ADVERTISEMENT

Chris Beard to Arkansas?

Finished first year a while ago. I am still trying to figure out what I am wrong on though? As far as I can tell, everything I have said has been spot on. I don't think a lawsuit is likely in any if the situations, just that the potential exists for there to be.

The DA already had her initial statement and evidence. They wouldn’t have needed her if the evidence was that strong.

As long as you preface them as your opinion or you believe, but the moment you start making blanket statements that so and so is a spouse beater or domestic abuse and so forth, you've committed defamation. Now as I said earlier, him being a public figure adds the actual malice element. So that makes it a bit harder, but not that much.

You don't always have to have full probable cause for an arrest. In cases of domestic violence, if police are called and see evidence of what looks like a domestic struggle, they are generally going to remove someone just as a precaution. You're still going to have to do testing to find out what is accurate and what isn't.

UT had cause because the verbiage in his contract allowed them to fire him for anything that would be detrimental to the University. He could also be fired for simply being charged with a felony, regardless of a conviction. Considering the public outcry, I completely understand why they had to make that choice to let him go. I'm sure they regret it now.

Pitino wasn't charged with anything. He was just alleged to have been invovled in the FBI sting operation. It was also his 3rd scandal in around 5 years and 2nd while they were currently on probation. That's why he was let go.

So, you've seen no evidence, spoken to no one involved, and don't know Beard or his former fiance, but based on media reports you're ready to hang em? Sounds about right for today's times.
Plenty to deal with here.

1. her previous statement is hearsay and not admissible in a trial, his right to confront witnesses and all. While the other evidence the police had, bite marks, bruises, cuts, etc. could potentially lead to a conviction, no prosecutor is going to try that case with her now saying she was lying when she first reported it. She called 911 because she thought he would kill her or hurt her really bad, but sobered up she realized that her gravy train was over.

2. You do have to have probable cause for an arrest. While police often separate people in a domestic dispute, they can't arrest you without probable cause.

3. It is not detrimental to the University to be wrongfully accused. If there was not something there, believe me there would have been a lawsuit.

4. I'm not relying on media reports, I'm relying on the police report of evidence they observed and the probable cause that led to an arrest. I don't want to hang him, I just have said a University can refuse to hire him based upon this situation.

"Finished first year a while ago." So you are working on your second semester of either criminal procedure or criminal law. Know enough to argue on a sports blog with people that don't know much about the law. You are wrong on this one and should just move on to another argument.
 
Plenty to deal with here.

1. her previous statement is hearsay and not admissible in a trial, his right to confront witnesses and all. While the other evidence the police had, bite marks, bruises, cuts, etc. could potentially lead to a conviction, no prosecutor is going to try that case with her now saying she was lying when she first reported it. She called 911 because she thought he would kill her or hurt her really bad, but sobered up she realized that her gravy train was over.

2. You do have to have probable cause for an arrest. While police often separate people in a domestic dispute, they can't arrest you without probable cause.

3. It is not detrimental to the University to be wrongfully accused. If there was not something there, believe me there would have been a lawsuit.

4. I'm not relying on media reports, I'm relying on the police report of evidence they observed and the probable cause that led to an arrest. I don't want to hang him, I just have said a University can refuse to hire him based upon this situation.

"Finished first year a while ago." So you are working on your second semester of either criminal procedure or criminal law. Know enough to argue on a sports blog with people that don't know much about the law. You are wrong on this one and should just move on to another argument.
Why would her previous statement be hearsay if you're not using them to prove the crime itself? You would have the 911 recording, any body cam footage, plus all the other evidence you're claiming police had. They can't make a case out of that? I'm guessing you don't have much experience in criminal law.

Um, you can be arrested without probable cause in exigent circumstances. Not saying that occured here, as I wasn't invovled and am not pretending I know the facts, unlike others...

Sure it's detrimental to employee someone who was accused of such things. Particularly when it's all over media cycles for several days. His contract gave them the provision, and, as it has already been explained multiple times in this thread, TX passed legislation several years prior that protects public entities in these legal disputes. He wasn't likely going to win.

