Saw this on ESPN Bottom Line scary, national story in a way.

Remember the line about indictments and a ham sandwich.

 

:confused::confused:

 

Haven't heard that one.

 

T

 

The old standard is that you can indict a ham sandwich ie it doesn't take much to get an indictment.

 

The trial is where the proof will or will not come out.

There are conflicting stories on this. It has been said that the team was denied water for some reason and it has also been reported that they had 3 water breaks in an hour. This is a very sad situation regardless and my heart goes out to all concerned. I just cant imagine a coach in this day and time that would keep a team very hydrated during the summer heat. HS coaches are college grads and are trained every year in different aspects of the medical care of their players not to mention constant correspondence on topics such as heat and hydration. Many programs also have trainers on hand at all times. I feel for everyone involved.

 

How many of you my age(45) and older remember when "water makes you weak"(quote from Remember the Titans)? I remember during 2 hour practices in the summer lining up on a knee one time during practice and a coach came around a gave you a squirt from a water bottle that didnt hardly wet your throat. It wasnt a rare occurence for someone to pass out during practice. We had an old line coach that make each 7 man group push the sled until someone threw up. We have come a long way since those days!

Did they ever determine the exact cause of death?

Without an autopsy, how could they? That's the part that I question. A defense attorney will use this as they should. When I first heard about the parents declining to have an autospy performed I wondered why they would do this. I heard when your body reaches that high of a temperature, an autopsy may not be helpful in determining the exact cause. I'm betting we are left with more questions than answers and the coach will be found not guilty.

This is a mess, anyone coaching football especially head coaches in Kentucky need to have your head examined, it is a nightmare for what they get paid.

Saw this on ESPN Bottom Line scary, national story in a way.

 

It's a national story because it's never happened before. No HS coach has ever been indicted for something like this. Not just in KY; not anywhere in the US.

Without an autopsy, how could they? That's the part that I question. A defense attorney will use this as they should. When I first heard about the parents declining to have an autospy performed I wondered why they would do this. I heard when your body reaches that high of a temperature, an autopsy may not be helpful in determining the exact cause. I'm betting we are left with more questions than answers and the coach will be found not guilty.

Wow, I can't believe they wouldn't want an autopsy.

This scares me on many levels.

 

I feel deeply saddened for Max's family and the pain that they must be going through. I also am thinking of Coach Stinson and his family as not matter the outcome, his life has changed forever. Not in a good sense.

 

This will have implications well beyond that of Football. All other sports that function during the heat of the summer. How about the effect on youth sports. How many of those coaches now what the heat index is much less provide ample water when they are out in it. How about middle school, they do not even have a governing body to regulate or enforce regulations. How many of those coaches fall under the same blindness as youth coaches?

 

This scares me on many levels.

Stinson must have failed to perceive a substantial and unjustifiable risk that the child's death would occur. In addition, that failed perception must be of such a nature and degree that the failure to perceive it constitutes a "gross deviation" from the standard of care that a reasonable person would observe in the situation. And, the Commonwealth bears the burden of proving all of this beyond a reasonable doubt.

 

Not too long ago, the Kentucky Supreme Court held that a person could not be convicted of reckless homicide who gave another person cocaine to ingest, and that person died. While the Court did state it was a case-by-case thing, in that case, other people had been given the cocaine and they did not die. The Court held that unless the defendant knew in advance of some medical condition that made the person more susceptible to death by cocaine than the others, he was not criminally responsible.

 

There was a subsequent case where a man was convicted of reckless homicide, and that conviction upheld, for injecting methamphetamine into another person's vein. In that case, there was testimony that the defendant knew that venous injection of meth was much more likely to cause death than subcutaneous injection, based upon the death of a previous friend.

 

In my opinion, no matter what Coach Stinson said, how much he yelled, or what inflmmatory remarks he made, unless he knew or should have known 1) that his players, whether this one or others, had collapsed and he still continued to withold water, or 2) that he had some specific knowledge about THIS child's health history that gave rise to it, then I don't think that this indictment has any merit.

