Mickey Joseph Arrested For Assault

[thexyz]

7 minutes ago, Rhuletheday said:

Terrible situation.  Nobody wins when it comes to domestic violence.  Loss of marriage.  Loss of child custody.  Loss of career.  Loss of time with family due to a divorce or prison time.  Not to mention the long-term trauma caused to the children that starts the cycle all over again. 

 

We will find out more as time goes on.  One of the charges is a felony, a charge that is not made without substantial evidence supporting the charge, especially against someone who is high profile.  For Strangulation in Nebraska: The maximum punishment is three years imprisonment and 18 months post-release supervision, or a $10,000 fine, or both

 

If a women is beating up on a man, it is on the man to leave the marriage or relationship.  If there are kids, then gather video or audio evidence (not hard to do these days) and then leave, taking the kids with you.  No child should have to grow up in a violent environment.  Be a man, do what is right. 

 

The stats say every day 3 women are murdered by thier husband or boyfriend.  Only God knows the true number, but it is substantial.  If you think this is a laughing matter, you have no morality.  

 

 

 

We just don't know the specifics. There are many possible scenarios. We don't know what precisely went down there or what lead up to it. We can only speculate. As of now it seems Mickey's put himself in a very bad position due to his alleged actions. 

 

Some of us here have probably witnessed traumatic events and/or known others that have. It can and often does affect children for a lifetime. That's the worst of it. Worse yet, some are victims themselves directly. It is awful and at times tragic. No excuse for it happening whatsoever. 

 

As you say, it is not funny at all. There are many concealed stories that remain hidden. We think that we know someone and they sometimes prove themselves to be entirely different than we believed. Then the conflict emerges once they're found out. We might even feel isolated knowing and peers not believing us. This sort of thing. Victims can feel guilty that they are somehow responsible. There's great humiliation and heartache. 

 

Terrible all around indeed. 

 

I just really feel let down not unlike most of us. Here's a person we looked up to, admired and believed in and now that's all in question. Just the other day I was posting on Mrs. Joseph's Twitter my gratitude for their family coming here. They made a sacrifice and chose us.  And, how somehow I hoped they'd find a way to remain as we're making a fresh beginning. Now, you check over there and it's all gone almost in an instant. 

 

One day a hero's on the sidelines, the next he's in jail. 

 

No matter what your opinion was on Mickey being head coach or not just about everybody was a fan of his cheering him on.  For those of us fans who lived during that span of time that he was playing he represented a better time and cherished memories. A shadow has been cast upon another bright spot.  We wanted him to stay. And the whole thing has suddenly become ugly. 

 

It's difficult to comprehend and all so very sad. 

[Lorewarn]

4 hours ago, gobiggergoredder said:

But if you believe firing someone based upon an accusation is just, which is where this all started, there is nothing for us to discuss/debate.  It’s flat out dangerous.

 

The conversation actually did not start at whether firing someone based on an accusation is just or not. It started in regards to whether the firing is likely or not - it being 'just' wasn't a part of that conversation.

 

What you can't seem to get is regardless of if it's just, if it's following the terms of the contract, it's doable. If his contract states one cause he could be fired for is if someone accuses him of being an alien from the horsehead nebula, and then someone does claim that, even if it's not true, he can still be fired with cause. Similarly but less hyperbolically, if his contract has language surrounding bringing bad PR to the university or getting into legal trouble as fireable offenses, which it likely does, then he will be fired with cause.

 

 

3 hours ago, gobiggergoredder said:

You alluded he should be fired.  With no investigation, evidence or follow up.  I work in America.  It’s unfortunate that “Due Process” is somehow bizarre.

 

Enhance did not allude to how Mickey should be fired. He alluded to the likely probability that he will be fired. Quit making such audacious claims while simultaneously failing in having average reading comprehension.

 

[gobiggergoredder]

3 hours ago, Lorewarn said:

 

The conversation actually did not start at whether firing someone based on an accusation is just or not. It started in regards to whether the firing is likely or not - it being 'just' wasn't a part of that conversation.

 

What you can't seem to get is regardless of if it's just, if it's following the terms of the contract, it's doable. If his contract states one cause he could be fired for is if someone accuses him of being an alien from the horsehead nebula, and then someone does claim that, even if it's not true, he can still be fired with cause. Similarly but less hyperbolically, if his contract has language surrounding bringing bad PR to the university or getting into legal trouble as fireable offenses, which it likely does, then he will be fired with cause.

 

 

 

Enhance did not allude to how Mickey should be fired. He alluded to the likely probability that he will be fired. Quit making such audacious claims while simultaneously failing in having average reading comprehension.

