Jamarion Wilcox
- Thread starter TheResistance
- Start date
Just goes to show you can have all the talent in the world and destroy your career if your head isn’t screwed on straight. Dude’s a really good RB, innocent until proven guilty, but I just hope he learns to not put himself into those situations and figures it out.
Jamarion Wilcox domestic violence allegations: More details emerge on University of Kentucky RB
New court documents reveal disturbing allegations behind Jamarion Wilcox’s absence against Toledo.
www.aseaofblue.com
"Needs to be gone" 99% of women do nothing but lie especially nowadays. And what happened to innocent until proven guilty?
Last edited:
Your generalization is equally bad though. Goes both ways. I agree innocent until proven otherwise.
Really? 99% huh? What is your primary malfunction?
I see I upset the p***y hat wearers. I'm just making broad statements without evidence like OP when the court case hasn't even started. Let him go before a judge even looks at the evidence and decides. **** it! Believe women! Evidence be damned! America in 2025.
Last edited:
Jamarion Wilcox domestic violence allegations: More details emerge on University of Kentucky RB
New court documents reveal disturbing allegations behind Jamarion Wilcox’s absence against Toledo.
Look at the completely idiotic comments made on that article. Right above the comments: Be respectful in your interactions with contributors and fellow fans. Go here to read our community guidelines.
I can't believe they haven't removed those posts. Pathetic.
need to let this play out. But what a waste of talent if it becomes true.
You're trying way too hard. And you spouting "innocent until proven guilty" is nonsense. This isn't a criminal case. It is a petition seeking an interpersonal protective order. The standard is merely a "preponderance of the evidence." There is no "guilty" verdict. The court either finds again by a preponderance of the evidence if the act occurred and may occur again if the protective order is not entered. It is a bit odd to me that there is not a criminal case that goes along with the request for protective order. "Innocent until proven guilty" simply means that a criminally accused enjoys that presumption in a court of law, meaning that in a criminal case the state must prove his guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. It doesn't apply in the court of public opinion. In other words, we're not required to presume that he didn't do it. Usually, not always, where there's smoke there's fire. Again, you're really trying to hard to be a hard *** with your 99% BS. Grow up. This kid seems like a POS and Stoops would do well to get rid of him. He's a bad look for a program that needs all the positives it can get.
Maybe I'm assuming he is guilty, and he needs to have his day in court, but It will be a tough call for Stoops to play him during that time. It sucks, but I guess I remember another player last year being found non-guilty and it almost ruined his career.
There is no "guilty" or "not guilty" here. The judge will either enter an Interpersonal Protective Order or it will be dismissed. But the bar is very low. It is almost certain to be entered if the requesting party insists on going forward. Would not surprise me if she doesn't. Happens all the time. Again, the standard is "preponderance of the evidence" (e.g. "more likely than not"). It's a far cry from having to prove your case beyond a reasonable doubt. These are often "he said/she said" situations and judges almost always err on the side of caution. They do not want blood on their hands if they deny the request and then something else happens.
You point out the extremely low bar for evidence and the judge will likely rule her way even if he is innocent but want him kicked off the team pronto anyway? How does this make good sense? If it is nothing but his word vs. hers your solution seems a bit extreme and unfair as the PO doesn't necessarily establish anything. The two additional cases definitely make me think he will be gone but due diligence is definitely in order before deciding. Innocent until proven guilty definitely should apply in regards to kicking him off the team unless the fact that he has remained in the doghouse most of his time here anyway makes Stoops decide enough is enough.
Last edited:
Seems like somebody got shot down on Tinder.
He hasn't been arrested or charged with a crime from this reported incident. Given that he was already in the doghouse, it would seem a suspension was appropriate, but since we are ignorant of so many details, it's difficult to criticize any action one way or another without sounding like someone who is jumping to conclusions without all the facts.
Last edited:
Yes kicked off the team because it's a bad look for a program that needs all the positives it can get right now. No "innocent until proven guilty" should not apply anywhere but a court of law which is the only place it actually does apply despite you wanting to take it to extremes. He does not have a right to play football for the University of Kentucky. He does have constitutionally protected rights in a court of law. He's obviously a bad seed and should be shown the door.
Kentucky RB Jamarion Wilcox Facing Multiple Court Cases
Kentucky running back Jamarion Wilcox has multiple court dates on his schedule for three different incidents.
It's time to say adios. This kid's had issues since he walked on campus. The staff has done everything they could to get him straightened out but it has not worked.
Is this the same kid that didn't tie his shoes last season?
WTF?
WTF?
Yes. Stoops was attempting to use examples of why the kid wasn't playing because he wasn't doing the right things off of the field. He was trying not to throw the kid under the bus. He's been acting stupidity since he got here. Missing meetings, coming in late to other team events and now all of the legal stuff is coming out publicly.
Yup. Just cuz you wear a UK jersey doesn't mean you have some sense.
Have met plenty who don't.
He is scheduled to appear back in court on Nov. 3.
Sounds like he won't be suiting up this year.
Sounds like he won't be suiting up this year.
I pretty much concurred with your final sentence in my reply. Punishing people for unsubstantiated allegations is just plain wrong in any circumstance however. Wrongful perception (if it actually is and I have made clear I have no idea what the truth is at this point) should never be the determining factor. I should not be able to make up crap to tell your employer and get you fired just because I'm mad at you. Your employer may well have the right to just get rid of you but that doesn't make it fair or proper.
Last edited:
I'm not sure you understand how this works. I do; I do it for a living. Where are you getting "unsubstantiated" from? It was "substantiated" enough that the judge assigned to the case after hearing testimony thought it was "substantial" enough that he/she entered the protective order. Not sure what else you're expecting. And that's a pretty big leap you're making to assume the victim is "just making crap up" because she's "mad at" him. Where's your proof? Again, the judge heard it and apparently believed the victim. That's plenty in a court of law. I think you've probably watched too much Law & Order and think that there has to be a "smoking gun" so to speak. Witness testimony, if found to be credible, is plenty to sustain entry of a protective order. He needs to be gone yesterday
You are just being arrogant. To think I actually tried to give you a little support when everyone was clowning your hyperbolic predictions for the FB season. I have never watched those shows you speak of. I was not saying it was unsubstantiated I was saying if it was. I never argued any legalities at all. You were the one that stated how weak the burden of proof was and the judge would likely err in her favor regardless of facts. I just stood up for what is fair on that one issue. Lloyd Tubman (who if I remember correctly was eventually exonerated) came to mind is what prompted my response.
Last edited:
I mean the kid basically lives in the doghouse ...... It's definitely not a good look to have any allegations against you when you can't seem to find the door to the dog house anyways. Guilty or innocent Wilcox already is playing catch-up with the coaches trust and this put another padlock on the door to the doghouse that Wilcox will have to earn the key for.
It's unlikely that happens considering the kid can't stay out of issues my bet is a scholarship is opening up in the RB room either through this issue or a transfer at the end of the year.
It's unlikely that happens considering the kid can't stay out of issues my bet is a scholarship is opening up in the RB room either through this issue or a transfer at the end of the year.
I hope this young man has a male in his life, anywhere, that can step in and mentor him. And I pray that he is receptive to it. Because he is on the verge of not just throwing his football career away, but his whole life.