Perhaps the BEST B1G Forum anywhere, here at College Football Fan Site, CFB51!!!

So you're blaming my opinion on being a Michigan fan? Pretty weak response honestly. I've read a couple articles and listened to local, pro-buckeye radio stations on my way home from work yesterday and every radio presence said it looked bad for Urban.
When did he claim not to know about it? Well, at the Big Ten media day when he said last night was the first he heard of the 2015 incident. The played the audio on the radio. Texts from his wife to the victim clearly state that Urban doesn't know how he wants to handle it.
I'm not burn him at the stake guy as I'd like to hear more facts, but the facts that have been released and his public statements are pretty damning at minimum, that he blatantly lied when originally asked. For clarity, I'm not saying he should be fired for that alone.
I don't think it was his job to play marriage counselor, but the fact he continued to keep him on his staff along with his history says a lot. The people you choose to surround yourself over long periods of time say a lot about the person. Again, not a reason to fire someone, but a reason I can have an opinion on character.
And let's be clear since you want to say my personal opinion is solely because I'm a Michigan fan. I have disliked Urban Meyer since 2002. If we go to the WayBackMachine and dig up the collegefootballnews, I'm sure we can find some posts of me ranting about UM. I watched him lie to personal friends that played for him, only to watch him do the same to Utah players a couple years later, then have a team full of inmates running the asylum at Florida. The dude should call Tim Tebow every day for creating a distraction and making him look like a decent human being.

What I am saying is- there only seems to be a couple posters here rushing to judgement. 
And there are only a couple that define my desire for a fair discovery- as defending a coach because wins mean more 
After I have said repeatedly that if what is being assumed is all true and ther is no other side to this- fire his ass-  - -that is not a reasonable position to take 
If the shoe fits ....
I have been clear on your position from the beginning.   You have been consistent.
Why would you take the MDOT hothead approach instead of agreeing with the basic principle of a fair trial?  You called me out for defending Meyer.  I have yet to approach Doing that.   
Meyer deserves his day in court- not today’s PC over the top lunch mob mentality.   

I've been told by many that mental abuse is even worse than physical abuse. The latter heals. In some cases, the former never does.




Damn. I wish it was something more than this thread that brought back so many old posters.

  Hey guys.  Anybody found Stingray yet?  I miss that dude.  

Not sure if he made it over here or not.Bama Buckeye & Buckeye Crazy have been scarce also

I probably mis-spoke. I'm not a lawyer - I hate those. All of them. Every one of them.



Anyway, Isn't it highly unlikely they could get a conviction without a cooperative witness in a DV case?

I probably mis-spoke. I'm not a lawyer - I hate those. All of them. Every one of them.



Anyway, Isn't it highly unlikely they could get a conviction without a cooperative witness in a DV case?

As hopefully a tolerable lawyer (to you at least), I would say, yes, it is highly unlikely.  The scenario would almost certainly require direct eye witness testimony.     Statutory construction can help illustrate why this is so.
Most 'Battery' statutes, and that's how many state's charge these cases (some call it 'Assault'), include the following language:
Actually and intentionally touches or strikes another person against the will of the other; or (maybe it includes this)

2. Intentionally causes bodily harm to another person.

You can see the problem when you don't have a cooperative witness/victim.
The Prosecutor must introduce testimony that the battery was 'against the will' of the victim.
(something like this) DA: Ms. Victim, how did you sustain your injuries?   Ms. Victim, did you give the defendant permission to strike you?
 
If you don't have this,  and of course then afford the Defendant their constitutional right to cross-examine the accuser, you don't have a case.  It would be quite difficult to win a case like this, w/o getting too deep in the weeds, the introduction of hearsay is challenging, without hitting certain exceptions (mainly availability of a witness).  Unless I could establish that the victim had vanished, and was legitimately unavailable, I'm gonna get crushed by the defense counsel.
I just checked, I had four battery cases in the fall of 2003,  2 of my victims refused to testify, or even contact the office after we filed the case.  So I had a police report, pictures, physical evidence, but at a trial, I have got very little.  why?  All I could do is call to the stand the police officer who took the complaint, interviewed the Vic, took the pictures.  It's her version of events (not under oath) presented to a law enforcement officer in a police report, without a witness to the actual battery, since she won't testify.  The cop swears in an affidavit, and that's good enough for arresting and charging the case.  For all we know her sister or jealous ex boyfriend roughed her up.  I can't place the defendant at the home when she sustained the injuries.   I could roll in twenty five friends of hers with text messages, still not good enough.

Damn. I wish it was something more than this thread that brought back so many old posters.

You caught me.  I have been on the B12 board a bit lately.  I didn't know anything about this until about noon today, saw somebody mention something on an LSU site and I didn't know what they were referring to, so I knew where to come to get the info from people who would know and be talking about it.  

We can do this conversation better - myself included.