Four turnovers in the Rose Bowl?

[Northside Hawk]

It was a big donor’s daughter. That’s how it got the legs it did.

Kind of like Bobby Knight's fateful encounter with Kent Harvey. Had it been a chance meeting with "Joe Smith" perhaps he coaches another decade at Indiana.

 

[ChosenChildren]

Thank you. I’m glad someone else has seen some of the facts that came out and saw what really happened here.

To be honest I thought the “if it was your daughter” thing was lame as well but let it slide. There are certain people that will just never admit they are wrong no matter what and I think we have some of that here.

I can see someone thinking poorly of Cephus, but calling Davis a criminal was just completely unfounded.

Sorry to disappoint you guys, but what those dudes did was wrong in every way. You are just parsing words now. There have been a large number of articles written on this case in Wisconsin. Those girls have suffered a great deal. Please read them and you can draw your own conclusions. There are two sides to this story. I stand by my comments.

 

[ChosenChildren]

You're a shitty lawyer, then. Enough came out about this case that ONLY someone who is UNINFORMED could paint Cephus and Davis the way you are painting them. The more info that came out--and again you weren't "required" to read it, but it's painfully obvious you that you didn't--shed more and more light on an overeager (and possibly malicious) prosecution by the DA.

You're also a shitty lawyer when you bring emotive crap into it ("If it were YOUR daughter!") versus looking at the facts and evidence in the case. Believe it or not, some claims of rape are "remorse" and "shame" rather than actual "rape" and/or "sexual assault".

Go back and read the facts of the case. It might make you a better lawyer, and it will certainly make you look like less of a fool when trying to argue whether or not Cephus and Davis are "criminals".

A lot of people disagree with your conclusions on this case. You are the one who needs to research it. The case hasn’t concluded on the civil side.

 

[ChosenChildren]

You're a shitty lawyer, then. Enough came out about this case that ONLY someone who is UNINFORMED could paint Cephus and Davis the way you are painting them. The more info that came out--and again you weren't "required" to read it, but it's painfully obvious you that you didn't--shed more and more light on an overeager (and possibly malicious) prosecution by the DA.

You're also a shitty lawyer when you bring emotive crap into it ("If it were YOUR daughter!") versus looking at the facts and evidence in the case. Believe it or not, some claims of rape are "remorse" and "shame" rather than actual "rape" and/or "sexual assault".

Go back and read the facts of the case. It might make you a better lawyer, and it will certainly make you look like less of a fool when trying to argue whether or not Cephus and Davis are "criminals".

I did read the facts. This case was about consent. The defense argued that the girls (18 yrs old) consented. The prosecution argued that they did not consent. The jury believed the defense.

I believe that they did not consent.

 

[NikeHawk21]

Sorry to disappoint you guys, but what those dudes did was wrong in every way. You are just parsing words now. There have been a large number of articles written on this case in Wisconsin. Those girls have suffered a great deal. Please read them and you can draw your own conclusions. There are two sides to this story. I stand by my comments.

There are two sides to every story and Cephus never got to tell his until the trial. He was kicked off the football team and expelled from the university and then had to wait several months to tell his story, while looking like a rapist to the outside world. When he did get a chance to tell his story he was found NOT GUILTY of all charges in less than 45 minutes of deliberation.

The girls case was built almost entirely on the fact that they were too intoxicated to agree to consensual sex. Not that he forced them to have sex just that they were too intoxicated to agree. At trial there was video produced both from the bar they left from, entering and exiting the apartment that directly disputed that claim. The girls were walking strait and didn't appear to be intoxicated. One of the girls friends testified that they didn’t think the girls were extremely intoxicated. Danny Davis testified that they didn’t appear intoxicated. The officer who filed the police report that night didn’t notice the female to be intoxicated and nothing was noted in his report. Again that was the entire basis of their case!

One of the girls texted Cephus after returning home asked him if she left her juul at his apartment despite claiming she doesn’t remember being there and sent him a kissy face.

Despite all this you know what happened more than the rest and are convinced that these two are criminals. Danny Davis is a criminal in your mind even despite never being accused of any criminal wrongdoing because he took a photo of a nude female and then instantly deleted it at her request.

You are either the biggest idiot I’ve ever dealt with on this board or the most stubborn SOB, my guess is it’s a little of both. It scares me to think that you actually might be a practicing attorney.

 

[ChosenChildren]

There are two sides to every story and Cephus never got to tell his until the trial. He was kicked off the football team and expelled from the university and then had to wait several months to tell his story, while looking like a rapist to the outside world. When he did get a chance to tell his story he was found NOT GUILTY of all charges in less than 45 minutes of deliberation.

The girls case was built almost entirely on the fact that they were too intoxicated to agree to consensual sex. Not that he forced them to have sex just that they were too intoxicated to agree. At trial there was video produced both from the bar they left from, entering and exiting the apartment that directly disputed that claim. The girls were walking strait and didn't appear to be intoxicated. One of the girls friends testified that they didn’t think the girls were extremely intoxicated. Danny Davis testified that they didn’t appear intoxicated. The officer who filed the police report that night didn’t notice the female to be intoxicated and nothing was noted in his report. Again that was the entire basis of their case!

One of the girls texted Cephus after returning home asked him if she left her juul at his apartment despite claiming she doesn’t remember being there and sent him a kissy face.

Despite all this you know what happened more than the rest and are convinced that these two are criminals. Danny Davis is a criminal in your mind even despite never being accused of any criminal wrongdoing because he took a photo of a nude female and then instantly deleted it at her request.

You are either the biggest idiot I’ve ever dealt with on this board or the most stubborn SOB, my guess is it’s a little of both. It scares me to think that you actually might be a practicing attorney.

Your name calling is a little irritating. I can assure you that if I had been the lawyer for either Cephus or Davis, they would have received a vigorous defense.

Davis received immunity from prosecution because he turned over evidence on his cell phone to the prosecution. You conveniently leave that fact out.

I accept blame for calling Davis a criminal when he was convicted of no crime. That was harsh and wrong on my part. I’ll own it. We will never know because he was immune from prosecution. I do believe that the actions of Davis that night were reprehensible. I’m sure he regrets them now, but it is too late.

But your insensitivity to the plight of those two young girls and your “allegation” that this case was frivolously pursued by the DA also are wrong. You ought to own that as well, in my humble opinion.

Please read the detailed Sports Illustrated article written by their legal expert McMann dated September 7, 2019. It explains the current status of this complicated case.

 

[Northside Hawk]

I did read the facts. This case was about consent. The defense argued that the girls (18 yrs old) consented. The prosecution argued that they did not consent. The jury believed the defense.

I believe that they did not consent.

It seemed as if the defense attorneys placed a lot of stock in surveillance video from both downtown and outside the apartment complex.

How much stock one takes in that evidence is another story.

 

[NikeHawk21]

Your name calling is a little irritating. I can assure you that if I had been the lawyer for either Cephus or Davis, they would have received a vigorous defense.

Davis received immunity from prosecution because he turned over evidence on his cell phone to the prosecution. You conveniently leave that fact out.

I accept blame for calling Davis a criminal when he was convicted of no crime. That was harsh and wrong on my part. I’ll own it. We will never know because he was immune from prosecution. I do believe that the actions of Davis that night were reprehensible. I’m sure he regrets them now, but it is too late.

But your insensitivity to the plight of those two young girls and your “allegation” that this case was frivolously pursued by the DA also are wrong. You ought to own that as well, in my humble opinion.

Please read the detailed Sports Illustrated article written by their legal expert McMann dated September 7, 2019. It explains the current status of this complicated case.

The name calling was warranted given your repeated insistence that I have no remorse for the females and “if I had a daughter” quip. As I said I do look at each case based on its merits and in this one I do feel the correct verdict was reached. I still feel for the females as well as it’s still been a horrible situation for them. There were many victims here.

Several posts later and you finally admit that the Davis criminal statement was over the top. He testified that as soon as he took the photo he knew it was wrong. He instantly deleted it and felt remorseful of his action. He served a two game suspension for his actions and testified at the trial. He made a mistake but he’s paid his dues and is not a criminal.