 

Quote

 

But this is also one of those situations where there won't need to be a trial. The university has already placed him on administrative leave and will probably look to formally sever ties ASAP pursuant toconversations with their lawyers. I imagine the mere fact he was arrested on a violent offense is probable cause to be fired.

you sir are welcomed to interpret this how ever you see fit.  We can beat up Would/should all day long.  The fact that anyone is “ok” with firing someone based upon the information we have is troublesome.   I will allow you to come to your conclusion without insulting your ability to read. “I imagine” our conclusions are different and that’s ok.

 

The second there is one shred of evidence he’s gone and I’m fine with that.    The Hosehead Nacho example is strong, but lacks practicality.  Firing someone on an accusation is dangerous no matter how you look at it and the likelihood of it happening with the evidence we have been presented, which is none, is very low.  The negative PR at this this point is a result of the accusation.  That will change quickly with evidence.  Once that transition happens, if indeed it does, it’s a whole new ball game.

 

The irony of this entire discussion is how I’m being called out for the same things several are actually doing.

 

These are hard discussions.  The lazy will say one is defending a wife beater.  You’re not doing that, but I guarantee that has gone through the minds of several.  I took the exact same stance with the two kids the ultimately got kicked off team for rape a few years back.  We all need to be advocates for due process and not the angry mob mentality.  We live in a ‘bizarro’ world where in the court of Twitterbook you’re guilty until proven innocent.  It’s far easier to be outraged than see the process through.  Quite frankly, I think it’s scary.

[twofittyonred]

question,  If it comes out that this disturbance had to do with an affair by the second party, does it change the narrative..??  

[Hagg]

11 minutes ago, twofittyonred said:

question,  If it comes out that this disturbance had to do with an affair by the second party, does it change the narrative..??  

 

Well, an assault becomes self-defense only when there's a perceived threat proven, I think.  If you're angry because of something going on with your spouse and you attack her, or the other party, the questions in court will have a lot to do with why you attacked her or the other party.

[NM11046]

12 minutes ago, twofittyonred said:

question,  If it comes out that this disturbance had to do with an affair by the second party, does it change the narrative..??  

Do you mean is it ok to strangle a woman if she's cheating on you?

 

Am I understanding your question right?  If so do you want to think about if you really, really want to say that out loud?

[Torgan]

11 minutes ago, twofittyonred said:

question,  If it comes out that this disturbance had to do with an affair by the second party, does it change the narrative..??  

Everything is speculation at this point, but to answer your hypothetical; No it does not change the narrative.  Even if one party walks in on their partner in the act, you pull out your phone, take a photo of the indiscretion and then immediately head to a lawyer.  It should never, ever become physical.  

[Husker03]

45 minutes ago, twofittyonred said:

question,  If it comes out that this disturbance had to do with an affair by the second party, does it change the narrative..??  

No.  If he found out his wife was cheating on him it would have been ok for him to leave the house and check into a hotel for a few days why they figured out counseling or separation.  Physically attacking her? Never a reasonable response.

[JJ Husker]

So it’s day 2. This must be the day when people start throwing out hypotheticals and asking what if this or that. The good thing is, when you don’t know squat, the options are endless. Have fun.

[sho]

1 hour ago, NM11046 said:

Do you mean is it ok to strangle a woman if she's cheating on you?

 

Am I understanding your question right?  If so do you want to think about if you really, really want to say that out loud?

 

Based on what I've heard from multiple people, sounds like a woman wasn't being strangled, not that it makes it any better. 

 

And the answer, doesn't matter what the other person is doing, strangling anyone is not OK, shouldn't have to preface with woman.   Not OK to strangle anyone, under 99.99% of circumstances.

 

 

[olddominionhusker]

6 hours ago, Lorewarn said:

What you can't seem to get is regardless of if it's just, if it's following the terms of the contract, it's doable. If his contract states one cause he could be fired for is if someone accuses him of being an alien from the horsehead nebula, and then someone does claim that, even if it's not true, he can still be fired with cause

That’s making an assumption that he has a terrible agent that would allow such open ended language in a contract with money of that magnitude on the table. Is it possible? Sure. Maybe he and his agent are stupid or incompetent. None of us are privy to his contract. But it would be very odd to expose yourself in a contract where a mere accusation allows you to be terminated for cause. My guess is administrative leave will be in place and once UNL reviews the facts and ascertains the likelihood of his guilt they will act. If the initial evidence looks awful they will probably take the risk and terminate

[alexhortdog95]

This is one hell of a post to get to #777, but it seems to be well on its way.

[Vizsla1]

12 hours ago, ColoradoHusk said:

Ummm…no

https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1992-09-07-sp-161-story.html

[knapplc]

Just finding out about this. I'm in shock. 

[sho]

Per DB this morning, two other adults were at the Joseph home, which adds to the credibility of what I've heard that it wasn't his wife being strangled.   Passion rage is wild, will make people do things they don't normally do.