 

The failure to obtain an autopsy in my opinion is fatal to this case, no pun intended. Did the boy have a heart condition? Blood condition? They have to prove that Coach Stinson caused this child's death. Was there an intervening medical cause?

 

Another potentially fatal item for the prosecution: the "reasonable person" standard in this instance is going to be a similarly situated football coach. It can't just be you and me. Where are they going to find a football coach willing to testify against Coach Stinson.

 

As his attorney says, this is a trial case and I hope that justice prevails over emotion. Civil case? Perhaps. Criminal case? Absolutely not.

Stinson must have failed to perceive a substantial and unjustifiable risk that the child's death would occur. In addition, that failed perception must be of such a nature and degree that the failure to perceive it constitutes a "gross deviation" from the standard of care that a reasonable person would observe in the situation. And, the Commonwealth bears the burden of proving all of this beyond a reasonable doubt.

 

Not too long ago, the Kentucky Supreme Court held that a person could not be convicted of reckless homicide who gave another person cocaine to ingest, and that person died. While the Court did state it was a case-by-case thing, in that case, other people had been given the cocaine and they did not die. The Court held that unless the defendant knew in advance of some medical condition that made the person more susceptible to death by cocaine than the others, he was not criminally responsible.

 

There was a subsequent case where a man was convicted of reckless homicide, and that conviction upheld, for injecting methamphetamine into another person's vein. In that case, there was testimony that the defendant knew that venous injection of meth was much more likely to cause death than subcutaneous injection, based upon the death of a previous friend.

 

In my opinion, no matter what Coach Stinson said, how much he yelled, or what inflmmatory remarks he made, unless he knew or should have known 1) that his players, whether this one or others, had collapsed and he still continued to withold water, or 2) that he had some specific knowledge about THIS child's health history that gave rise to it, then I don't think that this indictment has any merit.

 

The failure to obtain an autopsy in my opinion is fatal to this case, no pun intended. Did the boy have a heart condition? Blood condition? They have to prove that Coach Stinson caused this child's death. Was there an intervening medical cause?

 

Another potentially fatal item for the prosecution: the "reasonable person" standard in this instance is going to be a similarly situated football coach. It can't just be you and me. Where are they going to find a football coach willing to testify against Coach Stinson.

 

As his attorney says, this is a trial case and I hope that justice prevails over emotion. Civil case? Perhaps. Criminal case? Absolutely not.

 

 

WOW!:thumb:

Stinson must have failed to perceive a substantial and unjustifiable risk that the child's death would occur. In addition, that failed perception must be of such a nature and degree that the failure to perceive it constitutes a "gross deviation" from the standard of care that a reasonable person would observe in the situation. And, the Commonwealth bears the burden of proving all of this beyond a reasonable doubt.

 

Not too long ago, the Kentucky Supreme Court held that a person could not be convicted of reckless homicide who gave another person cocaine to ingest, and that person died. While the Court did state it was a case-by-case thing, in that case, other people had been given the cocaine and they did not die. The Court held that unless the defendant knew in advance of some medical condition that made the person more susceptible to death by cocaine than the others, he was not criminally responsible.

 

There was a subsequent case where a man was convicted of reckless homicide, and that conviction upheld, for injecting methamphetamine into another person's vein. In that case, there was testimony that the defendant knew that venous injection of meth was much more likely to cause death than subcutaneous injection, based upon the death of a previous friend.

 

In my opinion, no matter what Coach Stinson said, how much he yelled, or what inflmmatory remarks he made, unless he knew or should have known 1) that his players, whether this one or others, had collapsed and he still continued to withold water, or 2) that he had some specific knowledge about THIS child's health history that gave rise to it, then I don't think that this indictment has any merit.

