jackson being a dumbass.

Since86
10-11-2006, 03:28 PM
I really can't see him serving jail time in MI, because of parole violation when he really shouldn't be on probation.

Has anyone fimiliar with the law commented yet on how/why you can be given more time because of a civil suit? I was under the impression that civil law and criminal law are two seperate entities seeing how you can be found innocent in criminal, but guilty in civil. If they can be combined, then wouldn't it be like double prosecution, which is illegal?

SycamoreKen
10-11-2006, 03:31 PM
I dont know wtf is up with some of yall. Jack is still going to be starting for this team, these trials take ages to finish, and he aint gonna be going to jail anyway.

If jackson is found guilty of these charges, even in a plea agreement, and suits up for this team again then I will throw my Pacers gear in the trash. Management needs to suspend him until this gets resolved and tell him goodbye if he isn't proven innocent of all charges. I like Jax, but enough is enough.

DisplacedKnick
10-11-2006, 03:32 PM
I was told by a friend that Club is the Walmart of strip clubs, lap dances for a dollar. I'm sure they could have avoided the clientele there by going to a better Club. But I digress ....

LOL - as someone who's been there, no. It's not Wal-Mart and it's not Versace.

Call it a Sears. Lap Dances were 20 last I knew unless you took advantage of a 2-for-1 offer.

Still not a great place and not a great part of town. Not a place I'd ever think a celebrity should go.

indygeezer
10-11-2006, 03:34 PM
IIRC a felony D can be reduced to a Misdemeanor A but a C cannot be reduced to a D and then a Misdemeanor (w/e that has to do with anything).

Somehow, the P's have to figure out how to do damage control and yet have a quality player in the SG slot, and don't give me any rookie names, not if we're talking contending anyway.

Jermaniac
10-11-2006, 03:35 PM
If jackson is found guilty of these charges, even in a plea agreement, and suits up for this team again then I will throw my Pacers gear in the trash. Management needs to suspend him until this gets resolved and tell him goodbye if he isn't proven innocent of all charges. I like Jax, but enough is enough.If he is found guilty then I'm all for getting rid of him (I'm actually all for getting rid of him even before all this stuff happend) but you cant stop him from doing his job because he is on trial, Kobe was on trial for rape and he didnt get suspended.

Jose Slaughter
10-11-2006, 03:36 PM
I havn't read all the post in this thread yet but I've got thru most of them.

Once again, a sad day to be a Pacer fan.

Too bad we've been saying that far too much.

DisplacedKnick
10-11-2006, 03:36 PM
IIRC a felony D can be reduced to a Misdemeanor A but a C cannot be reduced to a D and then a Misdemeanor (w/e that has to do with anything).

Somehow, the P's have to figure out how to do damage control and yet have a quality player in the SG slot, and don't give me any rookie names, not if we're talking contending anyway.

Daniels at SG but you weren't contending this year anyway - not if you're talking championship.

SycamoreKen
10-11-2006, 03:37 PM
I really can't see him serving jail time in MI, because of parole violation when he really shouldn't be on probation.

Has anyone fimiliar with the law commented yet on how/why you can be given more time because of a civil suit? I was under the impression that civil law and criminal law are two seperate entities seeing how you can be found innocent in criminal, but guilty in civil. If they can be combined, then wouldn't it be like double prosecution, which is illegal?

I'm not a lawyer, but crimal charges and civil charges are not double jeopardy because they do not address the same thing. Hince the reason OJ could be sued by his ex-wife's family. I'll let someone that knows more specifics explain why.

Jackson was on probation due to the criminal charges they prosecutor brought and the plea deal he worked out if i am correct.

able
10-11-2006, 03:38 PM
There it is - it's not this case that causes the problem, it's violation of the terms of his suspension.

Either way, I hope we're done with him.

Did you (and everyone beyond you) miss the "IF CONVICTED" part the paragraph starts with ??

This is unlike you LA :)

PacerFan31
10-11-2006, 03:39 PM
However it goes, this won't be close to a resolution by election day.

I never said it would be over by then, it's just showing that he is going to "crack down" on a public figure.

SycamoreKen
10-11-2006, 03:39 PM
If he is found guilty then I'm all for getting rid of him (I'm actually all for getting rid of him even before all this stuff happend) but you cant stop him from doing his job because he is on trial, Kobe was on trial for rape and he didnt get suspended.

You do if you want fans to show up at games. They may have to use this as an excuss to get rid of him for that reason alone. If Jackson suits up Conseco may look like the Hawk's place come game day.

Putnam
10-11-2006, 03:40 PM
Ooo, lookee! There's a building on fire!!!!


Stephen who??

Tom White
10-11-2006, 03:41 PM
This is all about the prosecutor getting some good high profile face time in the press. Jackson will probably see jail time because of politics.

So, you are saying that, if this were not an election year, Jackson would not have been charged with anything?

I've got my doubts about that.

Putnam
10-11-2006, 03:46 PM
That cinches it. The felony charges against Jackson probably won't even be the top story in Indianapolis TV news two hours from now!!!


Amazing!!

Speed
10-11-2006, 03:48 PM
Read the police report on Indy Star, wow.

Tinsley was in the front passenger seat, when they were pulled over in his suv.......

Says Snap was detained..


and i'm only throught the first page an half.

http://www.indystar.com/assets/pdf/BG447041011.PDF

Stryder
10-11-2006, 03:50 PM
That appears to clear Tinsley's name, BTW.

Let's not lose track of this fact in the uproar over Jackson.

Not necessarily. One player, that I know of, "donated" his urine for a test.

Los Angeles
10-11-2006, 03:51 PM
Did you (and everyone beyond you) miss the "IF CONVICTED" part the paragraph starts with ??

This is unlike you LA :)

I didn't place a time frame on it. ;)

Jack might be forced to fight every charge 100% because a guilty plea could put him in violation of the Michigan deal.

