dwschmid Posted July 17, 2003 Share Posted July 17, 2003 And both of those incidents pale in comparison to Woog paying money to his players, Lou Nanne and Glenn Sonmoor recruiting Zach Parise after he already committed to UND, the Clem Haskins scandal, and the numerous other recent scandals at the University of Rodents. "numerous other recent scandals"? and what would these be? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mksioux Posted July 17, 2003 Share Posted July 17, 2003 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skateshattrick Posted July 17, 2003 Share Posted July 17, 2003 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mksioux Posted July 17, 2003 Share Posted July 17, 2003 PCM...you beat me to the retort. And yes you are correct...the less serious forgery crimes are often prosecuted at the state level. ...and NO there is NOT a federal court in Anoka County. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mksioux Posted July 17, 2003 Share Posted July 17, 2003 On a related note - any fan from an opposing team who calles Bochenski a "convicted felon" is technically inaccurate. His plea deal was such that he would enter a diversion program for 2 years...and upon successful completion, the case would be dismissed and the felony conviction would be wiped from his record. He has succesfully completed his diversion program and the case has been dismissed. I know that this is lawyer-speak but it is factual. ...and NO I'm not related to Brandon nor do I know him. This is all public information. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rick Posted July 17, 2003 Share Posted July 17, 2003 Sorry Hammy, I didn't realize you were a lawyer. You just insulted every lawyer in Minnesota. If I remember right, the hamster is a social worker. I believe he attended North Hennepin Community College. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WPoS Posted July 17, 2003 Share Posted July 17, 2003 skates...geeze lighten up man. I never said he was convicted, never said I was a lawyer, never said I was a "expert on virtually everything". My original post was meant as he will be playing is all. Just because I am a Gopher Fan doesn't mean I ALWAYS intentionally am trying to stir the pot. I am sure that UND fan saying pretty much the same thing would have not gotten quite the response I have from you. Do you actually think I like the crap that gets pulled down here? Bouncy ball can go away for all that I care. That takes care of about 80% of any NCAA violations that occur at the U. PCM, thanks for the info...you are correct WPoS Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PCM Posted July 17, 2003 Share Posted July 17, 2003 mksioux, I didn't know that about Bochenski and it brings up a good point that I suspect most people don't realize. Many criminals -- especially young first-time offenders -- receive suspended sentences. They are put on probation for a certain period of time. If they complete the probationary period with no violations, the charge is dropped and it comes off the person's record. Legally, it's as if the crime never happened. I once covered the trial of a woman charged with manslaughter. The prosecuting attorney confided to me that she had been convicted of manslaughter before. However, because she received a suspended sentence and had successfully completed her probation, the charge came off her record. He couldn't even mention the past conviction during the trial, even though it would have helped his case to do so. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hammy Posted July 17, 2003 Share Posted July 17, 2003 If I remember right, the hamster is a social worker. I believe he attended North Hennepin Community College. Nope. Maybe you are confusing me with another guy who runs mental circles around you though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skateshattrick Posted July 17, 2003 Share Posted July 17, 2003 skates...geeze lighten up man. I never said he was convicted, never said I was a lawyer, never said I was a "expert on virtually everything". My original post was meant as he will be playing is all. Just because I am a Gopher Fan doesn't mean I ALWAYS intentionally am trying to stir the pot. I am sure that UND fan saying pretty much the same thing would have not gotten quite the response I have from you. Do you actually think I like the crap that gets pulled down here? Bouncy ball can go away for all that I care. That takes care of about 80% of any NCAA violations that occur at the U. PCM, thanks for the info...you are correct WPoS My apologies for busting your chops, but I took it as a shot at UND's program. If you say it was not, then I accept that. I also did not like the bold emphasis that sent the message that this clearly was a federal offense. I don't believe it was, but I don't profess to know enough about the situation despite the fact that I am a lawyer and have been for many years. Minn. Stat. 609.625 is a state crime for aggravated forgery. He was never charged with any federal offense. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PCM Posted July 17, 2003 Share Posted July 17, 2003 Nope. Maybe you are confusing me with another guy who runs mental circles around you though. Is running in mental circles considered a positive attribute in Minnesota? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WPoS Posted July 17, 2003 Share Posted July 17, 2003 My apologies for busting your chops, but I took it as a shot at UND's program. If you say it was not, then I accept that. I also did not like the bold emphasis that sent the message that this clearly was a federal offense. I don't believe it was, but I don't profess to know enough about the situation despite the fact that I am a lawyer and have been for many years. Minn. Stat. 609.625 is a state crime for aggravated forgery. He was never charged with any federal offense. ok, my bad, I always thought forgery was a federal dealio...may be wrong...I can accept that I may have been mistaken, sorry about that if I was wrong... WPoS Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hammy Posted July 17, 2003 Share Posted July 17, 2003 Is running in mental circles considered a positive attribute in Minnesota? Only when it means the other guy is standing there clueless. Sort of like Rick. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hammy Posted July 17, 2003 Share Posted July 17, 2003 ok, my bad, I always thought forgery was a federal dealio...may be wrong...I can accept that I may have been mistaken, sorry about that if I was wrong... WPoS The ultimate jurisdiction is federal. All they are pointing out is that it doesn't mean it is prosecuted that way. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PCM Posted July 17, 2003 Share Posted July 17, 2003 The ultimate jurisdiction is federal. All they are pointing out is that it doesn't mean it is prosecuted that way. The "ultimate jurisdication" is whatever court gets the case. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skateshattrick Posted July 17, 2003 Share Posted July 17, 2003 The ultimate jurisdiction is federal. All they are pointing out is that it doesn't mean it is prosecuted that way. That is not true either. It is a state offense that he was charged with, not federal. It is conceivable that he could have been charged with a federal offense, but it is speculation to say that the alleged offense constituted a violation of a federal statute. I doubt that you know the circumstances well enough to say whether he could have even been charged with a federal offense, or if there was sufficient evidence to prosecute. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rick Posted July 17, 2003 Share Posted July 17, 2003 Only when it means the other guy is standing there clueless. Sort of like Rick. Back in '97/'98 when he went by the name "Scott", he was a social worker. I guess I'm not sure what he is now. I could be wrong on the NHCC degree. Maybe he never graduated. I haven't checked out the POI board for about a year, nobody must be listening to him over there anymore so he's spouting off on this board now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mksioux Posted July 17, 2003 Share Posted July 17, 2003 The "ultimate jurisdication" is whatever court gets the case. There is no such thing as "ultimate jurisdiction." The Feds may have had jurisdiction had there been enough evidence to charge Brandon with a FEDERAL offense. There may very well have been enough evidence to do so, but the Feds chose not to pursue it for whatever reason. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rick Posted July 17, 2003 Share Posted July 17, 2003 I have no trouble admitting when I'm wrong. After reading all hammy's posts, I stand corrected on his degree and where he obtained it. He's not a social worker anymore, he's a lawyer, and he didn't receive his degree from NHCC, it came from Dunwoody. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PCM Posted July 17, 2003 Share Posted July 17, 2003 There is no such thing as "ultimate jurisdiction." What I meant is that the only sentence that ultimately matters is the one that comes from the court that handled the case. Regardless of whether Bochenski could have been charged with a more serious federal crime, the fact remains, he wasnt. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hammy Posted July 17, 2003 Share Posted July 17, 2003 Back in '97/'98 when he went by the name "Scott", he was a social worker. I guess I'm not sure what he is now. I could be wrong on the NHCC degree. Maybe he never graduated. I haven't checked out the POI board for about a year, nobody must be listening to him over there anymore so he's spouting off on this board now. As usual, incorrect. I have never worked in any field revolving around social work. My alma mater? The same institution your head coach got his undergrad degree from. Not sure about grad school though. I have to sort that one out yet. I'll keep you informed since you seem to be so interested. As for me on POI.... well, things are calm with two straight titles under the program's belt so there isn't much to debate. So we just go where the controversy is. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rick Posted July 17, 2003 Share Posted July 17, 2003 So we just go where the controversy is. Who is "we"? You must be talking about present day "hammy" and the past "Scott" social worker guy back in '98 who would never reveal his sources when he was challenged. Then it turned out he didn't have the connections he claimed to have and that the garbage he was spewing was incorrect and couldn't be verified, so he went through "the change". You remember him, don't you hammy. He was a social worker back then (at least that's what he claimed to be), I'm not sure what he is today.....postal worker, astronaut, fireman, cowboy? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
administrator Posted July 17, 2003 Share Posted July 17, 2003 The personal sniping between members is not only way off the thread topic, but not of general interest. Email or PM are both better for personal communication that isn't of general interest to other members. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
schmidtdoggydog Posted July 17, 2003 Share Posted July 17, 2003 Many criminals -- especially young first-time offenders -- receive suspended sentences. They are put on probation for a certain period of time. If they complete the probationary period with no violations, the charge is dropped and it comes off the person's record. Legally, it's as if the crime never happened. I once covered the trial of a woman charged with manslaughter. The prosecuting attorney confided to me that she had been convicted of manslaughter before. However, because she received a suspended sentence and had successfully completed her probation, the charge came off her record. He couldn't even mention the past conviction during the trial, even though it would have helped his case to do so. In theory this would seem to be correct, however, technically it is not. Whenever you are charged with a crime, even if the matter is dismissed by the prosecution or the presiding judge or you are acquitted at trial there is still a record of the charge despite the lack of conviction. The only way to seal that record is to successfully petition the Court for expungement, which is rarely granted. Admitting guilt and subsequently having the charge dismissed after successful completion of probation (the situation to which you refer) is very rare in Minnesota, but is similar to what happened to Bochenski. I see an abundance of forgery charges in my job, but have yet to see the State defer to the Feds, who have much bigger fish to fry. In another vein, despite the exploding prison population nationwide, suspended or stayed sentences are the norm in the criminal justice system. However, what the Courts' typically do is hold jail or prison sentences over a person's head to ensure compliance with probation. If they violate probation, the stay is lifted and the person serves time. When people satisfy conditions of their probation and are successfully discharged the jail time disappears. In JB's case, if he pleads guilty or is convicted he will likely get a stayed sentence, with jail time (up to 90 days, but more than likely 30) hanging over his head. If he pays full restitution along with the other party involved, pays a fine and satisfies other conditions of probation (remains law abiding, cooperates with his probation agent if one is assigned, abstains from alcohol, if required, etc.) he would then be discharged from probation and won't have to serve the jail time, but the conviction, absent a stay of adjudication, will stay on his record. BTW, what in the world is ultimate jurisdiction?! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sprig Posted July 18, 2003 Share Posted July 18, 2003 BTW, what in the world is ultimate jurisdiction?! My guess would be God. In the law according to Hammy, who knows Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.