Lastly, your SI article about the countersuit has nothing to do with Cephus’s actions and everything to do with the university. The females are potentially suing the university for re-admitting him so quickly and without consulting the females. If they win that suit it has nothing to do with Cephus’ trial and everything to do with the fact that how the University handled his re-admittance.

What happened there is after the not guilty verdict was reached it was nearing football season and Cephus’s legal team put public pressure and even a deadline on the University to re-admit him into school. It became a very public thing and you had a lot of public outcry, which I’m sure included athletic department donors outraged that they weren’t letting him back in. You heard people talking about cancelling their tickets etc.

So the current civil case is against the university, if you are an attorney like you say and you actually read the article you would know that. If they win that case it would likely involve a settlement from the university but no repercussions for Cephus. The article is titled “After Re-admitting Cephus, Wisconsin could face a tough legal battle.” The keyword there is WISCONSIN.

Here is the link to the article. I’m having a lot of fun with schooling a practicing attorney.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.si...-cephus-wisconsin-john-clune-possible-lawsuit

 

[ChosenChildren]

Your name calling is a little irritating. I can assure you that if I had been the lawyer for either Cephus or Davis, they would have received a vigorous defense.

Davis received immunity from prosecution because he turned over evidence on his cell phone to the prosecution. You conveniently leave that fact out.

I accept blame for calling Davis a criminal when he was convicted of no crime. That was harsh and wrong on my part. I’ll own it. We will never know because he was immune from prosecution. I do believe that the actions of Davis that night were reprehensible. I’m sure he regrets them now, but it is too late.

But your insensitivity to the plight of those two young girls and your “allegation” that this case was frivolously pursued by the DA also are wrong. You ought to own that as well, in my humble opinion.

The name calling was warranted given your repeated insistence that I have no remorse for the females and “if I had a daughter” quip. As I said I do look at each case based on its merits and in this one I do feel the correct verdict was reached. I still feel for the females as well as it’s still been a horrible situation for them. There were many victims here.

Several posts later and you finally admit that the Davis criminal statement was over the top. He testified that as soon as he took the photo he knew it was wrong. He instantly deleted it and felt remorseful of his action. He served a two game suspension for his actions and testified at the trial. He made a mistake but he’s paid his dues and is not a criminal.

Lastly, your SI article about the countersuit has nothing to do with Cephus’s actions and everything to do with the university. The females are potentially suing the university for re-admitting him so quickly and without consulting the females. If they win that suit it has nothing to do with Cephus’ trial and everything to do with the fact that how the University handled his re-admittance.

What happened there is after the not guilty verdict was reached it was nearing football season and Cephus’s legal team put public pressure and even a deadline on the University to re-admit him into school. It became a very public thing and you had a lot of public outcry, which I’m sure included athletic department donors outraged that they weren’t letting him back in. You heard people talking about cancelling their tickets etc.

So the current civil case is against the university, if you are an attorney like you say and you actually read the article you would know that. If they win that case it would likely involve a settlement from the university but no repercussions for Cephus. The article is titled “After Re-admitting Cephus, Wisconsin could face a tough legal battle.” The keyword there is WISCONSIN.

Here is the link to the article. I’m having a lot of fun with schooling a practicing attorney.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.si...-cephus-wisconsin-john-clune-possible-lawsuit

Yes, that is the article. Thanks for linking it.

my whole point is that now it is a civil matter. The two women will pursue damages from the University. They also can file civil lawsuits against cephus and/or Davis for money damages in the future, which they may pursue. The suit against the U. Is the clearest path to justice for them now.

Just because injured parties do not obtain a guilty verdict in a criminal matter doesn’t mean they can’t recover money damages in a civil matter. I’m not having fun schooling you because you have no real empathy for those plaintiffs.

you can have the last word. This seems like blood sport for you. You’ve said very little about what this case has done to those girls, the threats and intimidation that happens to so many women in these types of cases. And Davis was no choir boy. He sought, and received, immunity in exchange for the evidence he provided to the prosecution.

I do hope folks read that article by SI. It is a very objective analysis.