DisplacedKnick
10-11-2006, 03:52 PM
I'm not a lawyer, but crimal charges and civil charges are not double jeopardy because they do not address the same thing. Hince the reason OJ could be sued by his ex-wife's family. I'll let someone that knows more specifics explain why.

Jackson was on probation due to the criminal charges they prosecutor brought and the plea deal he worked out if i am correct.

Here's what I THINK the probation article was referencing - but I'm not certain because that paragraph was so poorly written.

Jackson had originally been placed on probation for one year. During that year he had to do certain things - community service and some other stuff - don't remember exactly.

He didn't do those things.

At this point his Probation Officer will report this to the Prosecutor's Office. The Prosecutor's Office can do several things. In this case what they originally decided to do was extend his probation. However, since he didn't fulfil the terms of his probation within the specified time they are within their rights to declare him in violation and have him picked up to serve whatever sentence was dictated that he'd serve if he violated the terms of his probation.

Apparently, at Brizzi's urging, Detroit Prosecutors are going to change his status from a probation extension to a violation.

I think - because there's stuff in those 3 sentences that make no sense. They have the term "parole conviction." Huh? He was convicted but was never on parole - he was on probation.

But being on probation isn't the same as being free. You're still property of the legal system - you just get to walk around instead of being locked up.

aceace
10-11-2006, 03:53 PM
Look I hope James is ready to ball this season, but forgive me if I am not completely ready to give a starting spot to a second round pick. I like James, but if we lose Jack it hurts.I hope James is ready to go. Losing Jackson is similar to getting your cancer cured.

Smooth_for_Pres.
10-11-2006, 03:55 PM
Are we forgetting that this is an election year and that Carl Brizzi has a flair for the dramatic? (See: TV ads)

Just a thought...

naptown
10-11-2006, 03:57 PM
Well, I must say that I am now very disappointed in Jackson. For initially lying about getting punched. If you are having to tell lies then you aint nearly as innocent as you were trying to make out.

I can tolerate a lot of things in life, but lies is not one of them. All we have in life is our word. I no longer believe a thing that man says. I truly hope the Pacers can find enough infractions to warrant voiding his contract. I know the odds are very slim of that happening but it certainly would not hurt my feelings at this point.

Here are some updated links from Star/News, the second being a copy of the police report.

http://www.indystar.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20061011/SPORTS04/610110528

http://www.indystar.com/assets/pdf/BG447041011.PDF

gummy
10-11-2006, 03:57 PM
I'm not at all sure that he didn't fulfill the terms of his community service - at least the terms that most people care about, which include doing the hours, anger management, fines, etc. It may be that the hang-up is that there is a pending civil suit and part of terms include a resolution to any pending civil suits. Which is a lot different, in my book, than Jackson didn't do his community service hours. Read my post (made just a few minutes ago) in the Extra Year of Probation for Jackson thread.

Slick Pinkham
10-11-2006, 03:59 PM
Are we forgetting that this is an election year and that Carl Brizzi has a flair for the dramatic? (See: TV ads)

Just a thought...

No, but you may be forgetting that Stephen Jackson has a flair for the stupid (and perhaps the criminal).

Today's developments are as nonsurprising as sunrise occurring.

ChicagoJ
10-11-2006, 04:02 PM
I really can't see him serving jail time in MI, because of parole violation when he really shouldn't be on probation.

Has anyone fimiliar with the law commented yet on how/why you can be given more time because of a civil suit? I was under the impression that civil law and criminal law are two seperate entities seeing how you can be found innocent in criminal, but guilty in civil. If they can be combined, then wouldn't it be like double prosecution, which is illegal?

No, I think you're going down the wrong road here.

OJ was found liable in a civil suit, that's where you sue somebody for money.

OJ was found innocent in a criminal court, that's where the prosecutor accuses you of a crime and if convicted you go might get sentenced to a probation...

...of which one of the terms might be for you to satisfactorially resolve all related civil proceedings before your probation is lifted, in addition to community services, paying a fine, a maybe running a few extra windsprints at your next practice session.

PacerFan31
10-11-2006, 04:03 PM
Are we forgetting that this is an election year and that Carl Brizzi has a flair for the dramatic? (See: TV ads)

Just a thought...

I agree with this. That is exactly what I've been trying to say.

ABADays
10-11-2006, 04:03 PM
Sorry to burst your rant...but this is about Jackson being a dumbass.

You beat me to it. I said yesterday a lot more was going to come out on this so I'm not at all surprised.

Since86
10-11-2006, 04:05 PM
I'm not a lawyer, but crimal charges and civil charges are not double jeopardy because they do not address the same thing. Hince the reason OJ could be sued by his ex-wife's family. I'll let someone that knows more specifics explain why.

Jackson was on probation due to the criminal charges they prosecutor brought and the plea deal he worked out if i am correct.

But why would a criminal charge be dependent on a civil suit?

jjbjjbjjb
10-11-2006, 04:08 PM
After reading the police report, the grounds to make the arrest of Jackson must be that Fingers and Dino tell stories where they are minding their own business and along come a bunch of Pacers to pick a fight with them. In a trial, those guys probably get laughed at -- but for right now, it's enough for a prosecutor in an election battle to grab on.

Now it will be up to Jackson and his lawyer whether they want to go to trial, where I bet they can win without too much trouble...but do they want to take the chance? That decision probably depends on the Michigan situation. If taking a plea bargain means he goes to jail in Michigan, he is probably more likely to go to trial and take a chance on being totally cleared.

DisplacedKnick
10-11-2006, 04:10 PM
But why would a criminal charge be dependent on a civil suit?

As far as I know they wouldn't be. I've never heard of such a thing.

You can be found criminally liable for failing to fulfill the judgment of a civil suit but I sure wouldn't think a criminal judgment would be, "I find you guilty and sentence you to whatever comes out of the Civil Suit."

That makes zero sense - but not everything in this world does.

Shade
10-11-2006, 04:11 PM
And just when we thought things couldn't get any worse... :censored:

Smooth_for_Pres.
10-11-2006, 04:11 PM
No, but you may be forgetting that Stephen Jackson has a flair for the stupid (and perhaps the criminal).

Today's developments are as nonsurprising as sunrise occurring.

I'm not saying that Stephen Jackson shouldn't be charged with anything.
I'm not even saying that we shouldn't get rid of him because of this.
All I'm saying is this is a high profile incident with local celebrities that, IMO, was just starting to wind down when LOOK OUT! here comes the incumbent DA who's trying to answer to a dirty smear campaign about his record and he's going to , by all appearances, try to throw the book at Jack.
Now even if you don't agree, you have to admit that politics could factor into this even a little.

Putnam
10-11-2006, 04:11 PM
How can any true American, at a time when high-rise buildings in new York are being crashed into by airplanes, dare to criticize a righteous citizen like Stephen Jackson, who is guilty merely of fighting for his right to party?" [/absurdity and sarcasm]

FrenchConnection
10-11-2006, 04:12 PM
All legal questions aside, the Pacers are in a really bad position here. If they cut him, it is an obvious PR move. If they keep him, you have a really unpopular player who has been charged with a felony in the starting lineup.

I hope they make the PR move, just becuase I really want the poisonous atmosphere around here gone.

SycamoreKen
10-11-2006, 04:12 PM
But why would a criminal charge be dependent on a civil suit?

It is actually the other way around, or there is no connection at all. Again, I don't know the time table for sure, but Jackson was probably not hit with the civil suit until after the criminal proceedings were finished. The probation and criminal charges are handled seperately from the civil charges. Different courts and different judges.

ChicagoJ
10-11-2006, 04:13 PM
But why would a criminal charge be dependent on a civil suit?

There's no reason it can't be. Double jeopary means (I love the elementary school kid's definition) "a man cannot be hanged for the same crime twice." But you can have civil and criminal proceedings related to the same incident, and its certainly reasonable for the terms of someone's probabation to include the resolution of all civil activity related to the matter.

Put another way, this gives the person on probation a little more incentive to perform all of his obligations that result from a related civil matter.

Let's say SJax loses the civil matter and is liable for, say, $1,000,000 bucks. The verdict itself does not resolve the civil matter. Actually paying the $1,000,000 to the victim is what resolves it.

Hanging the terms of probation over his head increases his motivation for writing that check.

naptown
10-11-2006, 04:14 PM
Now even if you don't agree, you have to admit that politics could factor into this even a little.

Sure politics are involved in this to a degree. There aint a politician in the world that would pass on a high publicity case like this. He is getting his name out to the voters for FREE.

Smooth_for_Pres.
10-11-2006, 04:14 PM
How can any true American, at a time when high-rise buildings in new York are being crashed into by airplanes, dare to criticize a righteous citizen like Stephen Jackson, who is guilty merely of fighting for his right to party?" [/absurdity and sarcasm]


LOL HIlarious...

Since86
10-11-2006, 04:21 PM
There's no reason it can't be. Double jeopary means (I love the elementary school kid's definition) "a man cannot be hanged for the same crime twice." But you can have civil and criminal proceedings related to the same incident, and its certainly reasonable for the terms of someone's probabation to include the resolution of all civil activity related to the matter.

Put another way, this gives the person on probation a little more incentive to perform all of his obligations that result from a related civil matter.

Let's say SJax loses the civil matter and is liable for, say, $1,000,000 bucks. The verdict itself does not resolve the civil matter. Actually paying the $1,000,000 to the victim is what resolves it.

Hanging the terms of probation over his head increases his motivation for writing that check.


I understand the difference between it being double jeopardy or not, I get all that.

But I don't see how your probation status depends on the outcome of a civil suit. You get probation from criminal charges, because it's you Vs. the state/county whatever.

Civil is you Vs. a plantiff, another person. The law/court only acts as the arena for the dispute, and should have zero to do with what happens criminally.

I understand you should be able to be brought into civil court, because you were found guilty of a criminal charge, but to me it doesn't work the other way around because of the different legal proceedings.


It is actually the other way around, or there is no connection at all. Again, I don't know the time table for sure, but Jackson was probably not hit with the civil suit until after the criminal proceedings were finished. The probation and criminal charges are handled seperately from the civil charges. Different courts and different judges.

That's what I thought too, but Jackson's lawyer made the comment that his probation was extended because he hadn't paid out resitution from a civil suit.

SycamoreKen
10-11-2006, 04:31 PM
I understand the difference between it being double jeopardy or not, I get all that.

But I don't see how your probation status depends on the outcome of a civil suit. You get probation from criminal charges, because it's you Vs. the state/county whatever.

Civil is you Vs. a plantiff, another person. The law/court only acts as the arena for the dispute, and should have zero to do with what happens criminally.

I understand you should be able to be brought into civil court, because you were found guilty of a criminal charge, but to me it doesn't work the other way around because of the different legal proceedings.



That's what I thought too, but Jackson's lawyer made the comment that his probation was extended because he hadn't paid out resitution from a civil suit.

I guess I guess I should have read the "probation extended" thread before commenting. I didn't realize that part of his probation included settling the civil suit. Guess he should have taken care of that when it would have cost him a lot less.

ChicagoJ
10-11-2006, 04:32 PM
What are the rules for what can and cannot be considered appropriate terms of probation? It's pretty vague, as I recall, and the judge, many times, can do as he pleases.

I've certainly heard of goofier things than restitution of a civil matter that is related to the criminal matter for which you're convicted (or in this case, pleaded no-contest) and put on probation in the first place.

Speed
10-11-2006, 04:36 PM
BTW, Rumal Maddox took one for Tinsley it looks like to me or the entire back court would be arrested today.

