MSU's Crump gets Probation for Tunnel Attack
Mates,
Checked the board, didn't see this, relevant to our team. Crump, the helmet-swinging Sparty, got probation today pursuant to what is called 'HYTA' (pronounced 'high-ta'), the Holmes Youthful Trainee Act. In a HYTA disposition the accused pleads guilty the but the court holds the plea in abeyance and does not enter it. The case becomes what is called a 'non-public' record, not subject to disclosure or to the normal look up search engines.
If he completes his probation without incident, the case effectively goes away as if it didn't happen - gives him a clean slate.
Link to the ESPN article here: https://www.espn.com/college-football/story/_/id/35563758/spartans-khary-crump-gets-probation-tunnel-assault
This has been your Sparty-felony update for the day.
XM
January 31st, 2023 at 1:52 PM ^
HYTA doesn’t scrub what Google will bring up when his name is searched for the next decade.
January 31st, 2023 at 3:04 PM ^
Hopefully the Wolverines in the NFL won't let him off easy; if he's fortunate enough to get drafted/signed.
January 31st, 2023 at 5:38 PM ^
Correct. Standard employment background checks, of course, don't search for news articles - only official criminal records, education records, etc.
That said, there is nothing stopping a prospective employer from googling his name.
That also said, I don't wish for the kid's life to be ruined over this. Rather, I'm hoping he learns from this, matures to be a solid citizen, and does some good in this world to make up for past transgressions.
January 31st, 2023 at 7:16 PM ^
CJK5H
That's what Google can do for you.
January 31st, 2023 at 1:54 PM ^
Remember....people don't hurt people, tunnels hurt people
January 31st, 2023 at 5:39 PM ^
Blame the helmet. If the helmet hadn't been there, none of this would've happened.
January 31st, 2023 at 7:44 PM ^
The way they were dressed, those two were just begging for it.
January 31st, 2023 at 7:45 PM ^
The way they were dressed, those two were just begging for it.
January 31st, 2023 at 1:54 PM ^
I'm completely fine with this.
January 31st, 2023 at 2:17 PM ^
me too. is a principled outcome and appropriate for a first-time offender where no (? little?) injury was inflicted despite the accused's best efforts.
if all of us got rung up for every ill-advised thing we had done at that age, a fair number here might be emailing their parole officers, not their office mates.
January 31st, 2023 at 2:52 PM ^
Yep.
I may or may not have a few skeletons...
January 31st, 2023 at 6:02 PM ^
Little to no injury? He beat the kid over the head and gave him a concussion.
January 31st, 2023 at 6:56 PM ^
Mack, the question marks were clues. I have no idea about the extent of any injuries.
January 31st, 2023 at 7:19 PM ^
This doesn’t eliminate a civil case - the parents of the Michigan players can still sue. Especially if their child suffers due to the incident.
January 31st, 2023 at 7:19 PM ^
Dang…double post.
January 31st, 2023 at 10:24 PM ^
Thank you for this comment.
RCMB this, RCMB that. I seem to remember multiple posters on that "site" advocating assault against U of M fans. Lol. "Little if any injury"? But let's let that asshole "serve his time" and not "ruin his life". I've seen some disgusting shit on this site but nothing even remotely close to this. I can understand and respect Gemon Green for being allowed to have his input, and have his wishes respected. It's just further proof of how high of character he tries (and often succeeds) to be.
I know it's like a $100/year customer of a $10,000,000 profit/year company talking about how they'll never give the company a single dime more of their money. But I'm done. I'm just fucking done.
January 31st, 2023 at 3:01 PM ^
Username checks out.
Of course you are fine with it, because you would offer actual training and education.
I just hope (I honestly don't know) it isn't in reality more of a case of just can he keep clean long enough for it to disappear.
January 31st, 2023 at 3:54 PM ^
I just hope (I honestly don't know) it isn't in reality more of a case of just can he keep clean long enough for it to disappear.
Even though he goes to a shit school, with a shit board, a shit coach emeritus, and with a shit fanbase, justice has been served. No need to drag the kid anymore. If he fucks up, that's really not for any of us to speculate.
February 1st, 2023 at 6:28 PM ^
I don't know what you mean by dragging the kid.
You don't think it would be good to actually help/train him as the very name of the program implies?
January 31st, 2023 at 7:23 PM ^
I don't have a problem with the ultimate punishment. I just would like to see more contrition from the kid and from the school.
January 31st, 2023 at 8:07 PM ^
They should've been kicked off the team. That would've been a show of contrition from the school.
January 31st, 2023 at 10:44 PM ^
No matter what we would like to see, the practicalities of living in a world full of attorneys and a pending civil case make anything like that pretty hard. I ain't no kinda law talking guy but it seems like that requires some signal from the plaintiff's side that a honest display of contrition by the defense won't be used against him when it goes to court.
January 31st, 2023 at 1:55 PM ^
That works. I'm happy there was a repercussion for that and I also didn't want it following him around for the rest of his life, legally at least.
January 31st, 2023 at 2:08 PM ^
This is the complete opposite take that you would hear from the RCMB honks if this scenario was reversed. They would want that young man's life destroyed.
This reasonable take is one of the reasons I am proud to be a part of this fan base.
