Darrell Williams charged with rape

[snydrosooner]

They had to know ahead of time of the arriagnment today. That usually occurs once someone has been arrested. The article states arrignment was scheduled for today and the Willimas was not currently in police custody so it was worked out ahead of time to turn himself in.

 

[oSuJeff97]

He is being arraigned today at 1:30 p.m. Also, you do not normally file charges in district court before arresting someone and putting them in custody. Before filing charges the accused has to be served (get a copy of the charges) before the court will allow filing. The DA has to swear that the accused was served. If you do that in a criminal case without having the accused in custody or having a huge bail posted, the accused becomes a flight risk. Just try to get a guy to show up for his arraignment if he is in Mexico. The DA would be extremely negligent to file these charges and schedule an arraignment without a prior arrangement in place for the accused to show up. There would have to be all kinds of assurances from the accused person's attorney to avoid an arrest before filing charges and scheduling the arraignment.

OK... so I have a question then... and I'm not doubting you, just please understand that my knowledge of the criminal justice system comes from "Law and Order"... so maybe I just don't understand LOL.

So what you're telling me is that you think Williams was served... maybe on Friday, with these charges that were to be filed in Court on Monday... and at that time, they worked to schedule the arraignment for the same day (today).

Here's what I don't get --- why wouldn't they have arrested and taken him into custody on Friday then? They obviously were going to file some pretty serious charges... it seems weird to me that they would just give him a heads up (by serving him), but wait until today (Monday) to take him into custody.

As you said... he could have easily just taken off for Mexico on Saturday or Sunday.

Or are you saying that you think he WAS arrested on Friday and he posted bail?

 

[perryj74]

I think what he is saying is that his attorney had arranged for him to turn himself in at the arraignment and that seeing how the charges were filed first thing this morning that arrangement was more than likely made late last week.

 

[trueou]

What I am saying that since he was not arrested sometime last week in anticipation of filing charges and arraigning him today, the DA received some substantial assurances from his attorney and/or the University that Williams would show up today.

Was there a report that he was arrested this morning? If there was, I missed it. The report was just that he was being arraigned today. The DA would never announce that before the arrest unless there had been an arrangement by which Williams was going to turn himself in today. That arrangement had to have been made sometime last week.

 

[Edmond_Sooner]

It's a conspiracy!

They just wanted him to play against OU!

 

[Boomer]

Not good.

http://s3.amazonaws.com/content.newsok.com/documents/f7document0001.pdf

 

[thegreyghost]

Doesn't look good with there being 2 girls claiming he sexually assaulted them.

 

[oSuJeff97]

Not good.

http://s3.amazonaws.com/content.newsok.com/documents/f7document0001.pdf

Yikes.

OK... can I ask another silly question... and I'm really not trying to be cute or funny here, considering the severity of these charges....

But how is a finger an "inanimate object?"

Is it just considered "inanimate" in the context of these charges?

 

[trueou]

It's a conspiracy!

They just wanted him to play against OU!

No, that is not what I am saying.

If you recall, last year Drew and Bird were given a ticket for attempted shoplifting at Dillard's in Norman after we had beaten Texas in Norman. There was great division among this board about what Capel's actions should have been. He suspended them indefinitely and it ended up being a one game suspension. He let them play after that one game because Willie got sick and Tiny couldn't play either. Not many OU Hoops posters were happy with that result. But the guys have been model citizens since.

Contrast that to Ford playing a guy until the authorities hauled him away. Ford was presented with an ethical and moral choice last week. In my opinion, he failed to make the right choice. He chose winning over upholding basic standards of decency.

Another interesting question is if OSU had lost on Saturday would he have looked to be an even bigger fool? Or would any one have really cared?

 

[colston15]

If Williams is guilty, what does that say about his conscience, or lack of one? He had two of his best games shortly after the alleged incident.