ChicagoJ
10-11-2006, 04:36 PM
Since, what I'm saying is that SJax's terms for getting off probation included paying whatever restitution was owed on his civil matter.

I think it would be reckless to NOT have those connected. If you're the victim, and you've won a civil suit and the deadbeat isn't paying you, what recourse do you have?

We worked on a civil case a couple years ago, and our client won. 24 months later, we still have an old accounts receivable because the defendent still hasn't paid our client so they still don't have any money. They've drug it along on various appeals and technicalities, etc.

Winning a civil suit, by itself, doesn't account for much. Including restitution in the probation terms makes it more meaningful.

ChicagoJ
10-11-2006, 04:40 PM
BTW, Rumal Maddox took one for Tinsley it looks like to me or the entire back court would be arrested today.

that implies that you think Tinsley is really guilty. But a DNA test and a rumored drug test might prove otherwise. Clearly, if the player that took the reasonable cause drug test is indeed Tinsley and he flunks it, this entire process is going to be a laughingstock.

Can you imagine that headline,

"Man who took fall for Tinsley's dope is cleared by DNA test"

That would be even uglier than today's headlines.

I'm pretty cynical myself, but that's one step too far.

Putnam
10-11-2006, 04:44 PM
All legal questions aside, the Pacers are in a really bad position here. If they cut him, it is an obvious PR move.


So?

People are always saying, "The NBA is a business." and I'm always asking, "What business is it?"

The answer is entertainment, and that means giving the people what they want to see.

For any entertainment business, obvious PR moves always make sense.

tadscout
10-11-2006, 04:45 PM
More updated into the article...


Stephen Jackson, four other Pacers and several of their friends got into a big fight at the strip club early Friday morning. Witnesses told Eyewitness News it all started over how dancers were assigned to customers.

Prosecutors say Stephen Jackson helped beat up a handicapped patron named Quentin "Fingers" Willford. Jackson also fired his gun before and after Quentin's cousin tried to run him over with his car.


The players all claimed it was self defense, but Carl Brizzi doesn't buy it.


"This person known as Fingers was knocked to the ground during the fight. Mr. Jackson went to his car and grabbed his handgun, inserted himself into the fight, according to his own statements. Mr. Jackson had not been struck; he kicked this individual on the ground, fired somewhere between one and three rounds into the sky and then walked back to his car to put his handgun away and then this other vehicle Deon Willford was driving struck him," Brizzi said.


Brizzi also charged Deon Willford with battery, failure to stop at an accident causing injury and operating a vehicle without a license. Willford is already in custody at the Marion County Jail on $80,000 bond.


http://www.wthr.com/Global/story.asp?S=5526053&nav=menu188_1

Interesting Jackson had two chances to leave himself in his car before getting ran down...

Since86
10-11-2006, 04:46 PM
Since, what I'm saying is that SJax's terms for getting off probation included paying whatever restitution was owed on his civil matter.

I guess I'm having more of a problem with the law, if that is the case. I just don't see how a criminal case can be dependent on a civil. Civil suits don't carry a lot of weight in criminal cases, because of the different structure/lennency of evidence that can be presented, like hearsay isn't admissable in criminal, but is in civil.


I think it would be reckless to NOT have those connected. If you're the victim, and you've won a civil suit and the deadbeat isn't paying you, what recourse do you have?

We worked on a civil case a couple years ago, and our client won. 24 months later, we still have an old accounts receivable because the defendent still hasn't paid our client so they still don't have any money. They've drug it along on various appeals and technicalities, etc.

Winning a civil suit, by itself, doesn't account for much.

Why should they be connected?

I just don't see how a criminal case can be dependent on a civil. Civil suits don't carry a lot of weight in criminal cases, because of the different structure/lennency of evidence that can be presented, like hearsay isn't admissable in criminal, but is in civil.

A lot of cases get rediculious amount of sums attached to them, that have NO way of being paid. You think that OJ should be convicted criminally in some compacity because he can't pay the Goldman's Xmillions of dollars even after he filed for bankruptcy?

Civil suits are civil suits for a reason. The legal standard should be the same, if they are deemed dependent on one another, and they're not.

Eindar
10-11-2006, 04:53 PM
So, you are saying that, if this were not an election year, Jackson would not have been charged with anything?

I've got my doubts about that.

I think he would have been charged, but they would have been misdemeanors and he would have gotten off with a slap on the wrist. Brizzi wants to look tough, so he's going to grill Jackson like it's a capitol offense. Bet on it.

More to the point, there's absolutely no way they DNA test a bag of dope to find out who it belonged to unless someone is trying to get re-elected.

DNA testing is expensive, and it's not something they do for misdemeanor possession charges. Hell, I work for the State Police, and I don't even get overtime because the budget is so tight. In a non-election year, they'd lean on the passengers till they rolled over on whoever owned it.

Eindar
10-11-2006, 04:54 PM
More updated into the article...



http://www.wthr.com/Global/story.asp?S=5526053&nav=menu188_1

Interesting Jackson had two chances to leave himself in his car before getting ran down...


Well, it doesn't say anything about his passengers coming back with him, and as you all know, "We ride together".

CableKC
10-11-2006, 04:59 PM
And the hits just keep on coming.....
:picard:

FSU-IU
10-11-2006, 05:02 PM
More updated into the article...



http://www.wthr.com/Global/story.asp?S=5526053&nav=menu188_1

Interesting Jackson had two chances to leave himself in his car before getting ran down...

So the story that has been fed to us from the beginning has now been blown to ****, right? First, SJax claimed to only shoot his gun after he had been run over..and this was after he had been punched in the mouth.......now the story is that SJax was the one doing the punching/kicking (what a girl), went to his car and got the gun, shot a few rounds..all of this BEFORE he was run over with a car?

What the hell is the real story?