January 31st, 2023 at 2:22 PM ^
The RCMB honks (and Valenti) wanted Mazi to be affected for life, so you KNOW they'd be btching up a storm about this outcome.
January 31st, 2023 at 3:56 PM ^
This is the complete opposite take that you would hear from the RCMB honks
The Michigan difference
January 31st, 2023 at 4:08 PM ^
Those people are complete fucking idiots.
January 31st, 2023 at 5:45 PM ^
This reasonable take was not allowed here for a while. It is mellowing out now but “ruin the kids life” was the only permissible position here for a long time with regard to this incident.
January 31st, 2023 at 1:55 PM ^
And what if Green had been seriously wounded, or worse (anything short of death, which automatically bumps up the charges)?
January 31st, 2023 at 2:01 PM ^
I think if something else had happened then the result might have changed. This has been your "Daily Legal Insights from KRK".
January 31st, 2023 at 2:08 PM ^
The legal system isn’t based on what ifs and what could of. If it was everyone who gets stopped for speeding would be charged with attempted murder. Because what if someone was crossing the street.
January 31st, 2023 at 2:27 PM ^
That is simply untrue - which is why we have charges such "attempted murder" & "conspiracy"... intent & action absolutely matter, even if the result was not the most severe outcome.
January 31st, 2023 at 2:38 PM ^
These are not contradictory points of view. Intent is not a "what if" and presumably must be proven to a jury.
January 31st, 2023 at 3:38 PM ^
My point is that, in this case, defendents *actions* are not a "what if". He swung a hard, blunt object against someone's unprotected head numerous times. The victim ended up with a mild concussion, a broken nose and some mild facial damage. He could have easily ended up in a coma, suffered serious internal damage, or worse with all of the actions taken by the defendent being exactly the same. So, should the charge truly be any different in those scenarios?
January 31st, 2023 at 7:24 PM ^
Interesting, I read your previous post the other way. But yes, in the legal system actual damages do matter some, and potential damages do matter some.
The penalty for stealing money depends on the amount stolen far more than the "potential amount stolen", and the charges for shooting someone "near the heart but not killing them" also differs from "killing them", regardless of intent.
I think it's true even if there's no intent, the potential charges differ based on the outcome - "I accidentally ran a red light, and got a ticket but no one got hurt" versus "I accidentally ran a red light and someone was killed"
January 31st, 2023 at 8:30 PM ^
just like bar fights, consequences typically depend on outcomes of the incident. heat of the moment incidents are less penalized than premeditated, obviously.
January 31st, 2023 at 2:47 PM ^
Yeah, but it's not "what if they had attempted murder". You have to actually attempt it. If I slap my buddy in the face, I don't get charged for "assault and could have beat him with a lead pipe".
January 31st, 2023 at 3:39 PM ^
Beating someone in the head with a lead pipe is *that* different from beating them in the head with a helmet? Death can result in either case - all are simply fortunate it did not this time.
January 31st, 2023 at 4:07 PM ^
Why does the tool matter in that scenario <-- and that's kind of a rhetorical question because all this whatif-ism is pointless and getting downright embarrassing for you all.
Does the difference between a pipe and a helmet matter because someone may presume a pipe is more deadlier. Prove it. Otherwise, it's still the same act. What if I used a folding chair? What if I used a cleat? What if I used a broom in the tunnel hallway... all pointless discussions.
Death can result in either case
If the damage is increased as the result of the act I imagine the charges would increase as well.
January 31st, 2023 at 4:41 PM ^
I think you missed the point.
January 31st, 2023 at 4:09 PM ^
The legal system isn’t based on what ifs and what could of [sic].
Tell that to someone who got a DUI after being pulled over for expired tags.
Most DUIs are non-collision and non-injury. Unpopular opinion: The whole basis for these types of DUIs being crimes are “what ifs and what could have.”
January 31st, 2023 at 5:28 PM ^
Dude, that makes no sense in the context of what we're talking about.
January 31st, 2023 at 7:27 PM ^
Sure it does. If you get pulled over for something that isn't related to DUI driving, but you have a blood alcohol level over .08%, you'll get arrested and prosecuted for DUI. But the person hasn't directly harmed anyone by being DUI. The traffic stop wasn't related to anything involving impairment/bad driving. There was no actual harm or injury done. But DUI is a crime because of the danger it POSES, even if no harm was actually caused. That's absolutely a crime based upon "what if" or "what could have been."
February 2nd, 2023 at 10:08 AM ^
There is no "what if" the person was driving under the influence when they got pulled over for something else and are caught. The prosecutor can not charge them with more because "what if" they had killed someone. DUI is an actual crime, and the punishment is a deterrent to prevent it in the future. Someone who has 3 DUIs receives a much harsher punishment than a first offender.
January 31st, 2023 at 2:17 PM ^
If my grandma had wheels she'd be a bicycle.
It didn't happen so it makes no sense to deal in hypotheticals. This outcome makes sense given the facts.
January 31st, 2023 at 3:12 PM ^
Or maybe one of those party mobiles that people pedal around and get drunk on. I really don't know your grandma, but that would be kind of cool.
What if someone shot at but only grazed the person. Still a misdemeanor?
January 31st, 2023 at 7:26 PM ^
or a weinermobile. That would be really cool.