Tommy Rees and Carlo Calabrese arrested

[Bogtrotter07]

Yeah I understand, but I was just wondering about this charge in particular because (a) he's a minor, and, (b) he was found to have alcohol in his system at the scene of the 'crime.' Not sure how you fight that one...

Before we loose sight of it, Tommy is not a minor.

 

[NDdomer2]

Before we loose sight of it, Tommy is not a minor.

Notre Dame QB Tommy Rees appears in court - BostonHerald.com

In less time than it takes to run a play from scrimmage, Notre Dame quarterback Tommy Rees appeared briefly in court Thursday morning to enter a not guilty plea to misdemeanor charges of resisting law enforcement, battery and minor consumption.

 

[NDhoosier]

two definitions of a minor...
A minor is technically under 18: sexual interactions with a minor, independence from parents, etc...
but when it comes to drinking alcohol, it is under 21.

 

[Grahambo]

You always make errors, Graham Cracker. From Tun Tavern, (where I believe the first Philly Steak Sandwich was served, to White Feather, (Carlos). June 14, 1775? June 14, 1685? What do we have a comedian here?

You sure as heck do know what Tun Tavern is/was. White Feather..RIP...I never said 1685 although I'm sure you were around at that time too!

To second and third some fellas from above me, never plead guilty (unless a serious crime and a deal is struck yada, yada). Remember, the burden is on the government to prove beyond a reasonable doubt what you are charged with, not perponderance of the evidence (that would be in civil cases).

 

[BobD]

 

[Bogtrotter07]

You sure as heck do know what Tun Tavern is/was. White Feather..RIP...I never said 1685 although I'm sure you were around at that time too!

To second and third some fellas from above me, never plead guilty (unless a serious crime and a deal is struck yada, yada). Remember, the burden is on the government to prove beyond a reasonable doubt what you are charged with, not perponderance of the evidence (that would be in civil cases).

1685 is when Tun Tavern first was built. Everything happened there. From Free Masonry to Philly steak sandwiches to Leathernecks. Ohraah!

Tommy Rees is not a minor. He is guilty of minor consumption in Indiana. They don't update their laws to keep pace with the modern world; they just give arcane branches of their government totalitarian powers to provide for the common good. In Ohio and most other states he would be guilty of underage drinking as opposed to underage drinking as a minor.

 

[DillonHall]

.

 

[Bogtrotter07]

You the man DillonHall even if you spell it different:

<iframe width="420" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/1XSvsFgvWr0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

 

[WaveDomer]

Seriously? You don't EVER plead guilty to ANYTHING unless you're getting a deal. The burden is on the prosecution to prove the charge. There is literally not one reason to make their job easier for them.

I honestly believe there needs to be at least a little bit of law taught at the high school level. These are pretty basic concepts. It is elementary to how the system works.

I would agree with some schooling on basic law. Like when people deny their right to remain silent. WTF are you doing?

 

[DillonHall]

I would agree with some schooling on basic law. Like when people deny their right to remain silent. WTF are you doing?

The vast majority of the population doesn't ever get charged with a crime. I don't know how necessary it really is.

 

[Bogtrotter07]

Yes, but we are not the vast majority of the population.

 

[BGIF]

The vast majority of the population doesn't ever get charged with a crime. I don't know how necessary it really is.

Probably because the vast majority doesn't party in South Bend.

 

[WaveDomer]

The vast majority of the population doesn't ever get charged with a crime. I don't know how necessary it really is.

The vast majority of the population never uses physics or chemistry either. This is actually a basic civil rights issue that could be handled in Social Studies class.

 

[Irish Houstonian]

The vast majority of the population never uses physics or chemistry either. This is actually a basic civil rights issue that could be handled in Social Studies class.

On that note, I just heard of a police scam -- if the cops ever tell you you're required to bring your bail money "in cash" they're lying. Since 75-90% of all bills have traces of cocaine, they're going to use a drug-sniffing dog on your bills, and then sieze them as instruments of a criminal enterprise. Doesn't matter if they just came from the bank or ATM. Sad but true.

 

[NDBoiler]

On that note, I just heard of a police scam -- if the cops ever tell you you're required to bring your bail money "in cash" they're lying. Since 75-90% of all bills have traces of cocaine, they're going to use a drug-sniffing dog on your bills, and then sieze them as instruments of a criminal enterprise. Doesn't matter if they just came from the bank or ATM. Sad but true.

So by that logic/statistics, how would the overwhelming majority of arrestees ever be allowed to leave jail when they make bail? It would just be a vicious cycle - you get arrested, post bail...OOOPS!! crack money!! back to jail, post bail...OOPS!! crack money!! back to jail...

Not to mention, I think that would pretty squarely fit the definition of "entrapment".

 

[Irish Houstonian]

So by that logic/statistics, how would the overwhelming majority of arrestees ever be allowed to leave jail when they make bail? It would just be a vicious cycle - you get arrested, post bail...OOOPS!! crack money!! back to jail, post bail...OOPS!! crack money!! back to jail...

Not to mention, I think that would pretty squarely fit the definition of "entrapment".

That could possibly happen, and it would be neither entrapment nor unconstitutional under current Sup. Ct. jurisprudence.

Just get a money order first. And then don't spill drugs on it.

 

[NDBoiler]

That could possibly happen, and it would be neither entrapment nor unconstitutional under current Sup. Ct. jurisprudence.

Just get a money order first. And then don't spill drugs on it.

