Gotcha. I was always under the Impression that he was 17. Cant see how 17/18 is that much different to johnny law though. So that brings us back to the how? I once said that boosters, alumni, clm himself, joe dean, joe alleva, someone is chipping off the cheddar so this things go "away". Got yelled at for it. So which is it? If its against the law then why did the law look the other way? Or did they take into consideration that yeah Its against the law but there are circumstances with how it went down? Doesnt seem too likely does it? In the end I think I will say this kid was probably in the wrong place at the wrong time 2x in his life. Hope he doesnt make it a 3rd. It sucks that all these blow hards are using it against our program but we'd do the same damn thing to any other foe. Im willing to let it shake out and see how it plays. With life comes decisions and decisions carry consequence. They all made their choice and have paid for them. Time to move on.
He got about what most young miscreants get under same circumstances . . . Probation. I have no issues with the judges calls. I just think that he should get what most miscreants get under Les . . . Some game suspensions.
Funny how so many are judging Les on his actions in the "Jeremy Hill Affair" before he has announced what he has done about it. Les has always kept his moves close to his vest. The only thing he does is first let the legal issues play out the let and academic or school issued be decided before he takes his football related discipline. He hasn't told anyone press or public what he will do but has always told what he has done after he has done it. As so many have said Les has never been afraid to discipline ANY of his players stars or scrubs. Also as so many have said he has earned my trust that using his MUCH more complete and detailed knowledge of the situation and player he will arrive at the best decision for what is right, Jeremy, the team and LSU. It's fine to comment on what you think of Jeremy or what Les should do....but to assume what Les has done before he has done it is a little presumptuous don't you think?
it wasnt the first time she was in that locker room, i'll leave it at that because she is a minor and im not putting it all on her, she was 14. But should we not let 14 and 18 year olds go to the same school, since the law says they are not peers?
IMO, "legal adulthood" should start at graduation. If you haven't finished high school, how can you be considered an adult? But that's a topic for another day.
When I was in school, the 9th graders did go to their own campus. I think it was a perfect system. Now, because the town has shrunk by 2/3, this year they have 6-12 on the same campus. They say that the young kids will be segregated from the older ones, but you know that they will find ways to co-mingle.
And Jewish belief has it starting at 12. A GED and a birth certificate and you find yourself on the front lines in battle. At 18, you can make a decision on who runs this country. A lot of topics for another day. But, legal adulthood starting at graduation? Come on!
Assuming that you are "normal" high school age I would agree. By that I mean you have never been held back and started 1st grade at the normal time. A kid may turn 18 two months before graduation, but his is still immersed in the same peer group he has been for all of his life. So, all of a sudden what is legal for his buddies is not legal for him. Of course, provisions would have to be worked out for dropouts, etc.
it really should be that way because she was 14 and probably shouldnt be on the campus with 17 and 18 year olds.
