Front Office Football Central

Front Office Football Central (https://forums.operationsports.com/fofc//index.php)
-   FOFC Archive (https://forums.operationsports.com/fofc//forumdisplay.php?f=27)
-   -   Maurice Clarett arrested again (https://forums.operationsports.com/fofc//showthread.php?t=51754)

TazFTW 08-09-2006 05:40 AM

Maurice Clarett arrested again
 
http://www.ksat.com/sports/9651698/detail.html

Quote:

Originally Posted by article
Officers said Clarett, who was wearing a bulletproof vest, was uncooperative and police used a Taser gun in hopes of subduing him. However, the Taser gun did not work on Clarett because he was wearing the vest, so officers used Mace on him, police said.

Police said they then found an arsenal of weapons inside the SUV, including a loaded assault rifle and handgun. A hatchet, clothing and an open bottle of vodka were also taken from the vehicle.


Geez...

Poli 08-09-2006 05:42 AM

Twice in one night? Wow.

CleBrownsfan 08-09-2006 06:39 AM

dumb ass

VPI97 08-09-2006 06:39 AM

The Bengals should sign him.

Joe 08-09-2006 06:56 AM

he is well on his way to getting a degree in thuganomics

HomerSimpson 08-09-2006 07:10 AM

Sounds like a hell of a chase. I wonder if there is any video?

VPI97 08-09-2006 07:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TazFTW
A hatchet, clothing and an open bottle of vodka were also taken from the vehicle.

"But officer...I was only getting my goose on"

Butter 08-09-2006 07:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by VPI97
The Bengals should sign him.


He's too slow.

BucDawg40 08-09-2006 08:22 AM

He's just misunderstood.

Grammaticus 08-09-2006 08:28 AM

What was he planning on doing with a bullet proof vest and all that firepower?

Toddzilla 08-09-2006 08:30 AM

Maurice Clarett >> Marcus Vick

QuikSand 08-09-2006 08:38 AM

This event had been prophesied long ago.

sachmo71 08-09-2006 08:49 AM

poor guy

A-Husker-4-Life 08-09-2006 08:54 AM

What the hell, he was wearing a bullet proof vest. Weird..

SunDevil 08-09-2006 09:02 AM

Video on CNN. He looks pretty out of it.

JeeberD 08-09-2006 09:05 AM

What a fucking idjit...

Young Drachma 08-09-2006 09:32 AM

What a sad, sad story.

Subby 08-09-2006 09:40 AM

BALLERZ ALWAYS WEAR A BULLETPROOF VEST, YO!

Ksyrup 08-09-2006 09:42 AM

Quick, someone give him a microphone so VH1 can turn his story into a Behind the Music episode.

Deattribution 08-09-2006 09:53 AM

Quote:

COLUMBUS, Ohio --Former Ohio State star Maurice Clarett has been charged with carrying a concealed weapon and a traffic violation after a highway chase.

Clarett was arrested early Wednesday after a highway chase that ended with police using Mace him and finding four loaded guns in his sport utility vehicle, a police spokesman said.

Officers used Mace to subdue Clarett after a stun gun was ineffective because the former Fiesta Bowl star was wearing a bullet-resistant vest, Sgt. Michael Woods said.

"It took several officers to get him handcuffed," Woods said. "Even after he was placed in the paddy wagon, he was still kicking at the doors and being a problem for the officers."

Clarett did not speak to police who tried to interview him at the station before he was moved to the Franklin County Jail.

Wearing tan jail-issue clothes, he talked on the telephone in the booking area, separated from reporters by a window. He was to be held at the jail at least until an arraignment Thursday morning, unless his attorneys work out an agreement for his release, police said.

Clarett made an illegal U-turn on the city's east side and failed to stop when officers, in a cruiser with lights flashing, tried to pull him over, Woods said.

Police said they pursued Clarett onto the eastbound lanes of Interstate 70, one of the city's main freeways, when he darted across the median and began heading west. Clarett drove over a spike strip that was placed on the highway, flattening the driver's side tires of the SUV, Woods said. A police helicopter in the area helped track the vehicle.

Clarett exited the highway and pulled into a restaurant parking lot about 10 minutes after police say they saw him make the U-turn. Officers removed him from the SUV after he failed to obey numerous orders to exit the vehicle, Woods said.

After Clarett was placed in a police van, officers discovered a loaded rifle and three loaded handguns in the front of his vehicle, Woods said.

"We don't have any idea why he had them or what, if anything, he was going to do with them," Woods said. Police don't know where Clarett got the guns or where he was headed or coming from in the SUV. Federal authorities plan to trace the guns' ownership.

A half-full bottle of vodka was found in the SUV, but no breath test was administered because police had no indication that Clarett was intoxicated, Woods said.


Clarett, 22, is currently awaiting trial on two counts of aggravated robbery, four counts of robbery and one count of carrying a concealed weapon in a separate case. Authorities said he was identified by witnesses as the person who flashed a gun and robbed two people of a cell phone in an alley behind the Opium Lounge in Columbus in the early hours of Jan. 1.

Messages seeking comment were left Wednesday morning for Clarett's attorneys in that case, Nick Mango and Michael Hoague. The home address Clarett gave police was his mother's house in Youngstown. A message seeking comment was left at the home.

Clarett scored the winning touchdown in the second overtime of the Fiesta Bowl against Miami to lead Ohio State to the 2002 national championship, the school's first since 1968. But that was the last game the freshman played for Ohio State.

He sat out the 2003 season after being charged with misdemeanor falsification on a police report, then dropped out of school. He sued to be included in the 2004 NFL draft and lost in court.

A surprise third-round pick in the 2005 draft, he was cut by the Denver Broncos during the preseason.

Clarett plans to play for the Mahoning Valley Hitmen, one of five teams in the Eastern Indoor Football League. The team, based in Clarett's hometown of Youngstown, is to begin play in January.

Two things... How the hell does he not get charged with resisting arrest?

And two, what exactly kind of indication do you need that a guy is intoxicated when he has a small arsenal of weapons, a bullet proof vest and isn't responding to police.

vtbub 08-09-2006 09:56 AM

Can't they just shoot this fucker in the head and remove this problem child before he kills somebody?

rkmsuf 08-09-2006 10:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by vtbub
Can't they just shoot this fucker in the head and remove this problem child before he kills somebody?


they probably aren't supposed to do that

vtbub 08-09-2006 10:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rkmsuf
they probably aren't supposed to do that


The lawsuit would get messy too.

What a colossal waste of a person.

rkmsuf 08-09-2006 10:06 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by vtbub
The lawsuit would get messy too.

What a colossal waste of a person.


He just hasn't found his niche yet.

Just because he has little aptitude for football or crime doesn't mean he can't find his special talents within.

Maybe he could try skateboarding or competitive eating.

Deattribution 08-09-2006 10:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rkmsuf
He just hasn't found his niche yet.

Just because he has little aptitude for football or crime doesn't mean he can't find his special talents within.

Maybe he could try skateboarding or competitive eating.


I think he's already well on the way to making crazy his new career.

Ksyrup 08-09-2006 10:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Deattribution
what exactly kind of indication do you need that a guy is intoxicated when he has a small arsenal of weapons, a bullet proof vest and isn't responding to police.


I'm not sure I understand what having weapons and a bullet-proof vest have to do with being drunk. I would guess that most crimes involving weapons and b-p vests are committed by people who are sober.

And depending on what kind of demeanor he had in "not responding" to police, you could make a judgment that it had nothing to do with being drunk. He could have just been ignoring them.

KWhit 08-09-2006 10:28 AM

The open bottle of vodka, perhaps, is an indication that he may have been intoxicated?

Ksyrup 08-09-2006 10:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by KWhit
The open bottle of vodka, perhaps, is an indication that he may have been intoxicated?


First, that wasn't what was being cited to as evidence of his intoxication in the post I responded to. Second, an open bottle of vodka likely means he is guilty of violating the open container law, but without more, doesn't necessarily warrant a DUI charge. Apparently he was driving pretty well. And I've got to think that the cops would be more than happy to throw the book at him if they could. Obviously, they had insufficient evidence that he was drun, aside from the bottle.

Deattribution 08-09-2006 10:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ksyrup
I'm not sure I understand what having weapons and a bullet-proof vest have to do with being drunk. I would guess that most crimes involving weapons and b-p vests are committed by people who are sober.

