I’m sure you’ve heard the news by this point–not one, but two, separate incidents last night led to the arrest of 6 total Notre Dame football players.
The first and more devastating arrests occurred as senior Max Redfield, redshirt freshman Ashton White, sophomore Dexter Williams, sophomore Te’von Coney, and freshman Kevin Stepherson were stopped in Fulton County at 10:07 PM for speeding 73 in a 60 mile per hour zone and with a tail light out in their vehicle. State troopers later discovered weed and a loaded handgun. White was driving and all three of Redfield, Stepherson, and Williams face additional gun charges.
In a separate incident senior Devin Butler was arrested outside of the Linebacker off campus after being involved in a fight, and proceeded to tangle with a police officer as well.
Police release mugshots of arrested Notre Dame players: https://t.co/FYdUI3SUCx pic.twitter.com/pfkDZisg7X
— WSBT (@WSBT) August 20, 2016
We’ll see how the charges eventually are filed and how things shake out. I would assume the gun charge will ultimately fall on one person and whomever it ends up being will be in a very, very bad spot. Not only are there likely to be significant suspensions from the football team but there could be very stiff penalties from the university. I wouldn’t be surprised if that gun charge brings with it a dismissal from school.
At minimum, I’d bet everyone is getting 2 game suspensions but it’ll likely be much worse for more than one player. As far as the impact on the depth chart:
Redfield- This could be the end, unfortunately. Even if he’s suspended a handful of games I’m not sure he’s earned the trust of anyone on the team anymore. In trouble with teammates 2 to 4 years younger than him? Come on, man. If Studstill turns out to be a quality freshman he might keep Redfield on the bench for good. Even still, the depth at safety is atrocious so this is awful news that could really harm the defense.
White- He was doing some nice things in fall camp but still not a threat to start. However, that great depth everyone has been talking about at corner takes a hit. Plus there was also a possibility of White maybe becoming a safety down the road and while it’s nice to see freshmen doing good things I’m not sure we want to rely on them if needed, especially early in the season.
Williams- Things were starting to look really good for the rising sophomore. He could have played a lot early in the season with Folston shaking rust off from his knee injury and Josh Adams being slowed down all camp. Now, for a team that believes running the ball could be its greatest strength that job got a little tougher.
Coney- Kelly recently inferred strongly, but didn’t actually say it, that Martini was the starter at weak-side linebacker. However, some still expected Coney to play the most. Depending on the length of any suspension this could be bad or it could be entirely fine.
Stepherson- It’s tough to get too upset about a possible suspension from a true freshman but Stepherson could have been as high as the 4th receiver straight away in the opener. At best, it could significantly affect the depth at a position that really needs a bunch of young and inexperienced players to step up as soon as possible.
Butler- Currently recovering from a broken foot and not expected to play until the mid-to-late portion of the season. Although he carries with him some experience it was going to be a tough hill to climb in order to come back mid-season and make an impact. It’s likely that in football terms this means the end to Butler’s career at Notre Dame. He’s either facing a lengthy suspension and/or unlikely to suit up in a significant role for the Irish.
Sunday afternoon update:
Max Redfield has been dismissed from the football program and Devin Butler has been placed on indefinite suspension.
Here is Brian Kelly’s full statement. It’s very strongly worded. Overwhelming frustration with weekend’s events. pic.twitter.com/o1nDCMUUJo
— Irish Illustrated (@PeteSampson_) August 21, 2016
The fate of the other 4 players is yet to be determined. Remember, they also will be subject to any legal and/or school-related punishment, as well.
F
5 football players can fit in a Ford Focus?
Also, as Pete Sampson pointed out on twitter, “past discipline facing Floyd, Cierre Wood, Rees and Calabrese totaled four games missed.”
I guess we’ll see how it all shakes out, agree with the article that a loaded handgun probably doesn’t blow over as easily as some of the other charges. Seems fishy to charge 3 players for possession of a single handgun too, but I don’t pretend to understand the legality or what happened during the stop.
Probably curtains for Butler too, unfortunately. I remember Kelly talking about him in the summer about (paraphrased) how his future and track in life kind of seemed shaky or endangered, hope the best for him.
I can’t imagine how disappointed the coaches are today, especially in Max Redfield. Boys will be boys, and they don’t owe me anything…But come on man. Be smart for your own sake.
Pure speculation: I am guessing the gun was under the back seat and everyone sitting back there is charged until someone admits it was his.
Where is Anachronism with his sense of impending doom?
Not being afraid of guns myself I’m surprised that people think that’s the biggest of the problems. If it was just the gun license I’d have been here calling for a couple of extra laps and moving on with our lives.
I never thought I’d miss “The Breaking News Banner of Doom”.
In any event, I think several people had mentioned that, for once, we’d passed an off season without significant controversy or losses from suspension or expulsion. It now seems inevitable that something like that will happen. It’s too bad for these guys, especially Redfield, who I assume was on track to graduate. It’s just sad to see this occur.
I can’t judge them, having been in a position (while a student at ND) multiple times to get in trouble with my behavior. What I needed at that time was someone to step in and give me some guidance. I wonder if, even with all the extra support ND gives, there just isn’t enough support, or is it just perhaps the phenomenon of young men being crazy? It’s probably the latter. Assuming that is the case, the question becomes “how do you address it?” I don’t know.