I think SJax is in pretty deep........But one thing is for sure. His street cred now has to be at an all time high, that has to count for something, right?

abington
10-11-2006, 05:03 PM
As a criminal defense attorney, I thought I might try to add a little insight to this discussion.

While it is true that the pending felony case in Indy could take forever to be completed, the bigger short-term problem for Jackson is the fact he is on probation in the State of Michigan and someone can be revoked off of probation and sent to jail and then sentenced to additional jail time for violating the terms and conditions of their probation based on allegations WITHOUT BEING CONVICTED OF ANYTHING. Meaning, Jax can drag this bad boy out for a long time and still be sitting in a Michigan County Jail for a little bit. Now if Michigan decides not to revoke him, than Jackson will most likely avoid jail time in both states.

And Kobe's case has nothing to do with this. It is MUCH easier to prove that someone shot bullets in the air than someone raped somebody. It's like proving a lay-up compared to proving a half court shot.

aceace
10-11-2006, 05:10 PM
No, I think you're going down the wrong road here.

OJ was found liable in a civil suit, that's where you sue somebody for money.

OJ was found innocent in a criminal court, that's where the prosecutor accuses you of a crime and if convicted you go might get sentenced to a probation...

...of which one of the terms might be for you to satisfactorially resolve all related civil proceedings before your probation is lifted, in addition to community services, paying a fine, a maybe running a few extra windsprints at your next practice session.Your exactly right. OJ was found not guilty so he was never on probation for anything. Jackson plead guilty and was placed on probation, he was cited to make restitution. I am a former corrections officer (worst job ever I might add) so I have some knowledge of Indiana law, Michigan, while similar, may still be able to hold him accountable and he could serve a year or whatever was suspended.

Unclebuck
10-11-2006, 05:12 PM
And the hits just keep on coming.....
:picard:

Yes that is it.

Hicks
10-11-2006, 05:15 PM
Well, there goes my support for the man. From the charges dropped, to the fact that he's apparently changed his story many times with police (or did), I'm no longer in the "making something out of nothing" crowd. Don't get me wrong, I feel a lot of you jumped the gun big time, and I still 100% disagree with the negative reactions I saw, but now your suspicions are... not confirmed, but are made probable to the point where as of learning this news, my stance has shifted. I'm as disappointed as anybody.

ChicagoJ
10-11-2006, 05:22 PM
I guess I'm having more of a problem with the law, if that is the case. I just don't see how a criminal case can be dependent on a civil. Civil suits don't carry a lot of weight in criminal cases, because of the different structure/lennency of evidence that can be presented, like hearsay isn't admissable in criminal, but is in civil.

Why should they be connected?

I just don't see how a criminal case can be dependent on a civil.

Its a shame that the OJ matter is the easiest way to talk about the differences between civil and criminal cases.

I understand what you're saying, but the criminal case here was not in any way dependent on the civel case. There's an even bigger reason than what you've mentioned, the burden of proof if much different (thus, OJ was found liable even though he was not found guilty).

SJax's "conviction" (by way of pleading no-contest) was not influenced in any way by the civil case. That would be wrong for all the reasons you mention.

Rather, the terms of SJax's probation ARE dependent on the resolution of the related civil case. There's nothing, from what I can see, problematic about that.

OJ was not convicted; he had no probation. Therefore this doesn't apply.

Other wacky terms of probation can include things like, "You must stay employed", or "you must continue to live in X state or city" (or for juveneills, "you must not be truant from school" If those are valid, then how exactly is a requirement of restitution of a related civil matter not valid?

ChicagoJ
10-11-2006, 05:31 PM
Well, there goes my support for the man. From the charges dropped, to the fact that he's apparently changed his story many times with police (or did), I'm no longer in the "making something out of nothing" crowd. Don't get me wrong, I feel a lot of you jumped the gun big time, and I still 100% disagree with the negative reactions I saw, but now your suspicions are... not confirmed, but are made probable to the point where as of learning this news, my stance has shifted. I'm as disappointed as anybody.

With your "choose optimism" position, you did the intellectually honest thing - you didn't jump on the pessimism bandwagon until more details were revealed.

Keep in mind, however, that many of the negative reactions were not based on what actually transpired during the altercation, but by the bad judgment of putting himself and teammates in a bad position in the first place.

Granted, for several days we kept hearing the "self defense" story that sounded almost a bit too "self-congratulatory" to be believable.

ABADays
10-11-2006, 05:31 PM
Its a shame that the OJ matter is the easiest way to talk about the differences between civil and criminal cases.

I understand what you're saying, but the criminal case here was not in any way dependent on the civel case. There's an even bigger reason than what you've mentioned, the burden of proof if much different (thus, OJ was found liable even though he was not found guilty).

SJax's "conviction" (by way of pleading no-contest) was not influenced in any way by the civil case. That would be wrong for all the reasons you mention.

Rather, the terms of SJax's probation ARE dependent on the resolution of the related civil case. There's nothing, from what I can see, problematic about that.

OJ was not convicted; he had no probation. Therefore this doesn't apply.

Other wacky terms of probation can include things like, "You must stay employed", or "you must continue to live in X state or city" (or for juveneills, "you must not be truant from school" If those are valid, then how exactly is a requirement of restitution of a related civil matter not valid?

OMG please don't make him stay in Indiana!!!!!!!! :-o

Slick Pinkham
10-11-2006, 05:40 PM
It should be easy to determine which happened first, Jax shooting the gun or the car hitting him. Assuming there are many eyewitnesses.

One sequence means Jax committed a reckless felony, the other means he acted in self-defense.

lumber man
10-11-2006, 05:40 PM
:mad: :mad: :mad: :mad:

Unclebuck
10-11-2006, 05:43 PM
It should be easy to determine which happened first, Jax shooting the gun or the car hitting him. Assuming there are many eyewitnesses.

One sequence means Jax committed a reckless felony, the other means he acted in self-defense.