 

[coolm]

you shouldn't suspend a player just off of a police report and some accusation. The potential damage is irreparable and would certainly be worthy of an injunction seeking special relief to not play the game(s) until he was able to be included.

IMO it's not right to punish him in that manner until he's actually proven guilty.

 

[ByronHoustonsSweatyPalms]

you shouldn't suspend a player just off of a police report and some accusation. The potential damage is irreparable and would certainly be worthy of an injunction seeking special relief to not play the game(s) until he was able to be included.

IMO it's not right to punish him in that manner until he's actually proven guilty.

Lawyers!!!!

But he's probably right.

 

[colston15]

you shouldn't suspend a player just off of a police report and some accusation. The potential damage is irreparable and would certainly be worthy of an injunction seeking special relief to not play the game(s) until he was able to be included.

IMO it's not right to punish him in that manner until he's actually proven guilty.

Speaking from a PR standpoint I cannot think of a more inaccurate conclusion of what would be in the best interest of the school and basketball program.

It's not right to even let him be on the bench until he is proven innocent.

 

[coolm]

Speaking from a PR standpoint I cannot think of a more inaccurate conclusion of what would be in the best interest of the school and basketball program.

It's not right to even let him be on the bench until he is proven innocent.

yes...I am sure that an injunction against the school, the league, and other conference schools would put OSUx in such a favorable light.

duh

 

[skyvue]

you shouldn't suspend a player just off of a police report and some accusation. The potential damage is irreparable and would certainly be worthy of an injunction seeking special relief to not play the game(s) until he was able to be included.

IMO it's not right to punish him in that manner until he's actually proven guilty.

Coolm, you're a lawyer and I am decidedly not, but surely no player has an inherent legal right to a) be allowed to remain on the team and b) be awarded playing time, both against a coach/school's wishes. A coach can sit a player for any darned reason he chooses.

 

[Big Old Booger]

Coolm, you're a lawyer and I am decidedly not, but surely no player has an inherent legal right to a) be allowed to remain on the team and b) be awarded playing time, both against a coach/school's wishes. A coach can sit a player for any darned reason he chooses.

Exactly.

The kid suspended any rights to play basketball when he allowed himself to be placed at the scene of the crime not to mention actually participating as he is being charged.

 

[coolm]

Coolm, you're a lawyer and I am decidedly not, but surely no player has an inherent legal right to a) be allowed to remain on the team and b) be awarded playing time, both against a coach/school's wishes. A coach can sit a player for any darned reason he chooses.

So....you want to set a precedent where a mere accusation can take away ones' ability to play in collegiate sports?

think about it Ray...

the potential damage from not playing is irreparable and unless he broke some other rule to justify not playing then it meets the conditions for an injunction and could certainly endanger OSU's program and even the conference in the courtroom if he chose to pursue one.


Sorry - I have already fought this one in District Court before (albeit on a different level).

 

[colston15]

So....you want to set a precedent where a mere accusation can take away ones' ability to play in collegiate sports?

think about it Ray...

the potential damage from not playing is irreparable and unless he broke some other rule to justify not playing then it meets the conditions for an injunction and could certainly endanger OSU's program and even the conference in the courtroom if he chose to pursue one.

He has no unalienable right to play whether he has been accused or not.

Not to mention he has probably already violated team policy by having charges filed. Thus, a suspension would not be without merit.

 

[coolm]

"unalienable right"?

groan

violated team policy by having charges filed?

LOL - please stop. my ribs hurt already.

 

[oSuJeff97]

He has no unalienable right to play whether he has been accused or not.

You're certainly right about that.

But the idea that he must "prove his innocence" from any random accusation is ridiculous.

Not to mention he has probably already violated team policy by having charges filed. Thus, a suspension would not be without merit.

But I think some of us are talking about two different things here.

I'm in 100% agreement that having charges filed by the D.A. should equal immediate suspension pending trial or plea bargain.

I'm 100% in disagreement with the notion that any random accusation - without formal charges being filed by the D.A. - warrants suspension.