Noted without comment
From the N&O:
I'll have some comments later on this development, when i get a bit more time. Meanwhile, your thoughts?
Duke's Tauiliili OK'd to play
Despite facing criminal charges, Duke linebacker is reinstated -- with sanctions
Duke reinstated linebacker Michael Tauiliili to its football program Thursday, 11 days after he was suspended following an arrest on charges of driving while impaired and simple assault.
Duke's leading tackler during his first two seasons, the junior will be held out of the Blue Devils' Sept. 1 season opener against Connecticut and faces several undisclosed internal sanctions, coach Ted Roof said.
. . .
According to Durham Police citations, Tauiliili, 20, failed to stop at the scene of an accident that resulted in property damage to a vehicle owned by Jesus Alejo of Creedmoor. Tauiliili was arrested about 4 a.m. Aug. 4 and, according to police citations, had a .12 blood alcohol level, above North Carolina's legal limit of .08. (The legal age to consume alcohol is 21.)
Tauiliili -- listed under his birth name, Michael Shawn Brown, on the warrant -- also is accused of carrying a concealed knife and pointing an air pistol at Alejo.
I'll have some comments later on this development, when i get a bit more time. Meanwhile, your thoughts?
7 Comments:
Er... Duke's learned its lesson about slagging its own students in public?
Of course for this to be a true comparison, there are a few things that would have to swapped. Wanna make a list?
By Anonymous, at 11:42 AM
OK, that's one in favor of drunk driving and waving weapons around.
Anybody else?
By Barry, at 12:12 PM
Well you've got him convicted already. At least you're consistent.
By Anonymous, at 2:46 PM
Well, he did blow a .12 on the breathalyzer. Sounds pretty guilty to me.
He must have been a real ass to the police, too - they even hit him with a seat belt charge.
This is his second run-in with the law. He was arrested for a bar fight in Chapel Hill last year. One man crime wave, movin west. Look out, Wake County!
By Anonymous, at 10:49 PM
He's just trying to fit in with the Durmites. Think of it as community outreach. What's the big deal?
By Anonymous, at 2:35 PM
I don't have any answers, but I do have some thoughts.
I don't envy an athletic department for having to wrestle with decisions on whether/when to suspend students between the time they're accused of something and the time a conviction is or isn't delivered.
In our judicial affairs, we say "innocent until proven guilty" but we still keep potentially dangerous people behind bars until they come to trial. In the rest of our societal affairs, we usually measure relative risk (different for hospitals with working-drunk allegations against an MD than for athletic teams with public drunkenness allegations against a tennis player, say) as to what might happen to our constituents and publics in the case of actual guilt. We also measure the potential harm from "punishing" someone who may have done nothing wrong -- even if the punishment is "only" the loss of a chance to play football.
In the case of university athletes -- I'd like to imagine a society in which a school could say, "playing sports is a privilege. And therefore we are not 'infringing' on someone's needs or rights by suspending them whenever there's a serious allegation. Sure, it's bad luck if they're actually innocent. But it's bad luck that causes loss of a luxury, not a necessity." But this isn't that kind of society now, is it?
By Marsosudiro, at 2:34 AM
I was a bit surprised when i asked Durham Public Schools what their policy was regarding students or staffers who were arrested for DUI and got this answer:
"Durham Public Schools does not have a districtwide policy regarding DUI
as that is something that is outside the schools jurisdiction."
Something to think on.
By Barry, at 9:53 AM
Post a Comment
<< Home