Evidently Jax admitted he shot first. Also keep in mind Jax went to his car to retrieve the gun, that is also pretty damning

http://wthr.com/global/story.asp?s=5526053&ClientType=Printable

DisplacedKnick
10-11-2006, 05:43 PM
It should be easy to determine which happened first, Jax shooting the gun or the car hitting him. Assuming there are many eyewitnesses.

One sequence means Jax committed a reckless felony, the other means he acted in self-defense.

Or video - the security camera shows him shooting first. And there are plenty of witnesses.

DisplacedKnick
10-11-2006, 06:07 PM
Here's what I THINK the probation article was referencing - but I'm not certain because that paragraph was so poorly written.

Jackson had originally been placed on probation for one year. During that year he had to do certain things - community service and some other stuff - don't remember exactly.

He didn't do those things.

At this point his Probation Officer will report this to the Prosecutor's Office. The Prosecutor's Office can do several things. In this case what they originally decided to do was extend his probation. However, since he didn't fulfil the terms of his probation within the specified time they are within their rights to declare him in violation and have him picked up to serve whatever sentence was dictated that he'd serve if he violated the terms of his probation.

Apparently, at Brizzi's urging, Detroit Prosecutors are going to change his status from a probation extension to a violation.

I think - because there's stuff in those 3 sentences that make no sense. They have the term "parole conviction." Huh? He was convicted but was never on parole - he was on probation.

But being on probation isn't the same as being free. You're still property of the legal system - you just get to walk around instead of being locked up.


And that's it - up to Detroit prosecutors what they do but up to 93 days in jail is an option.

SycamoreKen
10-11-2006, 06:19 PM
Evidently Jax admitted he shot first. Also keep in mind Jax went to his car to retrieve the gun, that is also pretty damning

http://wthr.com/global/story.asp?s=5526053&ClientType=Printable

I'm disappointed, but not surprised that he was not carrying the gun but had to retrieve it. I know that it is against the law here in Texas to carry a concealed weapon, permitted or not, in a bar, and I was going to ask if the situation was the same in Indy. If it is that way, I was wondering why he hadn't been sited for such a violation.This answers the question.

DisplacedKnick
10-11-2006, 06:25 PM
I'm disappointed, but not surprised that he was not carrying the gun but had to retrieve it. I know that it is against the law here in Texas to carry a concealed weapon, permitted or not, in a bar, and I was going to ask if the situation was the same in Indy. If it is that way, I was wondering why he hadn't been sited for such a violation.This answers the question.

Actually it's not against the law. Not sure about any city ordinance but it's legal in Indiana. Now if you have a .08 BAC you can get in trouble but you can take a permitted gun into a bar.

Indiana has some of the most liberal gun laws in the country - I believe we're the only state that gives lifetime permits (provided you don't commit a felony).

ajbry
10-11-2006, 06:25 PM
Jack's story just fell apart. There's no way to defend him in that aspect - I'm disappointed in his lying.

Nonetheless, I hope everything works out, I'm sure he must be feeling horrible right now.

I'm still with you Jack, keep your head up.

Pacersfan46
10-11-2006, 06:42 PM
You guys are ridiculous. This changes nothing.

If you take part in a fight, you'll face assault charges. As has been said previously, if you fire a gun into the air, you'll be facing criminal wrecklessness charges.

It still happened the same way. There was a fight, they took it a step further by attacking him with a deadly weapon (a car). If he had shot AT the car, he'd only be facing the assault charges, which is standard procedure when something like this happens.

Geez, you guys overreact like nobodys business. Christ.

ChicagoJ
10-11-2006, 06:57 PM
You guys are ridiculous. This changes nothing.

If you take part in a fight, you'll face assault charges. As has been said previously, if you fire a gun into the air, you'll be facing criminal wrecklessness charges.

It still happened the same way. There was a fight, they took it a step further by attacking him with a deadly weapon (a car). If he had shot AT the car, he'd only be facing the assault charges, which is standard procedure when something like this happens.

Geez, you guys overreact like nobodys business. Christ.

The "overreacting" must be from those that were buying into the "self defense" story hook, line, and sinker.

Pacersfan46
10-11-2006, 07:08 PM
The "overreacting" must be from those that were buying into the "self defense" story hook, line, and sinker.

Criminal wrecklessness = firing the shots into the air

Assault - taking part in a fight before it escalated to a life threatening affair for anyone.

This in NO WAY says it wasn't self defense. These are charges that Skaut told us was coming from firing the gun into the air, and the assualt should have been common sense. He was involved in a fight, right?

If he had fired AT the car, instead of the sky, he'd only be facing misdemeanor charges.

ChicagoJ
10-11-2006, 07:38 PM
Yes, but there's a much different tone now that "both" sides of the story are out.

Saint Stephen was apparently more than just "in the wrong place at the wrong time."

In fact, his actions may have significanly contributed in esclelating a bad situation into a nightmare.

Just like his actions in Auburn Hills.

If you're simply saying that reasonable minds expected this, then I fully agree.

redwillow
10-11-2006, 08:12 PM
First of all, a Pacers' player can be anywhere they want, anytime they want. You don't get to decide what are appropriate activities for them. If you want to play morale-chaporone then go have some children and play it with them. Basketball players do not exsist simply for your amusment. They have a right to go anywhere you or I would go. (I wouldn't go to Club Rio, but I also wouldn't go to Domonique's Soul Kithcen or a Celine Dion concert. But I could if I wanted to.) Root for China's basketball team if you want to be a Commie.

Secondly, this is a poor attempt at a publicity stunt by Brizzi. It will backfire bigtime. He got annililated in his debate and is going to get lampooned for spending time on this case when he has a huge murder problem in this city to deal with.

Thirdly, You don't have to wait until someone hits you with a car to fire shots. All you have to do is say they were an immenent threat to your safety. How does a prosectuter prove that they weren't an immenemt threat? Good luck with that Carl. I'm sure SJ has a few extra bucks to pay some good attorneies. "But hey he fired shots into the air---that's criminal recklessness". If you fire shots into the air to warn someone who is trying to cause you bodily harmm, prosecuter is going to have a hard time getting that to stick. O.J killed folks and got away with it Scott-free. But SJ is going to get convicted of a Felony for this?? Sure. If people want something to gripe about then they should go build a house on the coast and wait for hurricanes.

Give it a rest! The Pre-season started 45 minutes ago and the whole season is shot?

Kstat
10-11-2006, 08:20 PM
Comparing Stephen Jackson to OJ Simpson is probably not a good idea if you're trying to defend him. Just saying.

Jermaniac
10-11-2006, 08:22 PM
Jackson is going to jail, reading all this new stuff coming out. I can totally see him doing everything he can to keep the fight going. I supported him when the first report came out but I dont know anymore.

redwillow
10-11-2006, 09:02 PM
Comparing Stephen Jackson to OJ Simpson is probably not a good idea if you're trying to defend him. Just saying.

Hehe. I guess I'm defending SJ. I really just wanted to defend his right to life, liberty and the pusuit of happiness.

P.S. SJ is one of my least favorite Pacers. But he wears a jersey that says Indiana on it. That counts for something with me.

Stryder
10-11-2006, 10:18 PM
that implies that you think Tinsley is really guilty. But a DNA test and a rumored drug test might prove otherwise. Clearly, if the player that took the reasonable cause drug test is indeed Tinsley and he flunks it, this entire process is going to be a laughingstock.

Can you imagine that headline,

"Man who took fall for Tinsley's dope is cleared by DNA test"

That would be even uglier than today's headlines.

I'm pretty cynical myself, but that's one step too far.

Not really. I can see it happening.

Leisure Suit Larry
10-11-2006, 10:23 PM
First of all, a Pacers' player can be anywhere they want, anytime they want. You don't get to decide what are appropriate activities for them. If you want to play morale-chaporone then go have some children and play it with them. Basketball players do not exsist simply for your amusment. They have a right to go anywhere you or I would go. (I wouldn't go to Club Rio, but I also wouldn't go to Domonique's Soul Kithcen or a Celine Dion concert. But I could if I wanted to.) Root for China's basketball team if you want to be a Commie.

Secondly, this is a poor attempt at a publicity stunt by Brizzi. It will backfire bigtime. He got annililated in his debate and is going to get lampooned for spending time on this case when he has a huge murder problem in this city to deal with.

Thirdly, You don't have to wait until someone hits you with a car to fire shots. All you have to do is say they were an immenent threat to your safety. How does a prosectuter prove that they weren't an immenemt threat? Good luck with that Carl. I'm sure SJ has a few extra bucks to pay some good attorneies. "But hey he fired shots into the air---that's criminal recklessness". If you fire shots into the air to warn someone who is trying to cause you bodily harmm, prosecuter is going to have a hard time getting that to stick. O.J killed folks and got away with it Scott-free. But SJ is going to get convicted of a Felony for this?? Sure. If people want something to gripe about then they should go build a house on the coast and wait for hurricanes.

Give it a rest! The Pre-season started 45 minutes ago and the whole season is shot?


Post of the Year in my book. Hilarious! Anyway I agree with your post. The Brizzi thing pisses me off, as a Republican I support the guy but damn, what is he trying to pull here.

Leisure Suit Larry
10-11-2006, 10:24 PM
Hehe. I guess I'm defending SJ. I really just wanted to defend his right to life, liberty and the pusuit of happiness.

P.S. SJ is one of my least favorite Pacers. But he wears a jersey that says Indiana on it. That counts for something with me.

I love it, keep up the great posts!

Pacesetter
10-11-2006, 10:27 PM
More updated into the article...



http://www.wthr.com/Global/story.asp?S=5526053&nav=menu188_1

Interesting Jackson had two chances to leave himself in his car before getting ran down...

I'm simply amazed ... in fact, I'm shocked he had chances to leave the scene but opted to battle it out at tombstone .... lol :D :rolleyes:

Man, I called it!

Pacesetter
10-11-2006, 10:31 PM
First of all, a Pacers' player can be anywhere they want, anytime they want. You don't get to decide what are appropriate activities for them. If you want to play morale-chaporone then go have some children and play it with them. Basketball players do not exsist simply for your amusment. They have a right to go anywhere you or I would go. (I wouldn't go to Club Rio, but I also wouldn't go to Domonique's Soul Kithcen or a Celine Dion concert. But I could if I wanted to.) Root for China's basketball team if you want to be a Commie.

Secondly, this is a poor attempt at a publicity stunt by Brizzi. It will backfire bigtime. He got annililated in his debate and is going to get lampooned for spending time on this case when he has a huge murder problem in this city to deal with.

Thirdly, You don't have to wait until someone hits you with a car to fire shots. All you have to do is say they were an immenent threat to your safety. How does a prosectuter prove that they weren't an immenemt threat? Good luck with that Carl. I'm sure SJ has a few extra bucks to pay some good attorneies. "But hey he fired shots into the air---that's criminal recklessness". If you fire shots into the air to warn someone who is trying to cause you bodily harmm, prosecuter is going to have a hard time getting that to stick. O.J killed folks and got away with it Scott-free. But SJ is going to get convicted of a Felony for this?? Sure. If people want something to gripe about then they should go build a house on the coast and wait for hurricanes.

Give it a rest! The Pre-season started 45 minutes ago and the whole season is shot?

You know something else redwillow .... the fans who go to Conseco Fieldhouse to support the Pacers have the right to voice their opinion with their feet, iow they can just say **** 'em!

Stay on your soapbox,. but in the end if the fans decide to spend their money elsewhere, the Pacers' players won't have to worry about "moral chaparones!"

JayRedd
10-11-2006, 10:38 PM
I for one am shocked. Shocked and appalled not only that SJax would behave this way but also that he would lie about it. :rolleyes:

Seriously....this is supposed to be surprising?

Whatever happens in court happens. Who cares, frankly.

Guy is gonna get waived before opening day. Bank it.

owl
10-11-2006, 11:25 PM
Secondly, this is a poor attempt at a publicity stunt by Brizzi. It will backfire bigtime. He got annililated in his debate and is going to get lampooned for spending time on this case when he has a huge murder problem in this city to deal with.



First of all Brizzi is doing his job. Publicity stunt? Nonsense. Second of all
Jackson or someone else very easily could have been the next homicide
victim. Hooray, more publicity stunts for Brizzi. Heavy sarcasm off.

DisplacedKnick
10-11-2006, 11:31 PM
Criminal wrecklessness = firing the shots into the air

Assault - taking part in a fight before it escalated to a life threatening affair for anyone.

This in NO WAY says it wasn't self defense. These are charges that Skaut told us was coming from firing the gun into the air, and the assualt should have been common sense. He was involved in a fight, right?

If he had fired AT the car, instead of the sky, he'd only be facing misdemeanor charges.

This is completely wrong. There was no fight - there was shouting. Jackson went to his car and got a gun. He went back. Meanwhile Tinsley's friend was pounding on "Fingers." Jax decided to get some kicking in. Then he fired his gun into the air. Then he got hit by a car.

All of this is from Stephen Jackson's police statement.

Jackson took a parking lot shouting match and turned it into a shootout. That's according to his own statement from the police report. You read Dino's and you'd think they were about to conduct a prayer meeting in the parking lot so I'll go with Jackson's.

What's great about it is that there were apparently several Pacers players and friends pounding on one handicapped guy with what amounts to one arm and only half his fingers.

Jermaniac
10-11-2006, 11:38 PM
In Serbia we would get charged with criminal wrecklessness every time a soccer game came on TV and our national team scored.

vapacersfan
10-11-2006, 11:49 PM
You guys are ridiculous. This changes nothing.

If you take part in a fight, you'll face assault charges. As has been said previously, if you fire a gun into the air, you'll be facing criminal wrecklessness charges.

It still happened the same way. There was a fight, they took it a step further by attacking him with a deadly weapon (a car). If he had shot AT the car, he'd only be facing the assault charges, which is standard procedure when something like this happens.

Geez, you guys overreact like nobodys business. Christ.

Wrong again.

The video clearly shows Jax fired before the car hit him, so wether or not he fired at them or in the air doesnt matter. He could not claim self defense for shooting at the car and then getting hit by the car.

What, was he psycic and able to see the car was going to hit him?

vapacersfan
10-11-2006, 11:55 PM
This is completely wrong. There was no fight - there was shouting. Jackson went to his car and got a gun. He went back. Meanwhile Tinsley's friend was pounding on "Fingers." Jax decided to get some kicking in. Then he fired his gun into the air. Then he got hit by a car.

All of this is from Stephen Jackson's police statement.

Jackson took a parking lot shouting match and turned it into a shootout. That's according to his own statement from the police report. You read Dino's and you'd think they were about to conduct a prayer meeting in the parking lot so I'll go with Jackson's.

What's great about it is that there were apparently several Pacers players and friends pounding on one handicapped guy with what amounts to one arm and only half his fingers.

QFT!

CableKC
10-12-2006, 12:43 AM
This is completely wrong. There was no fight - there was shouting. Jackson went to his car and got a gun. He went back. Meanwhile Tinsley's friend was pounding on "Fingers." Jax decided to get some kicking in. Then he fired his gun into the air. Then he got hit by a car.

All of this is from Stephen Jackson's police statement.

Jackson took a parking lot shouting match and turned it into a shootout. That's according to his own statement from the police report. You read Dino's and you'd think they were about to conduct a prayer meeting in the parking lot so I'll go with Jackson's.

What's great about it is that there were apparently several Pacers players and friends pounding on one handicapped guy with what amounts to one arm and only half his fingers.

The more I read of this sorted affair....the more am forced to do my impression of Picard:
:picard:

Naptown_Seth
10-12-2006, 01:46 AM
I admit that the latest news and story version has me frustrated and upset.

However, after reading the WTHR account linked here I still have one question - how the F did Jack get a couple of teeth broken from kicking a cripple lying on the ground?

Was it soley from the car hit? Did he do a face plant that bad when he was hit?

What about the punch, or was there one? Because right now I'm betting that not every witness thinks it was just Fingers rolling on the ground getting jumped. Jack was unfortunately making this worse it would seem, and that's a problem, but in terms of the total truth some things still don't match up perfectly.



Overall I'm following Hicks into the area of great disappointment if these were the actual choices Jack was making.

However, I still stand by my view regarding the reactions to strip clubs, 3 AM, and half a joint. Those are standard practice and have nothing to do with solving a problem by beating someone up or by ramping the situation up by fetching your gun.


Unless 2 days from now more witnesses come forth and suddenly the story takes another shift. Already we went from 4 Pacers just hanging out to a decent sized group that appears to have had more non-Pacers in it than Pacers.

And I'm also curious as to just what Fingers was doing when he went to "befriend" a dancer that was mingling/working with the Pacers group.


Anyway, if the latest version is what stands then I think Jack in Indy is done. If this is just a set of formalities and the actual case ends up with a lot less teeth (no pun intended) then it goes back to being no big deal in the long run.


Honestly the Pacers can move on without him I feel certain, but he may have just :censored: his career for good.

MagicRat
10-12-2006, 10:41 AM
http://www.theindychannel.com/news/10056420/detail.html

Here's the probable cause affidavit.

Mattox admits initiating the fight by hitting Fingers after hearing repeated threats to "dump".