Does anybody remember the d00k lacrosse thing? We have a lot of people rushing to judgement based on nothing but allegations.
Jalek Felton suspended from the University
- Thread starter dadika13
- Start date
As I said above, this isn't really true. Especially if he's factually guilty - he'd have to prove his innocence to win that case.
This is almost certainly true. No employer wants that attention, even if her statements are 100% accurate.
Have they? It seems like most statements have been of the "if...then" variety.
I am with you on this. I am also praying it's not true. what a shame if it is.
I get that, but if he is factually guilty, I don't see how he gets off. I don't know, I just feel like she is playing with fire. I think she is even talking crap about the attorney publicly.
Man, you have had something against Jalek from the start. Let this thing play out before we jump on the kid. Roy is loyal, I don't see him jumping ship on a kid he has probably known since he was a child.
If he's innocent, who cares? Fans of other teams will always find some reason to bash us. I prefer to stand by our players, until they're proven guilty of an offense. If he's innocent, I'll support him completely. If he's proven to be guilty, he'll be punished. I'll wait for more info to be released confirming he's committed a crime, before abandoning him. I really don't care what fans of other teams think.
.
If he's innocent, I hope he does go after people spreading false rumors. Social media is a joke. People can spread any lie they want to support their agenda & get away with it. Too many people believe everything they read on social media. That shows a lack of intelligence & an inability to think for themselves. I'm not saying he's guilty or innocent, but we simply don't know enough to form an opinion one way or the other.
Last edited:
That raises an interesting question:
Suppose, based on the (as-yet-unknown) facts on the case, the probably that Jalek is guilty is ~50%. Insufficient for criminal conviction or civil liability, but still a significant chance that he's guilty of something heinous.
What should Roy do? Risk keeping a sex criminal in his program - in the family? Or risk dismissing an innocent player?
If he's clearly innocent, that's obviously ideal. If he's clearly guilty, that's heartbreaking but straightforward. But that middle ground - very tough for a coach to handle.
Last edited:
UNC is one of the most PC, liberal universities in the country. If it appears he could be guilty of this hot button offense, regardless of whether or not he's charged, the PTB will force Roy's hand.
And that's sad.
And that's sad.
Until the facts are made public & we see both sides of the story, I’m willing to give Jalek the benefit of the doubt.
Jalek stayed with UNC through all the ncaa crap. He was the only 5* that gave a crap about UNC. He could’ve opened his recruitment back up but he stayed loyal.
Jalek stayed with UNC through all the ncaa crap. He was the only 5* that gave a crap about UNC. He could’ve opened his recruitment back up but he stayed loyal.
There is no question. If he is found innocent, he needs to be treated as if he is innocent.
Keeping someone off that is found innocent is ridiculous.
No adjudicatory body (be it a criminal court or a university hearing panel) finds someone innocent. They find someone guilty or not guilty. Not guilty is not a synonym for innocent.
Innocent is a definitive factual statement: the alleged offense(s) did not happen.
Not guilty is a negative - the absence of sufficient evidence to prove guilt beyond the required threshold. For criminal cases, that threshold is beyond a reasonable doubt. That's a very high threshold; in terms of percentages, it's 95%, 98%, or 99% probability, depending on who you ask.
There's a vast chasm between innocent and the uppermost level of not guilty.
For the reasons stated above, it's not that simple. If you're 90% sure your player sexually assaulted someone (for example), do you seriously want him to remain in your program?
Would you want OJ Simpson to date your daughter?
The Justice system is the Justice system. A state agency cannot deny you schooling or athletics for no cause.
People treating innocent people as if they are guilty is total bullshit.
So is Jalek innocent until proven guilty, or not guilty until proven not innocent?BTW just poking
The "date your daughter" question was too extreme. That was a bad point.
The question I should've asked: would you want OJ Simpson to play on your team, knowing the facts of his case? Would you want him in the Carolina Family?
For the criminal justice system, he's presumed innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt in a court of law. That a clear-cut principle that's central to our model of justice. You can't deny someone their freedom without compelling evidence that has been thoroughly evaluated.
When you, as an outsider, know of an accusation but have no actual information, you should withhold judgment and adopt the "innocent until proven guilty" approach - though not necessarily proven in a court of law. But when you start to get actual information, you can reasonably form an opinion of how likely guilt is. With little information, there's little certainty. With more information, there's more certainty, in one direction or the other. But as an outsider, your opinion doesn't really matter. You don't have to carefully analyze the information.
If you're a coach (or a friend), you have to digest the available information yourself and form an opinion. If the facts I know strongly suggest that my friend is a rapist - say, a 90% chance, which is insufficient for a criminal conviction - he won't be my friend anymore, regardless of what the justice system decides (or whether it even goes to the justice system). Would you say otherwise?
I think 90% is easy. 80% is obviously harder, though for me still pretty easy. 70% harder still. 60%, 50%, 40%...at some point (and I'm not sure where), it gets easy again. You'd dismiss a 1 in a million chance without second thought. But there's that middle territory where it's damn hard.
To be clear, when I refer to a 50% chance of guilt, I'm saying, "he's accused, so it's 50/50." That would be nonsense. I'm referring to Roy's interpretation of the available information. I'm saying, "what if based on the information Roy ends up knowing - and I'm sure he'll know plenty - he feels it's 50/50 as to whether Jalek is guilty; then what?"
Last edited:
My God, man. You just don't get it, do you? It wasn't the "date your daughter" thing that was the issue. You're on a damned public message board comparing a member of the Carolina family --- never mind that you have no way of knowing what actually happened --- to an accused murderer. I'm saying this in all seriousness: You really need to step away from this and get a grip.