 

The failure to obtain an autopsy in my opinion is fatal to this case, no pun intended. Did the boy have a heart condition? Blood condition? They have to prove that Coach Stinson caused this child's death. Was there an intervening medical cause?

 

Another potentially fatal item for the prosecution: the "reasonable person" standard in this instance is going to be a similarly situated football coach. It can't just be you and me. Where are they going to find a football coach willing to testify against Coach Stinson.

 

As his attorney says, this is a trial case and I hope that justice prevails over emotion. Civil case? Perhaps. Criminal case? Absolutely not.

 

:notworthy:Thanks for the info!

 

I just find it somewhat disheartening that people think that guys who make less than a quarter an hour, and who are obviously in it for the kids, would intentionally neglect a player to the point of death.

 

This is a mighty slippery slope we are placing coaches on. On one hand they are hired to coach a team to be the best it can be, and often that involves pushing the athletes to a physical point they did not know they were capable of reaching. On the other they are possibly being held responsible for.....doing thier job?

 

This is a terrible tragedy. But, using Occam's razor, what is nore likely here, with 60+ kids not experiencing the same fate. It bothers me greatly that, in our society, when a tragedy occurs someone must always bear the blame.

The state index rules really protects the state more than it protects the coach. He could still be convicted for negligent homicide if the court finds that he behaved in an indifferent manner to a dangerous situation that threatened the health of the kids whose safety was entrusted to his care.

 

It's like driving your car and hitting a pedestrian who's jaywalking. They may have been in the wrong, but you could still wind up being charged if a grand jury believes you didn't exercise the due diligence required to drive a car.

 

But doesn't the state itself establish those guidelines as to what is dangerous and what isn't? Isn't that the purpose of the heat index and the restrictions based on the humidity/temperature?

 

Your example is a bit misleading IMO. There, the pedestrian is doing something wrong and you could be convicted if you weren't following the rules (i.e. speeding, not paying attention). Here, the player obviously isn't doing anything wrong, and the coach is following the rules set forth by the governing organziation (presumably). Am I missing something?

 

How many of you my age(45) and older remember when "water makes you weak"(quote from Remember the Titans)? I remember during 2 hour practices in the summer lining up on a knee one time during practice and a coach came around a gave you a squirt from a water bottle that didnt hardly wet your throat. It wasnt a rare occurence for someone to pass out during practice. We had an old line coach that make each 7 man group push the sled until someone threw up. We have come a long way since those days!

 

We must have been on the same team.

 

We looked like baby birds waiting for the mother bird to put a drop of water in their beaks.

 

It seems so crazy that that was the norm.

The parents of this young man was on Today Show this morning, this is so sad. My heart goes out to the parents and to the coaches. The coach and his attorney refused to be on the show.

I agree with woodsrider, as a parent I would have wanted to know exactly what happened to my child, I would have wanted an autopsy.

We must have been on the same team.

 

We looked like baby birds waiting for the mother bird to put a drop of water in their beaks.

 

It seems so crazy that that was the norm.

 

I to remember the days when we would be given more salt tablets than water.

 

One of the things that bothers me is they are really hammering the notion that a coach said they would run until someone quit or threwup. There is nothing criminal about that.

 

Clyde, Back when we were not given water or water was given in small amounts, we were different then.

 

On 110 degree days we played outside. We did not stay in the air conditioning and play video games or surf the web the go out in the heat to practice. Our bodies were aclimated to these extreme temperatures and therefore we could withstand it better. We still got weak, we still would sweat we still would pass out. It is not like it is hotter today than 30 years ago, kids activities are different.

 

I did not know they were on a morning news show. That discourages me further. That is only done for effect and to sway the court of public opinion. That is a very slippery slope.

 

The other issue with our society is exactly what someone else on here said. There are no accidents or tragedies anymore. Someone is to blame. Not everyone, but someone.

 

I continue to pray for everyone involved.