And depending on what kind of demeanor he had in "not responding" to police, you could make a judgment that it had nothing to do with being drunk. He could have just been ignoring them.



Well, I know I can get pulled over, just look at the officer wrong and get asked if I have been drinking... To me, if his behavior is so radical that I am not able to give him a breathalyzer test because he's kicking the shit out of the paddywagon several officers just put him in - and he has a half bottle of vodka, I'm atleast a little curious if he's intoxicated.

Deattribution 08-09-2006 10:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ksyrup
First, that wasn't what was being cited to as evidence of his intoxication in the post I responded to. Second, an open bottle of vodka likely means he is guilty of violating the open container law, but without more, doesn't necessarily warrant a DUI charge. Apparently he was driving pretty well. And I've got to think that the cops would be more than happy to throw the book at him if they could. Obviously, they had insufficient evidence that he was drun, aside from the bottle.


I figured highlighting that part of the article was enough to show that I was using it as part of my post, but maybe not..

And if they wanted to throw the book at him, they could have got him for resisting arrest and the open container law.

KWhit 08-09-2006 10:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ksyrup
First, that wasn't what was being cited to as evidence of his intoxication in the post I responded to.


Yes, I understand that.

Quote:

Second, an open bottle of vodka likely means he is guilty of violating the open container law, but without more, doesn't necessarily warrant a DUI charge

I wasn't suggesting it warranted a DUI charge. But it should absolutely warrant making him take a breathilizer test to see if he was drunk or not!

Grammaticus 08-09-2006 11:23 AM

Well, he previously robbed someone using a firearm and is awaiting trial. Plus he had priors before that. Why is he even out and about? Now he is travelling in public with a bullet proof vest and loaded rifle and three loaded hand guns. What more do you need to hold him until his several trials are resolved? Does he actually have to kill someone before anything is done? I don't think he was method acting for the Hit Men indoor football team or trying out for The Longest Yard reality show.

Regarding the blood alcohol test, erratic driving (pulling the U turn and refusing to pull over) along with the beligerant behavior toward officers and the bottle of vodka is more than enough probable cause to require a blood alcohol test.

Pure speculation but, I'd bet dollars to donuts this nut case was on his way to rob a bank or kill his girlfriend, take your pick.

M GO BLUE!!! 08-09-2006 11:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Grammaticus

Pure speculation but, I'd bet dollars to donuts this nut case was on his way to rob a bank or kill his girlfriend, take your pick.

Hell, with that much firepower he could kill THE BANK!

I don't think there is anything wrong with having that many weapons in a vehicle though. The problem is when only ONE person has trhat kind of firepower because we all are not alowed to have it. If everybody on the highway had at least three uzi's, a flamethrower and an anti-aircraft shoulder missle the roads would be a safe place. :D

bulletsponge 08-09-2006 02:51 PM

shouldnt we just make a sticky "Maurice Clarett arrested again"?

Noddadropp 08-09-2006 02:56 PM

You guys keep referring to an "open container." Nowhere in that article does it say there was an open container found. They only found a half-full bottle of vodka. Just because you are transporting a bottle of alcohol that isn't full doesn't mean you are drinking it while driving.

VPI97 08-09-2006 03:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Noddadropp
You guys keep referring to an "open container." Nowhere in that article does it say there was an open container found. They only found a half-full bottle of vodka. Just because you are transporting a bottle of alcohol that isn't full doesn't mean you are drinking it while driving.

It says it in the very first post of this thread, as well as in the article that was linked to in the first post.

cartman 08-09-2006 03:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Noddadropp
You guys keep referring to an "open container." Nowhere in that article does it say there was an open container found. They only found a half-full bottle of vodka. Just because you are transporting a bottle of alcohol that isn't full doesn't mean you are drinking it while driving.


It doesn't matter. Any alcoholic beverage that is currently open, or had been previously opened, that is located in the passenger cabin is considered an "open container" by the law. An empty beer bottle on the floorboard is still considered an "open container". So a half-full vodka bottle definitely counts. Drinking while driving is a whole seperate deal. You can be cited for an open container even if you blow a 0.00 on the breathalyzer.

Noddadropp 08-09-2006 03:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cartman
It doesn't matter. Any alcoholic beverage that is currently open, or had been previously opened, that is located in the passenger cabin is considered an "open container" by the law. An empty beer bottle on the floorboard is still considered an "open container". So a half-full vodka bottle definitely counts. Drinking while driving is a whole seperate deal. You can be cited for an open container even if you blow a 0.00 on the breathalyzer.


Just looked up it. You're half right, I was all wrong.

In order for it to be an "open container" violation there must still be alcohol left in the container. So, empty beer cans would not count as open containers.

We both stand corrected it seems.

Noddadropp 08-09-2006 03:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by VPI97
It says it in the very first post of this thread, as well as in the article that was linked to in the first post.


Sorry, I was reading the posted article.

Surtt 08-09-2006 03:10 PM

Maybe the half-full vodka was left over from the last time he lifted weights.

Noddadropp 08-09-2006 03:13 PM

Then I assume it was well-aged.

Eaglesfan27 08-09-2006 04:38 PM

I heard this take on ESPN Radio today, and I agree that Maurice is lucky he was arrested. If he wasn't, I think this story would have been much more tragic.

duckman 08-09-2006 04:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Noddadropp
In order for it to be an "open container" violation there must still be alcohol left in the container. So, empty beer cans would not count as open containers.


If a cop turns over an "empty" container and one drop of alcohol comes out, they'll cite you for open container.

stevew 08-09-2006 06:48 PM

Man, and I was all about going to see him play in some semi-pro league in Youngstown soon. Fucker.

Which former banned troll is nottadrop?

Deattribution 08-10-2006 12:08 AM

ESPN has a pretty interesting piece on the Clarett situation, the article was written by a reporter who spoke with Clarett 2 hours before his arrest (supposedly while he was all vested up and driving) - it brings up some interesting and valid points... which make the story even more sad. If it turns out to be the case, as some of it's speculation, I can feel for the guy a little bit.

It's huge so I won't post it here.


http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/columns/story?id=2545078

Young Drachma 08-10-2006 12:21 AM

Yeah, after reading Tom Friend's piece, its even sadder. Hope that he can get his life straight rather than taking a sad road and being other people like Doc Gooden or Darryl Strawberry that keep coming in and out of jail because of substance abuse and other issues.

Too hard to watch, really.

DaddyTorgo 08-10-2006 12:24 AM

sad. but...*cough* shoulda stayed in school

edit: i mean this in the sense of "if he had stayed in school maybe he could have escaped the situation he found himself in by never being in it in the first place"

although it seems like a large part of it is that that was just his nature

Groundhog 08-10-2006 12:42 AM

Interesting read that ESPN article. Whenever I'd read anything related to his troubles previously I'd always just shrugged it off and considered him a fool, but I think he summed up his own situation nicely -in his own words - in this article. Makes you really feel for the guy.

KWhit 08-10-2006 08:40 AM

That ESPN article sounded like a lot of bullshit excuse-making to me. The tone presents Clarett as someone who had 4 loaded weapons (one an assault rifle), a bulletproof vest, and a hatchet because he needed protection.

The article states that "someone was coming after his baby girl. And if someone was coming after his baby girl, he was going to do anything he could to stop it."

Bullshit. The writer is trying to pull at our heart strings and make us feel for a bad, bad guy. I'm not buying it.

sachmo71 08-10-2006 08:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by KWhit
That ESPN article sounded like a lot of bullshit excuse-making to me. The tone presents Clarett as someone who had 4 loaded weapons (one an assault rifle), a bulletproof vest, and a hatchet because he needed protection.

The article states that "someone was coming after his baby girl. And if someone was coming after his baby girl, he was going to do anything he could to stop it."

Bullshit. The writer is trying to pull at our heart strings and make us feel for a bad, bad guy. I'm not buying it.



I interpreted it as the author explaining Clerett's state of mind, not the reality of the situation. Clerett is seriously depressed, and probably very scared. He seems to think he's in some sort of danger, and conveyed that to the author. I felt the author was making the point that Clerett was a timebomb waiting to go off, and in jail, he might be able to avert that. For a while, anyway.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:11 PM.

Powered by vBulletin Version 3.6.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2026, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.