I don't doubt your statistics regarding the percentage of money that has trace amounts of cocaine on it, but
How is it not entrapment though? Per definition isn't entrapment when "In criminal law, a person is 'entrapped' when he is induced or persuaded by law enforcement officers or their agents to commit a crime that he had no previous intent to commit"? Having currency is intent to commit a crime? I'm no legal expert, but...

 

[DillonHall]

The vast majority of the population never uses physics or chemistry either. This is actually a basic civil rights issue that could be handled in Social Studies class.

Good point, but who says chemistry is necessary either?

 

[Irish Houstonian]

I don't doubt your statistics regarding the percentage of money that has trace amounts of cocaine on it, but
How is it not entrapment though? Per definition isn't entrapment when "In criminal law, a person is 'entrapped' when he is induced or persuaded by law enforcement officers or their agents to commit a crime that he had no previous intent to commit"? Having currency is intent to commit a crime? I'm no legal expert, but...

The 90% number is from a UMass study that examined 234 bills collected from 18 cities.

It's not entrapment for a number of reasons. For one, they're not charging the deliverer with a crime. They're entitled to sieze any/all property used as instrumentalities in a crime, whether or not the possessor is charged. And you have the burden of proof if you want to get it back.

The fact that you seem to believe I'm making this up shows how ridiculous this practice is.

Under Asset Forfeiture Law, Wisconsin Cops Confiscate Families' Bail Money

 

[NDBoiler]

The 90% number is from a UMass study that examined 234 bills collected from 18 cities.

It's not entrapment for a number of reasons. For one, they're not charging the deliverer with a crime. They're entitled to sieze any/all property used as instrumentalities in a crime, whether or not the possessor is charged. And you have the burden of proof if you want to get it back.

The fact that you seem to believe I'm making this up shows how ridiculous this practice is.

Under Asset Forfeiture Law, Wisconsin Cops Confiscate Families' Bail Money

That's for sure!

Sounds like in the case you linked to, there were some other factors involved based on the article, not a simple cut and dried situation to say the least. My point was more specifically that authorities would be "requiring" cash to be used, which obviously leads toward a little different path.

 

[Bogtrotter07]

That's for sure!

Sounds like in the case you linked to, there were some other factors involved based on the article, not a simple cut and dried situation to say the least. My point was more specifically that authorities would be "requiring" cash to be used, which obviously leads toward a little different path.

Yeah the people were poor and uneducated, so someone thought they would be an easy mark. I have seen this with all kinds of government agencies. I have a couple pretty high power attorney friends. People give me crap, and they usually melt for either one of my friends. The smiley facey thingy is from my daughter, (9).She told

 

[NDBoiler]

Yeah the people were poor and uneducated, so someone thought they would be an easy mark. I have seen this with all kinds of government agencies. I have a couple pretty high power attorney friends. People give me crap, and they usually melt for either one of my friends. The smiley facey thingy is from my daughter, (9).She told

I hope you're not implying that is what my statement was about sir.

Tell your daughter from my sons

 

[Irish Houstonian]

...My point was more specifically that authorities would be "requiring" cash to be used, which obviously leads toward a little different path.

I don't understand. The cops' saying that the bail was "required" to be in cash was a pure misrepresentation of the law -- a money order would have worked fine. They did it purely to perpretrate this scheme (they get to keep most of the loot and use it toward general operating expenses).

 

[NDBoiler]

I don't understand. The cops' saying that the bail was "required" to be in cash was a pure misrepresentation of the law -- a money order would have worked fine. They did it purely to perpretrate this scheme (they get to keep most of the loot and use it toward general operating expenses).

Exactly, that is my point as well. That was why IMO it would be difficult to uphold if challenged. Unfortunately there may be cases where the "victim" may not have the resources to pursue challenging it in court as Bogtrotter inferred.

 

[phork]

Someone check out Snopes.com yet for validity?

 

[Irish#1]

So by that logic/statistics, how would the overwhelming majority of arrestees ever be allowed to leave jail when they make bail? It would just be a vicious cycle - you get arrested, post bail...OOOPS!! crack money!! back to jail, post bail...OOPS!! crack money!! back to jail...

Not to mention, I think that would pretty squarely fit the definition of "entrapment".

That's why I launder my money with my clothes. Pun intended.

 

[BobD]

Hi All,

Just wondering if anyone has heard any updates on this situation?

 

[BGIF]

Court Dates

Court Dates

per the article in Post #758

http://www.irishenvy.com/forums/not...s-carlo-calabrese-arrested-19.html#post704277

Rees 7/17
Carlo and his people 6/21

 

[SoDakDomer]

Maybe this has been discussed before but do you guys think Rees will get suspended for a few games? I think hey may get suspended for a couple games, one because he deserves some sort of punishment but also because it allows the following scenerio. It will allow Kelly a chance to start or play both Hendrix and EG in our first couple easier games. This will give Kelly two options. 1. One of the two establish themeselves as the starter and the season continues with them at the position. Or 2. They both stumble through the first 2 games which allows Kelly the opportunity to plug Rees in after his suspension and say Rees was going to be the starter all along? Thoughts?

 

[Riddickulous]

Maybe this has been discussed before but do you guys think Rees will get suspended for a few games? I think hey may get suspended for a couple games, one because he deserves some sort of punishment but also because it allows the following scenerio. It will allow Kelly a chance to start or play both Hendrix and EG in our first couple easier games. This will give Kelly two options. 1. One of the two establish themeselves as the starter and the season continues with them at the position. Or 2. They both stumble through the first 2 games which allows Kelly the opportunity to plug Rees in after his suspension and say Rees was going to be the starter all along? Thoughts?

I doubt he gets a suspension.