I’m not a lawyer, but I know a little bit…
My guess on the weed and gun charges is that it’s collective possession. The burner is within reach of all three in the back seat, and the weed is accessible to everyone in the car. Somewhat explains the nearly identical charges for everyone in the car. I find it super hard to believe that 5 separate guys had weed on them and 3 separate guys were carrying an unregistered burner. In my neck of the woods, this kind of stuff is frowned upon, and the charges will usually get trashed by the DA. Either lazy work by the officer, or nobody wanted to sack up and take responsibility, or both.
I’m not trying to minimize the situation, just thought I’d throw in a little educated guess about what happened. Super, SUPER stupid mistake, and I hope it gets cleared up soon. I doubt that ResLife will be very understanding though.
interesting context. Makes sense. Who is the biggest idiot to have weed and gun in the car? Even granting that, getting things cleared up will probably take long enough to miss a game or two. These things never seem to be quickly resolved.
Almost this exact situation happened with Bama. Their LT, Cam Robinson, got pulled over with a teammate and got arrested for weed/hand gun. And as you said, DA never filed any charges. I believe Robinson got suspended for a game.
Bama players have a somewhat different relationship with the court system in SEC country than our do with Indiana courts.
Indiana seems pretty lenient on gun ownership, no permit needed to buy/ own a handgun. You do need a license to carry though, so if the owner doesn’t have it he’s in trouble. I don’t see why the others would have a gun charge, unless they were handling it and left prints.
as for the speeding ticket, who doesn’t from time to time? Not sure what the school’s attitude towards weed is these days. Hopefully just brief suspensions.
Wouldnt be ND if we didn’t have this kind of drama most years.
Well, I presume that weed attitudes at ND (like most of the country) have changed a lot since 2007, but Kyle McAlarney lost an entire semester. Of course, the rules for hoops are different than football, so it isn’t a good reference case.
The problem is that the gun was probably acquired and carried illegally. That, plus what is still a very illegal substance…well, it could be pretty serious criminal trouble. I expect one or two guys will bear the brunt of it, and plea deals will undoubtedly be made with all involved.
I may think many of our pot and gun laws are stupid, but placing your future in jeopardy is also stupid.
I think it is funny we get all surprised by this every year. Recently, we’ve had the Reese/Calabrese thing, but there’s a long and sorted history of this week being trouble. It goes all the way back to my own freshman year.
http://www.nytimes.com/1991/09/04/sports/football-suspension-not-feared-by-notre-dame-s-mirer.html
Off campus upper classmen all start arriving, your friends are all getting back in to town, guys stuck in camp for a week, yadditta, yadditta, yadditta…
Honestly, short of Kelly locking the entire 85 into the Gug for the weekend, whatcha gonna do?
I’m not endorsing this behavior whatsoever. In fact, I hate the whole OSU/FSU’ish odor of the whole damn thing. I’m just saying it is hard to find this shocking.
Very disappointing. I realize kids make poor choices, but I’m having a difficult time finding a whole bunch of sympathy for these guys at this point.
I’m thinking one or two of them will step up and claim the weed and the gun. The others will claim ignorance of the possession . I don’t know if ND will still punish the others. It’s ND, so they probably will.
My blind optimism had high hope for Redfield this season, thought he would finally live up to his billing. Now I doubt he will ever see the field.
Just stupid, especially if the gun turns out to be illegally obtained. And it probably is, given that the only one of them old enough to buy a handgun is from California.
Indiana gun laws aren’t all that strong. Anyone over 18 can buy one, and there are virtually no restrictions/hoops to go through to legally obtain one, as best I can tell. The only thing they are guilty of with regards to the gun, it seems to me, is that the gun is unlicensed, which, again as best I can tell (I’m not a lawyer), is only a misdemeanor for someone without a criminal record.
I’m not sure there are any felonies here. Am I wrong, legal experts?
21 is the minimum age to buy a handgun from an FFL dealer. A private party sale might be legal to someone 18+, but only between IN residents, I think.
I suspect that the gun and the weed may compound each other here. Carrying in a car without a permit might not be a big deal, and having some pot might not be a huge problem, but combine them and suddenly it’s OMG! ARMED DRUGGIES! Add in the potential racial angle… Not good for these young men, and the fact that I think adults with a clean record should be able to roll into a convenience store for weed and handguns won’t change that.
In potentially good(?) news, rumblings on the internet are that the Butler incident might have been trumped up by the arresting officer. They haven’t brought charges, at least yet. It’s on the internet, so it must be true.
Well, that usually is the case when the charges are assaulting a cop and resisting arrest…the former can literally be as insignificant as farting the in the cop’s direction and the latter is always nonsense.
The rumored story on Butler is that he pushed a woman off his girlfriend and tackled the cop who tried to intervene. I don’t know how aware he was of who was intervening – there was a crowd, so a charitable reading could be that he thought thought the cop was someone trying to jump him. Once he got tased, though, he probably figured it out.
The other guys… It’s been said, but what in holy hell was Redfield doing on an armed weed run with a bunch of underclassmen? Nice leadership, man. That SEAL course must have really taken hold. I don’t know that I’ve ever seen someone who so well mixes a million dollar head with a five cent head, to steal from Crash Davis.
I would guess that whoever didn’t own the gun will face a multi-game suspension. This isn’t Kyle McAlarney’s ND – Cierre Wood toked up and had to sit out a couple of games. Whoever did own the gun might be gone. Butler will probably be a lower multi-game suspension.
The Indiana police throwing extra charges on ND students? Well color me shocked.
From Al Lesar’s column on the “Fulton County Five”. (his term)
Toryan Smith, a linebacker during the Charlie Weis era, tweeted shortly after the news broke: “Don’t beat up on the kids about that gun. When I was in school I was strapped too. Your head has to be on a swivel in South Bend”.
Have to imagine it depends on the guy.
As an average-sized white male, I would never feel the need. As a large, black celebrity, perhaps a different story.
It’s interesting how much opinions vary on this. Most people want the gun owner booted from the school even though it’s a protected right and the only charge was not having a license to carry.
I think context means everything. Any one of the charges would not be a big deal in isolation, but when you have 5 guys going 15mph over the speed limit while carrying weed and a loaded weapon, it’s a totally different story. Where in the heck were they going and why were they in such a hurry with that kind of cargo? Getting jailed may have been a better outcome than what they were heading for, for all we know.
Do we know where these guys live? That is, if they live on-campus and were about to go park in the lots, that means they were about to take a gun onto school grounds. I’m pretty sure that’s a huge no-no at ND.
For sure without that license it’s a No-No, at ND. I think as an upper classman, only Redfield would be off campus. Of course any college’s administration is going to be horrified with the thought of students walking around campus with guns.
There’s a big issue down in Texas right now, with AG threatening arrest for any professors that ban guns in their classrooms. Makes you wonder if Billy Joe openly packing heat will help him pass his Chemistry exam?
I don’t think they can get in trouble for what they were possibly about to do.
Let him who has never carried on ND’s campus cast the first stone…because that will be the only ranged weapon he has.
Also as a white, average-to-larger-size male (getting larger every meal) with a middle class background, the idea of carrying a hand gun in my car just doesn’t compute. And I’m hardly afraid of guns or anti-gun, I’ve slept with one in my bed while deployed. I don’t fetishize guns or particularly have a desire to own one, but having a gun for sport shooting/hunting is normal for many people I know.
That said, I’ve lived some…interesting places, like Anacostia DC and rural Louisiana. While in LA it’s mostly for hunting and only an idiot doesn’t have a license (and there are plenty of idiots), one thing I think it’s important to include is that for young urban African Americans, there may be a distinct feeling of needing to have personal protection. Ashton White went to Bishop McNamara just across the Maryland border, and there are areas around that aren’t much better than Anacostia. And given recent events, it’s not hard to imagine that, as a young African American male, the police are a threat (this is more in reference to Butler’s incident rather than the gun.)
I am not saying anything they did is justified, but I also acknowledge that while carrying a hand gun for protection makes no sense to me, it might seem perfectly normal to one or more of these young men, right or wrong. And there may be reluctance to tell law enforcement that you have a gun, as they may not be your friend. Now, it’s JUST as wrong to assume that is the case as it is to assume they have no reason. Bottom line, I have no idea, and that makes it hard for me to judge the individuals. All I can go with is whatever the rules say, and after reading about it for a day I agree with Kelly’s decision to boot Max–he, of all of them, and allegedly an intelligent senior, should have shown some leadership. The rest, we’ll see what shakes out.
Do you think that Kelly has any more details than us? E.g. is he convinced that it was Max’s gun/weed or just that he is (or should be) the ring leader because he is the senior?
Well, obviously I don’t know. But if he met with each of them over the course of 24 hours, I’m sure the discussions were more than just “so, don’t speed and get caught, eh?” So I’d probably go out on a limb and say he knows more details than us, yes.
That said, I don’t think it indicates Max as a “ring leader” of anything or that he owned the gun. Bottom line, Max is a senior. He’s supposed to be a mature leader. He should be saying “guys, leave the gun and weed at home and don’t bring it to campus.” He wasn’t driving, so I wouldn’t say he should be yelling at Ashton saying “slow down and don’t speed” or anything, but he should be aware enough that the situation meant maybe speeding wasn’t the best idea. People are free to disagree, of course, but leader responsibility is sort of drilled into me, and so for instance were I the senior military guy in a car of 5 guys, and something happened (an accident, someone arrested for something, etc.) then I would be held responsible by my chain of command for not stepping up and preventing the situation, even if I wasn’t the one driving (and therefore guilty of speeding), the one with the gun, or the one with the weed. Leaders help their fellow players avoid these sorts of situations.
If Max wasn’t “guilty” of anything other than not being more of a leader, I’m not sure it warrants being thrown off the team, but as I said, I’m not listening to what these kids have to say for themselves. BK is.
KG – I’ve read these replies a couple of times and am still not sure what you are saying. I have no doubt that it was Redfield’s gun. Do you really think Kelly would keep some moron on the team who brought a gun while sh*tcanning Redfield? NFW.
The other possibility is he doesn’t know whose gun it was and KG’s analysis follows that you get rid of Redfield for not taking charge. If it turns out he discovers whose gun it was later – that guy may be gone too. It’s not like everything has worked itself out yet.
Meh.
Occam’s Razor
Personally, the gun charge doesn’t even bother me. Like you said, their lives are different. It was like they were brandishing the weapon or using it in commission of a crime. If it was registered and legal, it’d be no issue at all in my mind.
As far as the part “Bottom line, Max is a senior. He’s supposed to be a mature leader. He should be saying “guys, leave the gun and weed at home and don’t bring it to campus.” Well….It’s Friday night right after camp is over. It’s speculation to really say what was happening but I’m sure everyone on the team was blowing off some steam in some form or fashion. But that’s probably why Redfield was dismissed, this wasn’t his first mis-step and it’s definitely not a good look for a senior to get busted with underclassmen with weed. To me it’s not a huge deal, but it’s a situation he just couldn’t put himself in, yet he did.
Also, a bit unrelated but something bugging me is the cop used “smell of weed” as his probable cause to get the drug dog. A bit coincidental he gets that after pulling over a car full of young black men isn’t it? Unless they were really dumb and smoking in the car (which I don’t think there’s evidence of) that seemed a little spurious to me this officer was able to detect the scent of weed in what was tucked away somewhere. Of course, I wasn’t there so I can’t say but it just seemed a little convenient considering the circumstances.
Yeah, this situation seems like a bit of a fishing expedition by the officer who initiated the stop. Now if only we had another player follow in Chris Stewart’s shoes and pursue a law degree…
The gun charge does bug me, because it’s extremely stupid. Indiana doesn’t strike me as a state that has a particularity difficult process to get a carry permit. Plus, there are often compounding charges when someone is arrested with illegal substances while carrying a gun. It’s just a situation that’s really easy to avoid with some rudimentary planning.
Definitely agree about the licensing of the gun, that would be the responsible and adult thing to do. Kids let things fall through the cracks, and they should have known the rules. I think, to me personally, it’s no big deal since like I said it took being found, they weren’t using it or threatening to.
The gun also may not have belonged to any of them, which would make the license part irrelevant. Well, not irrelevant, because you can be licensed without actually owning a weapon, but it’s highly unlikely that any of them were so conscientious as to do that.
This is the second time I have heard it mentioned that possibly (probably?) the gun was not actually owned by any of the players, and it’s not unlikely that none even knew it was there.
Is there public information confirming or denying this?
Added an update to the bottom of the story as Redfield is off the team and Butler suspended indefinitely.
Strong statement by BK.
As much as I hoped Redfield would show us all how good he could be, I’m glad BK dropped the hammer. I hope Butler can hold onto some sort of anchor – sounds like he’s been going through a lot lately.
Interested to see what happens to the other 4. Always fun to be an Irish fan.
“During the past 24 hours, I have met with each of the members of our team involved in the two incidents that occurred over the weekend, reviewed the evidence available to me, and consulted with others involved in the leadership of our team and the University,” Kelly said. “That process has only served to deepen my disappointment in the poor decisions made by these young men”
That last sentence made me feel sorry for all of them, not an enviable position to be in. Part of life and growing up to learn that actions and decisions can have serious and irreversible consequences sometimes.
To KG’s point above about the “chain of command” – being another former 35 year career military officer, I concur. Even more to the point, BK has said recently that he has continued the sort of military metaphor as part of Camp Culver/summer camp. In fact, the motto this year is “Leaders Eat Last” and when BK explained that motto in response to a question it was completely clear that this was inspired by the military model.
Now, looking at Max Redfield’s persona at least the tiny parts we’ve seen, plus his spotty record, I have to say that I would have been skeptical that he would be able to mature into that leader kind of persona. And unfortunately, that doubt is now justified.
Which means I also concur, his dismissal is a good move by BK. I hope this can give Max a real jolt, but, no longer our team’s concern…
My own deeper concern is the overall team leadership. My guess is that we will have to see how they react.
With the “speed” these disciplinary matters usually take at ND, I think we can expect some or all of the other four to not know their final punishment for some time. This will probably drag on for most of the semester.
[…] Previous […]
I couldn’t be more disappointed in these players, but I’m 100% behind the way BK has handled it and the message behind his statement.
Mr. Studstill, it’s coming early, but it’s time to be the young man we hope you can be for the next four years….on and off the field. Welcome to Notre Dame.
Testing…
Anyone else having issues making comments?
Working for me, I even managed to embed a picture, for which I’m patting myself on the back.
Works for me too. Maybe you’ve exceeded your quota or something…
Quite possible. I could type these responses, but it wasn’t letting me type responses to people above. Weird.
It’s unfortunate that this even has wound up being a thing. Through each one of the items:
1) 73 in a 60 – no big deal.
2) 10:07 p.m. – no big deal.
3) Weed – no big deal. Where I live it’s legal. Take it away from them and send them along. They need to stop hauling folks into jail for that crap.
4) Loaded gun – meh. Not a smart thing for them to be doing by any means, but hunting season is just around the corner. They arresting everyone driving around with loaded guns once that time comes around?
I’m wondering why they even bothered to search the car for driving 73 in a 60 and a busted taillight. *cough* profiling *cough*
I have Law Enforcement Officers point of view.
1. You can’t tell who is occupying a speeding car at 00:00 in the morning. You’re not fishing, you’re monitoring traffic and attempting to keep the roads safe. It is very difficult to determine the race of the occupants of a car at night, driving over 60 mph.
2. You can smell weed inside a car, burnt or unburnt, when you approach a vehicle. I do it all of the time. Marijuana has a very distinct odor and nothing else smells like it.
3. In most situations, cops don’t have a problem with possession of a gun. However, when you add the commission of a crime to possession of a firearm, combining those two can be serious trouble. Yes possession of marijuana is still considered a criminal act in most states. This sounds like personal use marijuana, but most cops will run it up and let bigger fish determine the charges. Most patrol guys will just call the on duty drug guy, and he will interview the suspects in jail then determine the charges.
4. None of this is profiling, fishing, or lazy cop work, this is actually good cop work. Lazy cop work would be to ignore the speeding car and do nothing. Bundy was caught because he had a tail light out.
That is how a cop would see it. That’s how this cop sees it.
