Josh Suspended For 1 Game
-
@drgnslayr My gut feeling is they’ll take money from the source (Josh) because that will be easier to be successful, then sue the university for some type of discrimination, keeping it in the news with all the public pressure & neg publicity on KU. I think it’s rather obvious that is their legal plan going forward. This continual media onslaught may all be part of their legal posturing to try & milk KU. After all, she’s not a very good player so unless she gets a degree her earning power likely will be nil. IDK all the circumstances here & hope I’m wrong, but this whole situation reeks of the mentality of a “perpetual victim”. Josh was clearly wrong as hell, but sounds like missy didn’t exactly shy away from the spat either. JMO
-
@globaljaybird
This situation is pretty complicated because the claims by this woman and her dad are all over the place. They are talking about a violation of Title IX, right?
If that is the case, and if they take that path it is completely different than a civil case with Josh. And there is no reason to think they might not go after more than one path.
What is clear is they feel like “victims” regardless of what she did in this. And it is clear she participated in elevating this situation.
-
@drgnslayr good points @globaljaybird I think alot depends on the initial report. They say something else bad every other week it sounds made up. She could very easily be charged with assault for throwing a drink in Vicks face. In regards to the mistreatment, I think a judge will get a good laugh outta it. Her minutes didn’t drop til 11 games after the incident. She her self has had some issues as well I’m sure JJ lawyer’s have a pretty strong case to just pay for the damage done and move on instead of acting like a 3 year.
-
I have a question and hopefully someone has the answer. Since these events took place well outside the campus and KU control and while students were on their own and not in any official school event…does Title IX even apply?
-
@JayHawkFanToo good question
-
It’s a sad situation. This is where society has gone today.
I like what Zenger did by saying sign the waiver and we’ll talk because clearly everything being printed negatively about Jackson and the University is not the whole story.
The affidavit also made things seem a lot more clouded then once thought. It makes me think Jackson’s lawyer is going to have a lot of ammunition to get whatever charges he’s facing dropped.
This father/daughter are clearly nut jobs at this point. We’ve seen enough put out there to challenge the credibility of their mental thinking.
Regardless, this is going to impact Jackson’s draft stock which I think is part of the ultimate end game for these people. They know he’s a star going to the league and no matter if this is dropped or not teams are going to be putting up possible red flags on him. You’ll see news articles online heading into the draft talking about “possible red flags”, “Jackson must ace interviews to put behind off-the-court issues” etc, something like that. ESPN will run with it as they have every pathetic headline the Star releases without actually fact checking them. ESPN is hurting just as bad as the Star is financially. It’s a good lesson for the University, Bill Self and especially Josh & Vick that everything they do is under the public eye…
-
@JayHawkFanToo I thought that the issue is how the 2 were treated by the Univeristy…they are claiming she was treated harsher than Jackson.
-
@Hawk8086 the question is, how many priors did she have before this incident? If she signs the waiver they can address the punishment. Each coach can punish how they see fit. KU is bound legally, dad is flapping his jaws knowing they can’t talk about her priors unless she signs. Each game we win the
️ And dad will add to the story. Dad is to busy to talk to SZ but can run his mouth to the ️
-
Exactly we’ll see a story Saturday, next Wednesday etc…
-
This about sums it up
-
Oh and worth mentioning, the cops found tail light pieces by her car after she had left/moved. Soooo it’s quite possible that she did it herself to cover herself a bit.
-
The whole thing just smells of BS.
-
How exactly was she punished harder? She was initially suspended and the suspension lifted shortly after and she did no miss any games. She continued to play extended minutes (contrarily to what she said) for a while and even tied her season high minutes long after the incident; her playing time decreased once her game went south in conference play. In fact, one could say she was not punished at all. The LJW had an excellent article with actual numbers that absolutely destroyed her case.
My question still is…does Title IX applies for events outside campus and when the individuals are in their own time and not in any school sponsored or associated events?
-
@JayHawkFanToo Why wouldn’t it? It is a statute addressing the treatment of men and women at universities. If the university takes action based on events outside campus, it is the action taken that is in the purview of the law.
Relationships between students arising from their status as students have a direct effect on their ability to succeed in school. That is why Title IX gets into those things–in the extreme examples giving rise to this concern, abusive behavior off-campus can prevent someone from attending. Schools have an interest in keeping their students safe, and for too long schools ignored reports of gender violence. Witness Baylor.
This is just an off the cuff answer. I do not guarantee 100% accuracy! Do not quote me!
-
But…the individuals in question were not on campus or under any control of the university or in any shool sponsored function and they were not acting as students or school representatives but as private individual at a private, off campus location. It would seem like a huge overreach to apply Title IX to apply under these circumstances.
If this applies, where does it stop? How about a guy and a girl that don’t know each other get into an argument at a bar at the Power and Light district in KCMO and later they find out they both attend KU, should a Title IX apply? How about if they attend different schools?
It would seem to me that this starts a slippery slope of government overreach and intrusion into private affairs by forcing a school or schools to intervene where the local law agencies would be the logical recourse.
It appears to me that the girl that started the entire episode is desperately trying to justify her own misguided actions born out of jealousy and extend her 15 minutes of fame and her angle appears to be leverage against future millionaire Josh Jackson and wants to use the school to further her personal agenda. Just my opinion.
-
Here’s what has been said by the 3 female players that line up so I’m inclined to believe these parts. Vick was at Yatch Club with Jackson and some girls (his new GF), and as Calvert and her friends were leaving, she went up and threw a drink in Vick’s face and left. Jackson followed after them and Calvert and Jackson were chirping at one another. They were still chirping at each other as Calvert tried to back up. Jackson then kicked her door and broke the tail light That much has been corroborated by all parties involved so that is what I’m willing to believe since there’s multiple witnesses with the same basic story and is 90 of the story.
The other 10% is Jackson threatening to “beat her ass” and Calvert is the only one who said that. Neither of the other two girls involved mentioned that so unless Jackson said it very quietly, and that doesn’t line up with everything else out there, I’m not too inclined to believe that part of the story.
Here’s what I think happened based on what’s out there. Vick and Jackson, along with Vick’s new girlfriend go to Yatch Club, later in the night, Calvert, and two of her teammates decide to go there as where, probably not aware that Vick is there with his new GF. When the girls get to Yatch Club, Calvert sees Vick with his new GF, Vick sees her and starts rubbing it in/taunting Calvert. This pisses Calvert off and as she’s leaving, she decides to do something about it and throws a drink in Vick’s face. Vick was probably going to let it slide because he had made his point already. Jackson decided he wasn’t going to let it slide so he follows Calvert outside and he and Calvert get into it verbally. Manning-Allen is trying to calm Jackson down while Calvert’s roommate is trying to get Calvert out of there.
I think Jackson and Calvert are equally at fault for this situation because they’re both pretty hot headed individuals. Vick was being an ass that night to Calvert showing off woth his new GF with her watching and Calvert’s teammates did nothing wrong as they were trying to keep two combustible people apart as best they could.
I think the situation was handled about as well as it could have been by the outside parties involved. The stories pretty much confirm Jackson messed up the driver’s door and taillights while other did the rest of the damage to Calvert’s car.
Calvert is lucky Vick chose not to press charges against her for throwing the drink in his face, amd Calvert’s dad just needs to shut the hell up.
-
“This father/daughter are clearly nut jobs at this point. We’ve seen enough put out there to challenge the credibility of their mental thinking.”
I can understand their desire to get her car fixed. Anything beyond that is pure opportunism. They see he is months away from a 7-figure paycheck and they want some.
I don’t think what has happened so far will really damage Josh’s future. At least, not for basketball contracts. I doubt it will even hurt his endorsement potential unless he continues to get in trouble. We forget he is just a kid still. He was new on this team and he was sticking up for his bros.
This all is very petty compared to other trouble players around the country have gotten in to.
-
“I think a judge will get a good laugh outta it.”
Back in my day I bounced at several bars for 7 or 8 years. We had to deal with this kind of stuff all the time.
As far as the threat from Josh to “kick her ass”… from my experience, judges basically treat someone who only verbally threatens someone outside a bar as a hero. It is obvious there is big time stuff going on when outside a bar, and to limit it to verbal yada-yada is a positive versus violence or other crimes. But my experiences with this dates back to the 80s. Times have changed…
-
@drgnslayr Ya if we start arrest folks for saying they’ll kick someones a$$, we need much much more prisons.
-
@kjayhawks Technically what Josh Jackson did could be classified as harassment which is illegal. I’m assuming jail time isn’t a penalty, but probably a fine, probation, and anger management or stuff along those lines is probably the common punishment.
-
Why is this thread still going? Kill it!
-
@Texas-Hawk-10 be nice if the whole story came out. She started it and ran her mouth. She’s not a very nice gal! I hope the whole world find out about her.
-
@kjayhawks said:
@drgnslayr Ya if we start arrest folks for saying they’ll kick someones a$$, we need much much more prisons.
When it is accompanied by kicking the hell out of the person’s car, while that person is in it, the courts might take it a lot more seriously.
Communication of a conditional threat like this (if one occurred, which is only alleged by one of 3 witnesses) is always treated more seriously if it occurs under conditions where it is more likely to occur.
For example, if I say to my brother who is 1050 miles away, “Say that to my face and I will beat your face in,” no one will consider it likely to occur. But if I say in his presence, “If you stand up, I will beat your face in,” then that is likely treated as a more likely, i.e., more serious, threat, and would be more deserving of possible charges.
An interesting aspect to the alleged Josh threat is that if it occurred, Calvert’s friends either did not hear it (not in their statements) or did not think of it as a statement of actual intent to harm, since by all accounts they tried to physically stop Josh from attacking the car. If I heard and saw someone his size in full rage mode promising to hurt someone who was in a position of relative safety, I would think twice about confronting him lest the anger get turned on me.
Just like the amount of damages, I think the police did not believe that statement could be proven in court. Otherwise, I cannot imagine why they did not charge him with an additional count, which in many places would be communication of a threat or in some, terroristic threats. (Not the international type – this is the type that means intentionally scaring the hell out of somebody.)
-
@mayjay true but I’m not buying it highly doubt a judge will ether. All of the sudden 3 and a half months later “he threatened to beat me up”. I wish the news outlets would stop with publishing one side of a story that nothing has been proven besides her throwing a drink and him kicking a car. But it goes in tune with the media these days. If a person watches the news they are misinformed most of the time that’s why I don’t watch the junk. It always about rumors or some sort of conflict proven or not.
-
@Crimsonorblue22 I think the affidavit provides enough of a picture to figure what happened which is that Lagerald and Josh were out, Lagerald was there with his new GF and when Calvert and her teammates arrived and were noticed by Lagerald, he started rubbing his new GF in Calvert’s face which ticked her off so at the end of the night, she threw a drink in his face as retaliation and then Josh did want to let it go. Basically, it was 3 people (Calvert, Jackson, and Vick) being immature about the Calvert/Vick break up and is something that is a fairly common sight when you have kids and alcohol mixed together. It really isn’t the big deal that the media has been making it out to be and Calvert’s dad really is the only reason this story is still going.
-
@Texas-Hawk-10 as usual I agree with you lol. No I don’t think what JJ and Vick did was smart whatsoever but stuff like that happens daily with a bunch of college kids. It’s crazy to me in hindsight that JJ kicking a car in anger has gotten 200x the media attention as Rasheed Sulaimon being accused of sexual assault, twice.
-
@Texas-Hawk-10 I’m not so sure he was being an ass and showing off his gf unless you know something. It doesn’t take much to set this girl off.
-
@Crimsonorblue22 Based on the affidavit, after Calvert and her teammates got there, Vick allegedly kept intentionally looking at Calvert while dancing and making sure Calvert saw it, and I believe two of the three girls mention that. Vick did nothing illegal or criminal, but it sounds like he was showing off his new GF and rubbing it Calvert’s face which is what set Calvert off.
Calvert’s comment in why she threw a drink in his face was, “he knows why” fits that version of the story of Vick being an ass towards Calvert that night by flaunting his new relationship in front of her.
18-22 year olds can be very petty and I think Vick was being petty that night based on reading the affidavit and that’s what set Calvert off that night.
-
This is way too much Dr. Phil for me for one day. Looking forward to the good games tomorrow.
-
@Texas-Hawk-10 if Calvert said it I wouldn’t believe it! I went back and read it.
-
@Texas-Hawk-10 Interesting that she was so upset about a new girl friend of a guy who allegedly hit and kicked her the year before.
This explains a big mystery. I think the reason nothing came out of it except for a “likely he did it” finding is she probably refused to testify in the University proelceeding. Assuming he said nothing, they must have based the finding on a written complaint. With no rebuttal or additional info, they can make that finding but could not go much further than the probation recommendation. Daddy was probably upset at the outcome knowing something happened but unable to do anything if she wouldn’t go forward or to police.
-
Well if you want to get pissed off again, Stu Gotz is going to go on blast at Bill Self/Josh Jackson on ESPN radio on Monday morning. I normally enjoy his ill informed rants, but this one is going to piss me off. He’s just a hot take gomer, but I can tell you already if I hear it I’ll be pissed. And that’s too bad as he’s normally very entertaining.
-
Operating on the information we have – which is a very important premise for me – am I reading this correctly? This is not a “big deal”?
Come on. Let’s connect with reality.
As a starting point, let’s assume this young lady is completely irrational. Given that, is it not a big deal that Jackson followed her out of the club, kicked her car three times, and told her to get out because he was going to beat her a**? Who here has ever done that to a woman in their entire life? What planet are we on?
No denials of the facts have ever been made.
Assuming that to be true – what Jackson did – give some conceivable circumstance at the Yacht club that would justify Jackson doing that? That’s where the apologists are missing it. Again, operating on what we know.
Given the affidavit, if the prosecutor believed it to be true, Jackson could have been charged with assault under Kansas law – placing one in fear of imminent bodily injury. Prosecutors probably didn’t charge it because she was inside the car, but they certainly could have.
As I said when this came out, Jackson should have been suspended 2-3 games. That eliminates the edge on the story – that the athlete was not punished for his actions.
That all said, I’d also mentioned a few weeks ago that Calvert should be charged with battery re: throwing the drink in Vick’s face. Given the entirety of the incident, I think she should have been charged.
And some “wouldn’t believe” Calvert. Ok, but have we heard anything that indicates anything she said is not truthful? From any source? There is a difference between her being troubled and the statement being untruthful.
Again, there has been no dispute on the facts. Meaning not even a denial.
I’m as anti-KC Star on this as anyone else, but because of the sensationalistic and biased nature of their reporting. Not because this isn’t a “big deal.” This is a big deal.
When I said 2-3 games when this story came out, I didn’t know of the “get out and I’ll beat your a**” comment. Easy 3 game suspension.
That all being said, IF the facts really are different, and Calvert and the witness are just dead flat lying about Jackson kicking the car and the beat your a** comment, I would change my position immediately. Operating on what we know.
@mayjay - I think you may have solved that one. That does make the most sense.
-
-
It is all petty but he’ll have questions to answer that other Top 5 picks don’t have because the headlines have been construed in a way to make him look guilty. While he’s admitted guilt and done his part to close this case the Calvert’s have gone off the deep end and won’t let it go and every single media stream has run with it. I doubt it will cost him much but it could.
-
The “beat your a**” comment wasn’t made by Calvert until months after the incident. And she’s the only saying that he said it. Hmmm yeahhh
-
Calvert is the only one that said josh was going to beat her ass. None of the witnesses said that.
-
I generally agree with your statement but you are using facts not in evidence to make your more serious point. The statement about a Jackson telling her he was going to kick her arse is not part of her original statement and came out 2 months after the event when the father became involved. The two witnesses, who happen to be her teammates, did not mentioned this at the time or now, so this appears to be pure uncorroborated embellishment on her part to make the incident more serious than it really was.
This is reminiscent of the woman that accused Bragg of pushing her “down” the stairs when in reality, and as shown by the surveillance video, she was trying to hit him, bounced of his arms stretched in a defensive position and fell on her rear end all of 15 inches on the stairs going “up” and quite different than being thrown down the stairs and she was rightfully charged and the charges against him dropped.
I am not saying that Jackson acted right; however, he is still entitled to the presumption of innocence until proved otherwise. Let’s not pile up on Jackson for (so far) unproven and one-sided allegations…we already have the Star doing just that.
-
“When it is accompanied by kicking the hell out of the person’s car, while that person is in it, the courts might take it a lot more seriously.”
I’m not certain about that.
What I do know is a person with a felony record is treated different and a simple verbal threat can be a lot of trouble for that person, especially if he/she has a record showing known violence.
From what we know… Josh just doesn’t fit in any bad scenarios concerning this case and the possibility of damaging his career.
This will all blow over.
-
this whole story is just #fakenews
Not to diminish the incident but she’s making accusations months afteer the fact that apparently no one else heard not even her own witnesses are backing that up. That’s all I really need to know. And in the event that he did say it, i’m sure we’re all guilty of saying something in the heat of the moment that we wish we didn’t. Making a drunken threat is not the same thing as actually following through or even saying it with any intent.
-
@HawkInMizery said:
Making a drunken threat is not the same thing as actually following through or even saying it with any intent.
I’m surprised. Suppose he made the threat and suppose he kicked and damaged her car with her in it. Isn’t that “following through” to some extent, or at least “showing intent”?
I can’t believe some folks here have such a hard time imagining what a traumatic experience is being affirmed here: NBA-level athlete follows girl to her car, berates her, stops her from backing her car out and damages it with her in it - apparently abetted by a small crowd! Man, put that in a film and I don’t want to go see it.
OK, what is being affirmed may not be the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth. Fair enough.
That doesn’t allow us to belittle the seriousness of what is being affirmed. Saying “if he said and did all this, so what?” is not a valid defence in my book.
-
We have been witness to the fact that Josh exhibited anger management problems early in his games in a Jayhawk uniform. Obviously, he has learned from the consequences, responded positively to counsel of the coaching staff, and gotten control of the way in which he responds to perceived injustices by officials. As to his multiple offcourt infractions, especially bringing to light his seemingly violent reaction to a female fellow student and athlete, more extensive guidance appears to be necessary. Josh is very much in the limelight during his brief tenure in Lawrence. Among a handful of the very best recruits ever to don a Kansas jersey, the kid continuously shoots himself in the foot while casting blemishes on the program which nourishes him. That said, I like the kid. Overall, his public disposition has always appeared to be very pleasant, at least when he is suited up for games…and since he has grown away from conflicts with officials. I view him as probably the best basketball talent to play for Bill Self at KU. But I suspect that his troubles are not over, esp. off the court, and that we will read more news of legal troubles for him as time goes on. In a 3 or 4 month span he has hauled plenty of grief upon his young shoulders. Hopefully, the key word is “young,” and he will have learned enough from untoward actions and subsequent consequences while a college freshman that he will be able to survive the life of an NBA millionaire without further harm to himself or those around him. His adoring fans will wait, with more than a little concern. After all, forever he will represent Jayhawk Basketball.
-
@ParisHawk Josh didn’t vervally berate Calvert. Calvert threw her drink at Vick, Josh called her out, and the Calvert and Jackson has verbal back and forth.
There’s too many people ignoring the affidavit and making their own facts up. Based on the affidavit, there were 3 crimes committed that night that are corroborated by the 3 witnesses. Calvert committed battery when she threw her drink at Vick and that’s tge incident that triggered the rest of the events. Jackson committed harassment when he followed Caovert outside and got into the shouting match with her, and Jackson committed property damage when kicked her car. The police only chose to pursue 1 of the 3 crimes committed that night and yet Calvert wants to complain about not getting equal treatment.
I’m not going to say that Calvert brought this on herself because Jackson was clearly in the wrong for damaging her vehicle, but by all accounts, Calvert was the instigator in this case and helped elevate the situation instead of just walking away.
-
@Texas-Hawk-10 said:
Josh didn’t vervally berate Calvert.
How do you know? The claim was he said he would beat her a**.
Don’t change the subject. I said IF everything Calvert claims is true, it’s serious.
Saying some of it isn’t true is fine, but irrelevant to my point.
-
@ParisHawk The police affidavit has been released so I’m not pulling stuff out of thin air. Calvert is the only one out of 3 people who have given statements claiming Jackson said he would beat her ass.
What’s corroborated by all 3 is Calvert threw a drink in Vick’s face, Jackson followed Calvert out and they had a shouting match with each other, and Jackson kicked Calvert’s door and taillight.