I haven't accused anybody of anything; I haven't asserted any set of facts. I'm talking about plausible hypotheticals, nothing more.
Players get kicked off of teams without any sort of formal process all the time. Coaches evaluating evidence themselves is not restricted to sexual misconduct accusations. It's part of the job, really.
I agree. I love Blackstone's formulation as much as anybody.
But any functioning justice system will punish innocent people. It's inevitable, because proving 100% certainty is impossible. With enough people put on trial, even with an extremely high standard, some innocent people will slip through. Innocent people are imprisoned. Innocent people are executed.
And although nobody wants to acknowledge this, it's a compromise we as a society are comfortable making. It is total bullshit to execute innocent people, but we can't demand 100% certainty - thus we use the beyond a reasonable doubt standard of ~98%. The standard has to be high, because the consequences are severe, but it can't be 100%.
Interpersonal dynamics have less significant consequences and can thus have a lower standard. If I believe there's an 80% chance my friend is a rapist, they're not going to prison, but they're sure as hell done being my friend. I can live with that 20% more easily than I could live with the 80%.
That's just disingenuous.You're making over-the-top extreme-case comparisons that have zero place in this thread or any other, and bring no value whatsoever to any intelligent discussion. There is nothing "plausibe" about a comparison to an accused murderer.
Parsing out percentages of hypothetical determinations of "guilt" is one thing ---- useless to be sure, but at least harmless --- but throwing out hyperbolized junk like this is just out of line.
Seriously. Stop.
OJ is the classic example of someone who's "not guilty" but totally guilty. That's why I made the comparison; not to make any comparison of severity. But I get why you (and others) could find that comparison inappropriate, and I should've picked a more careful example. That's my bad.
That aside, I do think it's a very interesting and challenging question - and one Roy might be facing in the not-too-distant future. Would probably be the toughest situation of his career, and he's face some tough ones.
Sigh after being a bailiff in a court I can tell you that more than a few innocent people slip through the cracks. With out mentioning specific cases, I can tell you people have been convicted for such things as looking guilty in court, looking around to much, having their lawyer ask to many questions, having a past criminal record, even in one jury session for not being able to afford cleaner looking clothes. I once took someone to prison to do a 10 yr bid and I knew beyond a shadow of a doubt that the jury convicted an innocent man. It was Friday and they wanted to go home no joke. The system is not perfect but I have also seen people get off who were as guilty as Satan himself. My point is if he is found not guilty he should be allowed to return if he wants. I for one am standing but Jalek until REAL evidence is given out that shows me he is guilty. The rest of some of you judgemental guys can go on playing God and just throw the kid away... Good grief it's simple let's see what evidence comes to light before making a judgement on this young heel who stuck by us when other recruits avoided and still do like the plague because rival coaches no names (CAPEL) were suggesting we we're gonna get the death penalty.
If his judgement is so poor that he even puts himself in a position to be accused of this crap then it's time to move on. His focus was obviously not where it should have been which was learning Roy's system and improving his play, getting high grades in class, and representing the university. NBDL bound. He's not entitled to attend UNC or play for UNC. It was a privilege that he abused. Guilt or innocence of a criminal offense is irrelevant.
Bros it isn't me that's worried about it. I was more thinking about it from his view point. Ultimately the sport is about the players way more than the fans. If not for the players this board is just rambling complaints.
Oh ok by that account than anyone who had ever been accused of s crime should be stripped of all rights to ever recoup what they lost
Nope, apples to oranges. First he has no "right" to recoup. It was a privilege to play at UNC, not a right. He can recoup in the NBDL if there is any truth at all to the accusations. He was offered privileges that 2-5 people in the world get annually and apparently abused those privileges. That's on him, not Roy, UNC, or any UNC fans. It's his behavior that has led to the current situation, not my reaction to the situation.
Oh ok that makes sense so even if he is innocent of everything but there is truth that he is a jigalo so to speak even if it was those girls choices to sleep with him he should be off the team?
The problem is the reality these kids have to understand, UNC is a very liberal university to begin with, just having put behind us 6yrs of NCAA investigation and prostration of all of our programs brought on by an athlete's social media brain dead moment, mix in a little PJ as well. Smack dab in the midst of this Me Tooo movement and coming on the heels of the issue with the MSU doctor. It is a perfect storm that dictates these kids live up to a higher standard than the typical student or fan. They are looking at great futures if they do but are as well under a microscope for the slightest miss-step so much depends on their making the very best decisions. Joel breaks his hand after losing a video game and is bumb rushed on social medias and among fans, this is a much more serious issue by a kid that really has not had a great start. It is just a very poor example of decision making and realizing the position he is in and what comes along with it in responsibility as well as opportunity.
I gave you a like just for using the word “adjudicatory”.
Can we get a little clarification here?
Ugly as in JF did some terrible things or ugly like this is totally overblown but it’s gonna be a mess to dig out of?
So as recruiting classes go this one has not done very well.
Yea you can't kick a kid off the team for having Herpes. I sympathize some. I was a young man who pretty much only thought with my dong not too long ago myself. I was lucky and or smart enough to not get herpes "allegedly" or any other STD.
duz any one know how ths works? Can feltn + school jst never tell what is goin on if jalek duznt want any onr to know
It's not that he's (probably) a murderer. It's that he's an easily-recognized example of someone found not guilty who most of us believe was not innocent.
We can have a personal verdict - a personal belief - that differs from the legal verdict. And we ultimately act on what we believe.