Glad you said something. I was a prosecutor until recently and though I do civil work now I have an appreciation for the work police do. Someone above suggested it’s hard to believe a cop smelled marijuana in a car during a traffic stop without individuals smoking it. This happens all of the time. Every day everywhere. Also, in many states (not in mine), no probably cause is required for a K-9 officer to do a ‘sniff search’. Someone else, suggested that loaded guns are common this time of year because hunting season is coming up. With a handgun?? Are they gonna shoot a deer point blank with a 9 mm? The police were doing their jobs. Let’s not attribute motives to them that there is no reason to believe they had.
Yikes, grammar.
00:00 in the morning? It was 10:07 in the evening. But I wasn’t suggesting that them being pulled over was the part having to do with profiling – busted taillight and 73, sure, write a ticket and move on. And as research shows, racial profiling has more to do with the interaction than the initial stop. That black drives are 300 percent more likely to be subject to a search than white drivers or the widespread disparity of arrest rates between the black population and white population.
So you’re saying that two things that aren’t a big deal combined are serious trouble. I’m sure there’s some context that this is logical, but I sure can’t wrap my head around it.
Sure, the pull-over was entirely appropriate. Personally, I’ve been pulled over recently with a brake light out – I appreciated the officer letting me know. Heck, it’s near impossible to tell when that rear light is out at times. Didn’t get a ticket or my truck searched, just got sent on my way.
I don’t know what the officer’s motivations for searching the car are. Perhaps he/she could actually smell the weed. But it does fit the statistical indicators that are pointed to when racial profiling are discussed. I’m not going to put some stamp with “profiling” on it, but I am going to question it. I appreciate the work that officers do (including yours, thank you for it). To pretend that there aren’t racial disparities in the criminal justice and that there’s the potential that this could be an instance of it…well, I don’t think there’s anything positive in that.
Those are legitimate concerns. I won’t knock them and the won’t turn this into a political discussion. I don’t agree with everything you are saying but I can live with it being a concern. I will state again that I smell weed coming out people’s cars all of the time. Y’all don’t know me, but I know I’m not a racist and I work very diligently to not let any bias affect how I deal with a situation.
As far as the gun and weed combo. In my state, the commission of a felony while in possession of a gun most often adds five years to the sentence, if convicted. Obviously, as a cop, when guns are present, you are going to handle the situation differently than if there is no gun present. That’s just common sense and s of preservation.
I hate to say it, but even if the cop were the worst racist in the world, that doesn’t take away from the fact that these guys were over an hour away from the University, breaking at least three laws. Unless the cop planted the gun and the weed, what he did was possibly heavy-handed initially but ultimately the correct move by the letter of the law. He is supposed to catch people breaking the law. He did that.
If he did full-cavity searches or some crazy degree of harassment and then didn’t even get anything from it, that’s a different story. But regardless of motive from the cop, based on the result I don’t think he could be faulted. He saw the need to search the car…whatever his instinct came from, he was 100% correct. I’m sure there are a lot of situations where people are abused, but to conflate what happened here with that narrative does the narrative a disservice.
“Unless the cop planted the gun and the weed, what he did was possibly heavy-handed initially but ultimately the correct move by the letter of the law. He is supposed to catch people breaking the law. He did that.”
Not necessarily. In fact, illegally obtained evidence will generally be inadmissible in court.
“He saw the need to search the car…whatever his instinct came from, he was 100% correct.”
Where his instinct came from may matter a great deal, at least to the extent that the 4th amendment still counts for anything. I don’t know enough in this case to say whether or not he had a reasonable suspicion (i.e. actually smelled weed or not), but it’s certainly possible that he did not, and decided to make up an excuse in order to search the car anyway.
Seeing a car with out-of-state plates speeding through a rural county that is known for 2 things:farming and drugs…I really don’t see why the cop would have to make up a reason to search the car. These guys weren’t buying Indiana sweet corn at 10PM. And again, some people are losing track of the fact that these guys broke multiple laws. There’s always rights to due process, but no one has reported anything about that process being compromised. Please don’t create theories where there has been no evidence to point in that direction at all. Making up “what if” situations where something could be thrown out in court doesn’t change the 100% true fact that these guys broke the law.
“Seeing a car with out-of-state plates speeding through a rural county that is known for 2 things:farming and drugs…I really don’t see why the cop would have to make up a reason to search the car.”
It’s called the 4th amendment. Out of state plates on a car speeding through a rural county is not sufficient to legally justify a search.
“These guys weren’t buying Indiana sweet corn at 10PM.”
So? Not buying sweet corn at 10PM (OMG, 10PM!) doesn’t give probable cause. The cops can’t violate constitutional rights just because they think someone is up to no good.
I’m not making up anything, I’m explaining why your anti-American willingness to discard constitutional rights is wrong.
Again, no one has claimed an inkling of these guys having had their constitutional rights ignored. Please don’t make up things to fit whatever narrative you want to imagine. These guys were charged with laws that they broke. Blaming the cop for these guys apparently being criminals is equivalent to shooting the messenger.
Also, ad hominem attacks are a sure sign of losing an argument, so try not to do it.
“Again, no one has claimed an inkling of these guys having had their constitutional rights ignored. Please don’t make up things to fit whatever narrative you want to imagine.”
I’m not making anything up. There was some speculation about motives, ability to smell weed, etc… in the thread, and then you stepped in to declare that none of that matters because weed and a gun were in fact found. Indeed, you have been ignoring the cop’s stated, legally justifiable reason for the search (he smelled weed) and instead offering a plethora of other, imaginary, and illegal reasons for it (out of state plates, 10pm, and so on). Your argument has not been that the cop gave a valid reason to search the car, and events justified it. Rather, your argument has apparently been that if a cop feels like searching a car, he should be able to search it. For example: “He saw the need to search the car…whatever his instinct came from, he was 100% correct.” And “Seeing a car with out-of-state plates speeding through a rural county that is known for 2 things:farming and drugs…I really don’t see why the cop would have to make up a reason to search the car.”
This argument is not a defense of the cop’s given explanation (smell of weed) but an argument that pesky things like probable cause, warrants or the 4th amendment don’t apply if a cop has an instinct that a particular car is full of troublemakers and wants to search it.
“Blaming the cop for these guys apparently being criminals is equivalent to shooting the messenger.”
Where have I blamed the cop for anything? Citation needed.
“Also, ad hominem attacks are a sure sign of losing an argument, so try not to do it.”
Citation needed. Also, declaring that people who would set aside enumerated constitutional rights and protections are anti-American is a reasoned judgement, not a juvenile personal attack like “you’re a butthead” or suchlike.
This is just confusing me. Are you not claiming that the cop had no right to search the car? You claiming that he made up smelling pot to justify searching a car and coincidentally finding pot makes it sound like you can’t trust this process and so the crimes shouldn’t be charged. My point is that these guys broke the law. Regardless of the process involved, people broke multiple laws. What penalty they face is definitely swayed by the process of how evidence was discovered, but assuming that a cop (who has the job of making sure this process is done appropriately) automatically can’t be trusted to do his job because you don’t like the result (or whatever reason you claim he’s not doing his job correctly)…I don’t buy it. Whatever reason he found for doing what he did, they still broke the law.
And calling people who disagree with you “opposed to all things American” would be the definition of ad hominem, not “reasoned judgment,” which you misspelled by the way.
Yeah, you certainly seem confused.
“Are you not claiming that the cop had no right to search the car?”
I have made no such claim. I have said that his stated reason (he smelled weed) justifies the search, and that I do not know whether he actually smelled weed or not.
To recapitulate the thread: The cop said he smelled weed, which gave him a reasonably justifiable reason for the search. Others in this thread speculated as to whether he could have really smelled the pot, or if he just said that in order to go fishing for evidence on a car of young black me. You then jumped in to say that you don’t care about his reasons for searching the car, he felt he had good reason and he found his evidence. I then pointed out that legally, his reasons matter a great deal. You replied by offering legally unjustifiable reasons for the search, and I pointed out that you were arguing to set aside constitutional rights. And here we are.
What I think you may not be realizing is that the arguments you make to justify this particular search by this cop of this car, would apply beyond this case. I have not argued that Redfield and Co’s constitutional rights were violated–I have argued that your willingness to tolerate them being violated is anti-American, because it would allow everyone’s rights to be violated, regardless of what happened in this specific case. Should everyone speeding through rural areas at night with out of state plates be subject to searches? Can the cops search anyone at will? Can they go through your house, car or office just because their instincts tell them they might find evidence of a crime?
“Automobiles may be stopped if an officer possesses a reasonable and articulable suspicion that the motorist has violated a traffic law. Once the vehicle has pulled to the side of the road, the Fourth Amendment permits the officer to search the vehicle’s interior, including the glove compartment. However, the trunk of a vehicle cannot be searched unless the officer has probable cause to believe that it contains contraband or the instrumentalities of criminal activity. But similar to a search incident to arrest, once a vehicle has been lawfully impounded, its contents may be inventoried without a warrant, including the contents of the trunk.”
I think you should maybe stop getting legal advice from JayZ’s “99 Problems.” Again, whatever his reason…in Indiana he is justified to search the interior of a car. (also see:State of Indiana v. James S. Hobbs, IV, No. 19S01-1001-CR-10) And as Indiana is still a state, that is the law in America.
Nice copy and paste job. But you didn’t bother to actually read any of the legal decisions on the subject, did you? If you had, you wouldn’t have tried to cite the Indiana Supreme Court decision here, since it contributed nothing to the case law that would be relevant to searching a car as part of a traffic stop.
Anyway, I’m done with you. You don’t care about constitutional rights, and your method of supporting your arguments is to copy and paste from Google results you haven’t read and don’t understand.
OK guys – I’m going to ask both of you to stand down at this point. We have a case of East and West here that are not about to meet anytime soon, and I’d like to avoid going down the rabbit hole that occurs so often in Internet discussions. Let’s move on.
Appreciate the insight and perspective, Russell, and your service as well- my old man was an inner city fireman for 30 years so I know it’s definitely not an easy job as a civil servant of any kind these days.
I perhaps shouldn’t have insinuated that it was impossible to detect the smell of weed, but at the same time, I’ve been in situations where I haven’t. We really don’t know since we weren’t there and it’s not right to speculate. The officer certainly did his job, as he should have. The optics don’t look good to stop a car full of young black men on a Friday night and quickly call in the drug dog, but it’s obviously not like they didn’t find it, so I can’t say his reason for the probable cause was wrong, wasn’t there.
Shinons, you don’t even know if the cop was white, yet you’re convinced it was profiling. This isn’t the place to spout back all the stats on black interactions with law enforcement that contradict your biases, but for one I’m pretty tired of the BLM schtick.
What BLM schtick? You’re the one bringing that up.
Guess you missed the part that it had to be profiling, rather than 5 guys doing illegal ( and stupid) stuff, and dealing with the consequences of their poor decisions?
Concern about racial profiling predates BLM by quite a few decades and can be discussed without any reference to BLM, as it had been until you brought BLM into the thread.
Fair enough, although in recent events, it’s been BLM leading the charge, very often outrageously falsely.
Hey, leave the Bureau of Land Management out of this.
Why would the cop have to have been white for it to be racial profiling? That doesn’t make any sense Kiwi.
I fully agree, Dannan. My point was really that there is a willingness to believe, on the part of some, that profiling was involved, despite no evidence or claim by the 5 guys that this was the case. My shorthand comment was clumsy, and assumed that the guy I was replying to had leaped to the conclusion it was a white cop, since they are usually the ones the claim is made against, whether true or not.
The absence of a comment by the 5 is irrelevant. With charges pending the last thing they should be doing is lodging a public complaint about the probable cause found to search their car, a car that contained the illegal substance. Making that claim now wouldn’t help them in the court of public opinion, their standing to the university and team or the justice system, but it doesn’t change anything.
Further, I don’t think anyone believes their was profiling, no one really knows for sure. I was just pointing out the optics on finding a reason to search a car that 5 young black men are in on a Friday evening. It could very well have been just, and since weed was found it’s impossible to rule out the reason of probable cause listed. There certainly was no profiling on the initial stop; travel 13 MPH over the speed limit at night with a tail-light out, and I would imagine that car’s getting pulled over 99/100 times if an officer comes across it.
Thanks Hooks, yeah I was initially just trying to point out that stopping a speeding car, smelling weed, and then finding weed, is not shady cop work. I got defensive, I shouldn’t have, but it’s been a rough couple of years career wise. I’ll try to keep it to football from now on. That’s why I come to this site anyway.
In the other incident, Devin Butler has been charged with two felonies for battery of a police officer and resisting law enforcement, both class six felonies which carry a maximum of 2.5 years in prison each. All per ND Insider.
I had held out hope that the arresting officer was trumping up the charges a little and they’d be reduced once they were reviewed, unfortunately for Butler that’s likely the end of his career as well.
Any word as to there being video of the incident? No idea if the backer does has cameras facing outside the bar, but it wouldn’t be unprecedented for a place known to get *ahem* sloppy.
I’m interested to see how well someone with a broken foot can tackle a police officer.
As I think we all know, mix alcohol and anger and woman problems and a man is capable of a lot of scary things. I hope this somehow works out for him but this seems pretty bad.
Yea…something’s up here. This cop is bad, bad news.
http://www.ndinsider.com/football/eyewitnesses-dispute-police-account-of-notre-dame-cb-devin-butler/article_1b5b211a-6a56-11e6-8cb7-3b5aa684cfe0.html
I just can’t get past that his girlfriend’s name is “Haleigh Bailey.” Like, look, even though you spell it “eigh,” it still rhymes.
I’m pretty shocked that he apparently has a lawyer and his lawyer thinks it’s a good idea to be making statements to the press and not preventing defense witnesses from doing so. Good way to give the state potential fodder for cross examination.
This isn’t about the facts of what went down but look at this not-very-well-thought-out statement at the end:
“But I thought that the law was ‘innocent until proven guilty,’ and there’s no proof of anything besides word of mouth.”
??
This is an article about different eyewitness accounts. If there’s one problem with this case it’s not hearsay. Is she saying the cops only heard about the alleged resisting and assault? Did someone come up to the cop afterwards and say “I just wanted to let you know that Devin Butler tackled you earlier”. The issue is who is telling the truth.
Well the officer who arrested Butler seems like a gem
From ND Insider
I was surprised that Kelly went easier on Butler than Redfield, given the charges in each case…but this makes it sound like Kelly knew more about issues with Butler’s “crime” maybe not being as bad as what was charged. Obviously, having a cop with this bad history doesn’t mean that he hasn’t cleaned up his act, but it’s not a good sign for his version of events.
I fought the law and I won
I am the law so I won
Erm… what? Is this a think that people force 7-Eleven clerks to do?
Apparently it was a store that they went to regularly. I don’t want to generalize too much from a small sample size, but the actions in all three cases are consistent with how a bully would behave. Maybe they’re inconsistent with the other 99% of his life that we don’t see, and sure, the truth probably lies somewhere in the middle, but we have three documented examples of questionable behavior and one potential example with Butler. It’s not a good look.
In addition to the mistaken identity case and the 7-11 case, the Stevenses also filed suit against the city. Only the mistaken identity case has concluded so far. Certainly we live in a litigious society, but still, also not a good look.
Yup, just another of South Bend’s “finest”. Doesn’t shock me because it’s so typical, but it is still disgusting.
I grew up in Elkhart a long time ago. I’ve never heard of questionable or bad behavior from South Bend PD. I didn’t know it was a thing.
I think there’s a lot of factors at play in people’s perceptions here that are sort of muddled together from several different directions. It seems to have toned down some in the last several years, but the Indiana State Excise Police were extremely active around the fringes of the campus (and probably Indiana’s and Purdue’s campuses as well) and were known, charitably speaking, questionable practices, and for celebrating when they got a football player. Supposedly they cheered as they pulled Will Yeatman out of his house and arrested him, along with about 20 other students, because the ISEP used visible Solo cups seen through the window as probable cause to enter the house without a warrant or permission from whoever opened the door. The prosecutor ended up throwing out every arrest.
They also used to engage in pretty heavy-handed/absurd tactics around the tailgate lots; this is a notorious picture taken by an NDN poster of the ISEP walking around videotaping tailgaters.
I think the worm turned when somebody took cell phone video of one of them walking up to a kid and giving him some “what are you looking at” stuff, then shoving him backwards and shouting about assaulting an officer when the kid put his arm up to avoid getting punched. The guy threw him down and cuffed him, and the whole time he was practically on the verge of tears yelling, “I didn’t DO anything!” It wasn’t pretty.
The average student probably doesn’t differentiate much between South Bend PD, ISEP, and state troopers – to them, they’re all cops. For what it’s worth, my general perception is that the troopers are OK, the ISEP is almost universally loathed, and the South Bend PD, like any PD, is mostly good guys with a couple of bad eggs. The arresting officer in the Butler incident looks like he might be one of the bad eggs – the Butler case has some pretty substantial parallels with two other incidents involving the same officer, both of which resulted in lawsuits against the city. The city lost one of those and the other is still active.
I remember reading that the SUDS force got paid based on the number of citations they issued. How does that pass any kind of ethical standard? If everyone were perfect, they’d have to make up charges to earn a salary.
Wellll… Quota systems – i.e., you need to write so many tickets per month – were declared unconstitutional years ago. So what a lot of departments went to instead was a points system, with officers getting so many points for this and so many for that so it wasn’t just about writing tickets, and they’re supposed to shoot for a certain number of points every month. But, in reality, it’s about writing tickets, because municipalities do depend on them to varying degrees for revenue. That’s not to say that the town council is rubbing its hands together and cackling, Monty Burns style, about how much it’s about to soak its constituents. Any town budget, though, typically includes a line item for enforcement revenue, and just like in any other budget, missing the number is not good.
Obviously, like you say, there’s an ethical element at play here too given the kind of work we’re talking about. I think you could fairly make the case that cops let a lot of stuff go, and an uptick in ticketing is generally a result of them letting less stuff go, but certainly the potential for abuse is there.
Also, forgot to respond to the specific scenario you mentioned, but yeah, being paid solely based on the number of citations issued seems absolutely and completely wrong. That makes it seem more like a straight money grab than an effort to protect and serve.
I can’t speak for elsewhere but, my friends on my local police force find the quota rumors laughable. Speed traps etc. are usually set up after the department receives complaints from the public. Watching how people drive, where I live and work, filling any quotas would not be difficult.
Not quotas man, points. Obviously every municipality makes its own rules, and I can’t speak for your area at all. But I have direct knowledge of a points system in a couple of municipalities in my area, and I’m sure we’re not all that rare. As for your point about filling any hypothetical quota being easy, I agree, which is what I meant with “I think you could fairly make the case that cops let a lot of stuff go, and an uptick in ticketing is generally a result of them letting less stuff go.” If my local departments wanted to, they could nail me four or five times a day for doing 38 in a 35 or rolling through a stop sign. Thanks, guys!
Like Russell says below, which is what I was getting at with the budget talk above but he put it better – any boss needs to point to metrics to prove the productivity of his team and, critically, to justify headcount. It’s reality. If the department isn’t “productive,” they stand the risk of cuts. That doesn’t mean they should have carte blanche to drum up business, as it were, but headcount in a police/fire/emergency services setting is a very delicate balance, and personally I’d prefer that balance to tip to the heavier side to be safe.
I can’t find the piece about it, but there is a lot on-line about SUDS being restarted. I can’t find anything about why it was disbanded, though. Does anyone know? It’s definitely a weird entity, taking members from different forces and existing solely (seemingly) to harass ND students who are drinking.
SUDS wasn’t just ND – it was, as noted below, a federally-funded program comprised of “details where there is a high concentration of underage drinking.” In other words, on and around college campuses. I think the ISEP was the main organization coordinating it in South Bend, and of course their imprint was unmistakable. I’m not sure it worked the same way everywhere else.
Pay based on tickets or arrests is certifiably unethical. I have never seen any department that works that way.
I will say though, every department has a boss. That boss has to answer to their boss about the work these cops are doing on a regular basis. Cops don’t catch murderers, robbers, and burglars on a regular basis. It’s much easier for that Chief or Sheriff to justify tax payer money on cops that are actively performing their jobs. Tickets and written reports are an easily quantifiable way to illustrate work being done.
That was the rumor with SUDS, which was sort of a weird deal – it was a joint effort between the ISEP, the state troopers, and the local departments. Basically, any officer working for one of those entities could apply to be part of SUDS and earn overtime by, shall we say, actively enforcing underage drinking regulations. I don’t know if they were actually paid per citation, but that rumor was definitely floating around. At the very least they were encouraged to be extremely zealous in their enforcement; as I remember their beat consisted of a bunch of guys piling into a car and driving around town looking for gatherings of young people.
I said ISEP above but I think it was actually a SUDS team that raided Yeatman’s off-campus place. That story wasn’t so rare; I don’t remember details at this point, unfortunately, but there were other cases of forcing their way into houses or messing with people who were just wandering around the lots on game day, in many cases people who weren’t intoxicated or even holding a drink. I don’t know if it was disbanded but it was definitely scaled back dramatically when it was obvious that things were getting a little out of hand. The idea was well-intentioned but borderline, and they had a lot of arrests thrown out.
This is from the ISEP website:
Clearly that’s a well-intentioned program, no question. It’s just that the execution left something to be desired.
The ISEP/SUDS procedure when I was there was to send a bunch of undercover cops around the tailgates, then send one or two on horses up and down the aisles. The cops would then grab anyone who put a beer down as the cop on the horse went by.
The rumors that we heard, during the dark days of Bill Kirk, were that ND actively went out and requested the ISEP to bust kids tailgating, so they would accumulate reslife violations and get kicked off campus (housing was pretty tight). Maybe this program was simply disbanded on a city/state/federal level, but I was under the impression once Kirk left the University no longer allowed the ISEP to come on campus.