Sure you are relying on media reports. You haven't even seen the police report. You haven't seen or even know the exact evidence they have, and you haven't talked to anyone involved in the case. Other than what you have heard in the news like everyone else, you know nothing additional. So, yes, you are relying on media reports. Lol.

Finished crim law and crim pro a while ago, too. You have yet to be able to demonstrate what I am wrong about. First, it was that he could never sue. Then I had to explain the situations that could arise and how he could sure. Then you had to concede he could sue in certain situations. Now you're saying police can never arrest without PC, but that also isn't entirely accurate.

I'm starting to wonder if you did in fact actually attend law school. If so, that's kind of embarrassing.
 
Last edited:
There’s an Arkansas guy on X that said he’s upgrading the idea after speaking with someone. Seems to have a decent following. 🤷‍♂️


🫣
Hopefully the smoke leads to some fire…. So we can start to rejoice and get out program back on the right foot here…
 
  • Like
Reactions: Pooser51
There are a lot of people talking about this on Twitter. I think at the very least Arkansas atleast had discussions or reached out. There is alot of smoke for it to not have a little validity to it
 
  • Like
Reactions: kywildcat41086
If there is any smoke at all then it will be deja vu to the UCLA thing. He will get another raise and an increase in the buyout.
Exactly because Mitch is such a dumb@$$. This would be the time you would let him walk without having to owe him a penny….
 
  • Sad
Reactions: Pooser51
I saw it in passing. He’s got around 5K followers, but I dont know enough about X to say. He just said something about upgrading the Cal to Ark stuff from crazy to rumor or something Mike that. Might have misunderstood it completely. I’m just clinging to anything for hope.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Klix

I think they are just trolling us because they know how our fanbase is
200w.gif
 
  • Like
Reactions: Dontworryboutit23
I want Cal gone.

At the same time there are a few schools I wouldn’t want him to go to. Mainly because I think he’ll be in “prove it” mode to show he’s still got it. He’s not in that mode at UK any longer.

Arkansas is one of the schools I’d not want him to go to.
 
But in the miracle scenario it is true, Mitch go get Nate oats, this isn’t a hard job search, he is the clear cut number one option, no Scott drew
 
  • Like
Reactions: SemperFiCat
I want Cal gone.

At the same time there are a few schools I wouldn’t want him to go to. Mainly because I think he’ll be in “prove it” mode to show he’s still got it. He’s not in that mode at UK any longer.

Arkansas is one of the schools I’d not want him to go to.

Nah man we’re good. Calipari can’t even beat Oakland and St. Peter’s. His roster building is really bad and outdated. If he can’t pull the right guys over Duke and UNC / Kansas at Kentucky there’s no way he can do it at Arkansas.

Calipari has had a really really bad fall from grace. If he did so this, I’d bet it’s because he wants to
Load up on NBA draft picks and he knows he’s not gonna last much longer at UK. Might as well
Finish where you’re getting paid and they’ll give you as long as you want.

Although, Calipari does this. He puts this stuff out I’m sure of it. He did it one time with NC State going back a ways. It’s probably his people to gauge the unrest and feel the temp of the water if nothing else. I believe he thinks I everyone is gonna to second guess wanting him to leave, to calm the unrest. This time though, I think it’s him that’s in for a surprise.
 
I want Cal gone.

At the same time there are a few schools I wouldn’t want him to go to. Mainly because I think he’ll be in “prove it” mode to show he’s still got it. He’s not in that mode at UK any longer.

Arkansas is one of the schools I’d not want him to go to.
I’m fine with it, he isn’t gonna win anything there if the rumours are actually true.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Pooser51
I’m starting the good vibes guys like the the prayer circle post so it becomes true.🕯️🕯️🕯️🙏🙏🙏 cal becomes arkanasas’s next coach
 
  • Like
Reactions: Pooser51
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT