Another drinking violation for JD Quinn?

crazycat · Post by **crazycat** » Fri May 23, 2008 8:43 am

tampa_griz wrote:
He took cash offerred to him that he didn't earn. It was stupid but it wasn't even a crime. Most 19-year-olds would've done it too.

The stupidest part of all that was when he told the TV guy from Oklahoma to 'get a real job.' I about fell out of my chair.

tampa_griz · Post by **tampa_griz** » Fri May 23, 2008 8:47 am

crazycat wrote:
tampa_griz wrote:
He took cash offerred to him that he didn't earn. It was stupid but it wasn't even a crime. Most 19-year-olds would've done it too.

The stupidest part of all that was when he told the TV guy from Oklahoma to 'get a real job.' I about fell out of my chair.

Yeah he ain't the sharpest knife in the drawer.

bcats · Post by **bcats** » Fri May 23, 2008 9:38 am

Fox Sports has picked up on it.

http://msn.foxsports.com/cfb/story/8169 ... -DUI-again

AlphaGriz1 · Post by **AlphaGriz1** » Fri May 23, 2008 9:49 am

After looking at Re/Max's list it just reaffirms my stance on 1A drop downs.

They are not worth the trouble. The fact that they drop down kind of implies they are quitters when the going gets tough and for every Randy Moss there are hundreds of guys that do nothing for the program they drop to.

Why waste time and money on these guys? If it was my program they could get their second chance elsewhere.

Common Cat · Post by **Common Cat** » Fri May 23, 2008 9:52 am

tampa_griz wrote:
TIrwin24 wrote:
tampa_griz wrote:
TIrwin24 wrote:What amazes me is that UM knew of this kid's past before picking him up to play ball here from Oklahoma State. IMO Hauck is the bigger dumbass for thinking that Quinn was going to change.
Well he actually went to OU but that's fairly trivial. And don't kid yourself......tons of schools (including MSU) would've gladly taken Quinn when he came to to Montana.
You honestly think so?

I have to disagree with you on this one. (sorry about my mistakes, been up since 4am )

After talking with people during his move to Montana, they all agreed he was trouble, and nobody would want to have him despite his football talent.
He took cash offerred to him that he didn't earn. It was stupid but it wasn't even a crime. Most 19-year-olds would've done it too.
Yes, a lot of schools would've taken Quinn. Both UM and MSU have since taken other players that were/are bigger red flags than Quinn was at that time.

I totally disagree. If you are playing sports at the collegiant level you better know what and what you cannot do. Not to mention, most 19 year olds have better ethics than what Quinn has demonstrated. There is no excuse for this kid. He needs to learn his lesson. He has been given too many chances already.

GrizinWashington · Post by **GrizinWashington** » Fri May 23, 2008 10:24 am

Quinn is a lowlife.

However (and this may be splitting hairs) Hauck did not recruit Quinnn. JD recruited Montana.

As for Tampa's point about other teams picking him up, simply take a look at Bomar. He certainly had no trouble finding potential suitors when he left OK. The same would have been true of Quinn, and you're in denial if you don't believe it.

Now, does that justify Montana taking a chance on the kid?? I think that's a personal decision.

tampa_griz · Post by **tampa_griz** » Fri May 23, 2008 10:47 am

Common Cat wrote:
tampa_griz wrote:He took cash offerred to him that he didn't earn. It was stupid but it wasn't even a crime. Most 19-year-olds would've done it too.
Yes, a lot of schools would've taken Quinn. Both UM and MSU have since taken other players that were/are bigger red flags than Quinn was at that time.
I totally disagree. If you are playing sports at the collegiant level you better know what and what you cannot do. Not to mention, most 19 year olds have better ethics than what Quinn has demonstrated. There is no excuse for this kid. He needs to learn his lesson. He has been given too many chances already.

Someone offerred him their money and he took it. I understand that it's an NCAA violation but let's also remember that there are no victims in that sort of transaction. I don't know that it demonstrates a lack of ethics. He's clearly stupid but I had no problem with UM taking Quinn at the time. And 99% of the rest of the FCS programs would've taken him as well.

MSU Toddler · Post by **MSU Toddler** » Fri May 23, 2008 11:04 am

you know what burns me? is the generalizations that these college athletes are young and dumb and will make significant repetitive mistakes. MOST DON'T!!!

so aside from the tragedy of these sorts of mistakes, the great comeback stories (which i do hope happens here too), the focus of these events, the fact that most of us did do stupid things while in college and on and on.....

i think what is important is to recognize those that go out of their way to not make mistakes while they are a student athlete for a college program!

mslacat · Post by **mslacat** » Fri May 23, 2008 11:05 am

S: (n) rationalization, rationalisation ((psychiatry) a defense mechanism by which your true motivation is concealed by explaining your actions and feelings in a way that is not threatening)

crazycat · Post by **crazycat** » Fri May 23, 2008 11:40 am

tampa_griz wrote:
Common Cat wrote:
tampa_griz wrote:He took cash offerred to him that he didn't earn. It was stupid but it wasn't even a crime. Most 19-year-olds would've done it too.
Yes, a lot of schools would've taken Quinn. Both UM and MSU have since taken other players that were/are bigger red flags than Quinn was at that time.
I totally disagree. If you are playing sports at the collegiant level you better know what and what you cannot do. Not to mention, most 19 year olds have better ethics than what Quinn has demonstrated. There is no excuse for this kid. He needs to learn his lesson. He has been given too many chances already.
Someone offerred him their money and he took it. I understand that it's an NCAA violation but let's also remember that there are no victims in that sort of transaction. I don't know that it demonstrates a lack of ethics. He's clearly stupid but I had no problem with UM taking Quinn at the time. And 99% of the rest of the FCS programs would've taken him as well.

As much as I hate to agree with tampa "I'm tough on crime" griz on anything

, I have to say that the act of accepting money for your work despite how little you do is not a crime. Unethical? Perhaps, but not a crime. ARod gets paid $45,000 per at bat, so if a business wants to pay someone a pot of dough for washing hubcaps that's their prerogative.

That act alone by Quinn does not bother me much. But when you combine it with the two drinking violations that he had prior to coming to UM it would make me think twice. Maybe Hauck wasn't in on the drinking issues. Hard to say.

Bleedinbluengold · Post by **Bleedinbluengold** » Fri May 23, 2008 11:52 am

AlphaGriz1 wrote:After looking at Re/Max's list it just reaffirms my stance on 1A drop downs.

They are not worth the trouble. The fact that they drop down kind of implies they are quitters when the going gets tough and for every Randy Moss there are hundreds of guys that do nothing for the program they drop to.

Why waste time and money on these guys? If it was my program they could get their second chance elsewhere.

Smart post.

BWahlberg · Post by **BWahlberg** » Fri May 23, 2008 11:57 am

Did you guys see the missoulian article on this, there's some follow-up posts on it with egriz as well - he requested a blood test but the hospital wouldn't do one (allegedly).

In the most recent alleged offense, police stopped Quinn just after midnight for a mudflap violation and for making a left-hand turn into the wrong lane, near the intersection of Front and Pattee streets. The officer arrested Quinn on a misdemeanor DUI charge after Quinn refused a breathalyzer and requested a blood test, Ryan said, though neither was administered. Quinn posted bail one hour after he was booked into the Missoula County Detention Facility.

“He disputes that he was impaired at all,” Ryan said. “We continue to monitor his alcohol use, but he's been really compliant and just wants get these matters resolved.”

Quinn, an All-Big Sky selection last year, was one of several returning starters to the Grizzly offensive line this fall. However, UM athletics officials say he's been suspended from the team until further notice.

“He has been indefinitely suspended pending further investigation, and until I can find out more about what's going on,” said Jim O'Day, UM athletic director.

GrizinWashington · Post by **GrizinWashington** » Fri May 23, 2008 12:06 pm

I did see that, Re. For the life of me I cannot understand why a blood draw or Breathalyzer wasn't administered. Perhaps there was not enough field evidence to support one? I have not idea.

Old Skool Cat · Post by **Old Skool Cat** » Fri May 23, 2008 12:18 pm

All I know is I just find it comical how many egrizzers are so willing to let this slide based on the arguement that everyone drinks and drive so why point fingers at poor ole' JD. Gimme a break (handjob emoticon here). You would think that with the problems both programs have had, you would have absolutely ZERO tolerance for this kind of crap.

crazycat · Post by **crazycat** » Fri May 23, 2008 12:21 pm

"He disputes that he was impaired at all," said Paul Ryan, Quinn's attorney. "We continue to monitor his alcohol use, but he's been really compliant and just wants get these matters resolved."

Love that quote from his attorney. Really compliant as opposed to just compliant. I've really been obeying the laws this year.

KittieKop · Post by **KittieKop** » Fri May 23, 2008 12:26 pm

GrizinWashington wrote:I did see that, Re. For the life of me I cannot understand why a blood draw or Breathalyzer wasn't administered. Perhaps there was not enough field evidence to support one? I have not idea.

Because, according to the article, he refused the breath tests, but requested a blood test. In Montana it is the officer's choice of the test the person will take - in almost all cases, its a breath test (because of costs, time and convenience). If JD asked for a blood test, he could have one, but had to pay for it himself, but that doesn't take the place of the one asked for by the officer. In my eye, as the officer and legally, the refusal of the breath test can be used as evidence against him like the actual test could. And if he does get a blood test of his own, we just supeona that also as evidence. I think in my years I've had 3 or 4 people actually request and get their own blood test; most of time when people learn they pay for it, its not worth it to them.

Post by **SonomaCat** » Fri May 23, 2008 12:26 pm

GrizinWashington wrote:I did see that, Re. For the life of me I cannot understand why a blood draw or Breathalyzer wasn't administered. Perhaps there was not enough field evidence to support one? I have not idea.

He refused the breathalyzer. It's pretty rare for cops to haul someone to the hospital to draw blood (in the ER, presumably?) and pay for that test when a person is legally guilty of a DUI per se the instant they refuse to blow (I believe that is the law, anyway).

tampa_griz · Post by **tampa_griz** » Fri May 23, 2008 12:42 pm

Bay Area Cat wrote:
GrizinWashington wrote:I did see that, Re. For the life of me I cannot understand why a blood draw or Breathalyzer wasn't administered. Perhaps there was not enough field evidence to support one? I have not idea.
He refused the breathalyzer. It's pretty rare for cops to haul someone to the hospital to draw blood (in the ER, presumably?) and pay for that test when a person is legally guilty of a DUI per se the instant they refuse to blow (I believe that is the law, anyway).

They only receive an automatic six-month suspension of their license. They could still ulitmately convict you of DUI but they have much less evidence. A friend of mine went this route and it worked. He wasn't obviously drunk, he refused the breath test, and the prosecutor offerred him a plea (careless driving I think) but he couldn't drive under any circumstances for six months. Most attorneys would probably tell you to refuse unless you knew you were stone sober.

GrizinWashington · Post by **GrizinWashington** » Fri May 23, 2008 12:55 pm

Bay Area Cat wrote:
GrizinWashington wrote:I did see that, Re. For the life of me I cannot understand why a blood draw or Breathalyzer wasn't administered. Perhaps there was not enough field evidence to support one? I have not idea.
He refused the breathalyzer. It's pretty rare for cops to haul someone to the hospital to draw blood (in the ER, presumably?) and pay for that test when a person is legally guilty of a DUI per se the instant they refuse to blow (I believe that is the law, anyway).

Wait. Are they guilty or can they simply be charged with it immediately if they refuse to blow?? I can't believe the law is written that they're immediately guilty (seems as though that would be grounds for a constitutional challenge). If it's the latter, than the lack of a blood draw is going to make a guilty verdict more difficult, I would think.

crazycat · Post by **crazycat** » Fri May 23, 2008 12:59 pm

He refused the breathalyzer.

That's not a solid admission of guilt. He could've just had a few beers (in Quinn's case that will probably be enough to get him booted from the team assuming Hauck gave him a 'no drinking' ultimatum) and knowing how random breathalyzer's are he didn't want it to mistakenly say his BA was over the limit.

But in Quinn's case its actually best to blow in a breathalyser than to say no, because of his size (overwieght people give more inaccurate readings than those who are of muscular build). My understanding is that if you blow in one, you can then argue its validity in court. Have an expert come in and say this appartus has been shown to be inaccuate on many occasions, especially with over weight people.

This argument may not work for Quinn since he is also fairly muscular: An overweight person generally has a higher blood alcohol concentration than a muscular person who weighs the same and drinks the same amount of alcohol. This is because muscle tissue has more blood to dilute the alcohol.