Bison06 Posted June 11, 2013 Share Posted June 11, 2013 What is this "true believers" reference. I am not familiar with that term. The only reason I brought up Sandy hook was to say that the media runs with the early story and sometimes the official account is different. Obviously the details are different. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnboyND7 Posted June 11, 2013 Share Posted June 11, 2013 Dom Izzo @DomIzzoWDAY 6m Defense attorney Bruce Quick tells me he believes there's "self-defense element" regarding Travis Beck and will be successfully defended Here we go. The best attorney in the state will spin, twist and mold the hell out of this to where Beck is playing next fall. Gene will then tell everyone that "he has been through enough" and will be suspended for 1 game. Book it. You are upset that a young man may in fact not be guilty of a felony? Is there something wrong with having your rights defended? and what so he'll miss the kstate game, like he would make a difference there anyway. Umm....yeah, he is a two-year starter and a pretty good one at that. His backup, regardless of who it is, does not have nearly the experience Beck does. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt Posted June 11, 2013 Share Posted June 11, 2013 Closed circuit to UND Law School Grads: You can build a very lucrative practice by being on retainer with the AC athletic department. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UND1983 Posted June 11, 2013 Share Posted June 11, 2013 You are upset that a young man may in fact not be guilty of a felony? Is there something wrong with having your rights defended? Like I said, this will be spun and twisted to the point where he was "defending" himself and everyone in Fargo will completely ignore the fact that its his third offense in as many years. His past history will somehow be ignored by Bohl, GT and the fanbase. Quick will turn him into the victim, somehow, some way. You cannot deny the resisting arrest part, but I am sure somehow that will go away soon also. It's becoming fairly predictable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnboyND7 Posted June 11, 2013 Share Posted June 11, 2013 Like I said, this will be spun and twisted to the point where he was "defending" himself and everyone in Fargo will completely ignore the fact that its his third offense in as many years. His past history will somehow be ignored by Bohl, GT and the fanbase. Quick will turn him into the victim, somehow, some way. You cannot deny the resisting arrest part, but I am sure somehow that will go away soon also. It's becoming fairly predictable. The video evidence that apparently is out there will show what did or did not happen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
choyt3 Posted June 11, 2013 Share Posted June 11, 2013 Umm....yeah, he is a two-year starter and a pretty good one at that. His backup, regardless of who it is, does not have nearly the experience Beck does. [whoosh] <--- the sound of that one going over your head Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt Posted June 11, 2013 Share Posted June 11, 2013 The video evidence that apparently is out there will show what did or did not happen. Don't assume the video will serve to exonerate or convict. Could just as easily be inconclusive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bison06 Posted June 11, 2013 Share Posted June 11, 2013 Like I said, this will be spun and twisted to the point where he was "defending" himself and everyone in Fargo will completely ignore the fact that its his third offense in as many years. His past history will somehow be ignored by Bohl, GT and the fanbase. Quick will turn him into the victim, somehow, some way. You cannot deny the resisting arrest part, but I am sure somehow that will go away soon also. It's becoming fairly predictable. What are you angry about? That NDSU fans would prefer the facts come out before passing judgement? Past history? He got a minor. Alert homeland security. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bison06 Posted June 11, 2013 Share Posted June 11, 2013 Don't assume the video will serve to exonerate or convict. Could just as easily be inconclusive. I agree, but at least they'll get it right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teeder11 Posted June 11, 2013 Share Posted June 11, 2013 charlie stock wasn't available? Is Stock the one that goes by CAS on Bville? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdub27 Posted June 11, 2013 Share Posted June 11, 2013 Past history? He got a minor. Alert homeland security. Also the second time he's been charged with resisting arrest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UND1983 Posted June 11, 2013 Share Posted June 11, 2013 What are you angry about? That NDSU fans would prefer the facts come out before passing judgement? Past history? He got a minor. Alert homeland security. We will see how it plays out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bison06 Posted June 11, 2013 Share Posted June 11, 2013 Also the second time he's been charged with resisting arrest. Though it looks like this second resisting arrest charge is warranted. I have seen that charge given out for some pretty "ticky tack" things. Especially if it associated with an MIP. Seems to have a pretty low threshold to be charged with resisting arrest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redneksioux Posted June 11, 2013 Share Posted June 11, 2013 What are you angry about? That NDSU fans would prefer the facts come out before passing judgement? Past history? He got a minor. Alert homeland security. So if the video doesn't show $&!? You must acquit? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bison06 Posted June 11, 2013 Share Posted June 11, 2013 So if the video doesn't show $&!? You must acquit? Not sure, I'm not a lawyer. If the video doesn't show the alteration clearly, it seems to me that the only people who are talking are parties directly involved. He said, he said type of deal. I'm sure someone on this board can shed some light on what might happen if this video is inconclusive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SiouxVolley Posted June 11, 2013 Share Posted June 11, 2013 Not sure, I'm not a lawyer. If the video doesn't show the alteration clearly, it seems to me that the only people who are talking are parties directly involved. He said, he said type of deal. I'm sure someone on this board can shed some light on what might happen if this video is inconclusive. So you don't think the evidence includes an unconcious man who was taken to a hospital as well as his records? That's some tough evidence to try to pretend didn't happen. Even if on some technicality Beck gets off, how can Gene Taylor allow Beck to play considering Taylor said NDSU had zero tolerance for violence, sexual misconduct, or drugs. Most Fargoans don't want a goon squad football team running around town. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnboyND7 Posted June 12, 2013 Share Posted June 12, 2013 So you don't think the evidence includes an unconcious man who was taken to a hospital as well as his records? That's some tough evidence to try to pretend didn't happen. Even if on some technicality Beck gets off, how can Gene Taylor allow Beck to play considering Taylor said NDSU had zero tolerance for violence, sexual misconduct, or drugs. Most Fargoans don't want a goon squad football team running around town. No one has said Beck didn't hit the guy. If he guy hit beck first, then Beck is entitled to fight back...not saying he should have or shouldn't have. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdub27 Posted June 12, 2013 Share Posted June 12, 2013 Well there are people already claiming to have seen the video and that Beck was defending himself. Not sure how that would even be possible? I believe the Forum was already denied seeing it as it was part of an ongoing investigation, curious how all these "insiders" have seen it. And how good of the quality is the video and does it include sound (honestly don't know)? As for his attorney stating it was self-defense, what else is he going to say? And I concur on it being interesting on what GT and Bohl do regardless, GT said there was no tolerance for violence. Will there be an exception to the rule this fast? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
82SiouxGuy Posted June 12, 2013 Share Posted June 12, 2013 No one has said Beck didn't hit the guy. If he guy hit beck first, then Beck is entitled to fight back...not saying he should have or shouldn't have. There is no excuse for beating someone until they are unconscious, even if that person threw the first punch. If the other person attacked, Beck should be able to defend himself. But there is a limit. Unconscious is past that limit. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stromer Posted June 12, 2013 Share Posted June 12, 2013 There is no excuse for beating someone until they are unconscious, even if that person threw the first punch. If the other person attacked, Beck should be able to defend himself. But there is a limit. Unconscious is past that limit. Very common to see someone knocked out from just 1 punch. Now please tell me how that is past the limit? You have no control on how the events unfold after the first punch is thrown. That's why no fight is ever worth it. Even if you win you end up losing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnboyND7 Posted June 12, 2013 Share Posted June 12, 2013 There is no excuse for beating someone until they are unconscious, even if that person threw the first punch. If the other person attacked, Beck should be able to defend himself. But there is a limit. Unconscious is past that limit. Beck said he hit the guy til he went down. If that is the case, it really doesn't matter if the dude was unconscious. Now if the guy went down and Beck continued to pummel him, then I think you'd have a point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darell1976 Posted June 12, 2013 Author Share Posted June 12, 2013 Beck said he hit the guy til he went down. If that is the case, it really doesn't matter if the dude was unconscious. Now if the guy went down and Beck continued to pummel him, then I think you'd have a point. That is why you need video of it to see what exactly happened. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hayduke Posted June 12, 2013 Share Posted June 12, 2013 You know, I'll bet that everyone thinks this Ag Coilege player's life is over now. It's not. Heck, it was over when he signed up to play for the AC.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goon Posted June 12, 2013 Share Posted June 12, 2013 There is no excuse for beating someone until they are unconscious, even if that person threw the first punch. If the other person attacked, Beck should be able to defend himself. But there is a limit. Unconscious is past that limit. It's called force necessary to end/repel the attacker. If he went to far, he's still in trouble. Any first year Criminal Justice student can tell you that. I think it's funny that Bison faithful are defending this guy. Yep.... I can see how this one ends already, since he's a star player, he will never see a suspension, if he does, it will be the first game of the year. More than likely by the time this one is over the kid will be the victim much like the clowns in the voter registration fraud case. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goon Posted June 12, 2013 Share Posted June 12, 2013 . Most Fargoans don't want a goon squad football team running around town. From what I have seen the last couple of years, it appears that the locals are able to over look it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts