Eagleborn Posted January 16, 2014 Share Posted January 16, 2014 Meanwhile, back in Gladewater....................... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest 4to3 Posted January 16, 2014 Share Posted January 16, 2014 lol He works at a public school. He's payed by the tax payers of the School District, may even get supplemented by the state, I don't know.. The School board is the governing body of the district, elected by the voters of the district. And right now, I would think that School board is knee deep in this mess he has created. Agreed, "public servant." Good nite. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bluetooth Posted January 16, 2014 Share Posted January 16, 2014 I like beer. That's an understatement lol. 2 miles per hour and one tree down.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coachc45 Posted January 16, 2014 Share Posted January 16, 2014 Agreed, "public servant." Good nite. You can say what you want..... but coaches are not considered public servants. Argue all you want, but the court determined it and that is undisputable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest 4to3 Posted January 16, 2014 Share Posted January 16, 2014 You can say what you want..... but coaches are not considered public servants. Argue all you want, but the court determined it and that is undisputable. A number of courts have expressly answered the question by concluding that public school teachers fall within the broad definition of "public servant" provided by the current version of Section 1.07(a)(41)(A) of the Texas Penal Code. See In re J.P., 136 S.W.3d 629, 630 (Tex. 2004) (juvenile assaulted public servant per Section 22.01(b)(1) by hitting and kicking public school teacher); Moore, 143 S.W.3d at 311 (school superintendent was "public servant" under Section 1.07(a)(41)(A)); In re F.C., No. 03-02-00463-CV, 2003 Tex. App. LEXIS 4709, at *10-11 (Tex. App.--Austin June 5, 2005, no pet.) (mem. op., not designated for publication) (teacher at Dobie Middle School was "public servant" for purposes of Section 22.01(b)(1)); In re J.L.O., No. 03-01-00632-CV, 2002 Tex. App. LEXIS 5730, at *8-9 & n.1 (Tex. App.--Austin Aug. 8, 2002, no pet.) (mem. op., not designated for publication) (education assistant at public school satisfied Texas Penal Code definition, which Legislature intentionally made broad "to extend the law's protection to all school employees"); In re B.M., 1 S.W.3d 204, 207 (Tex. App.--Tyler 1999, no pet.) (public servants include employees of independent school districts). http://www.juvenilelaw.org/CaseSummaries2007/PDF/07-3-13.pdf Have a great day. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coachc45 Posted January 16, 2014 Share Posted January 16, 2014 A number of courts have expressly answered the question by concluding that public school teachers fall within the broad definition of "public servant" provided by the current version of Section 1.07(a)(41)(A) of the Texas Penal Code. See In re J.P., 136 S.W.3d 629, 630 (Tex. 2004) (juvenile assaulted public servant per Section 22.01(b)(1) by hitting and kicking public school teacher); Moore, 143 S.W.3d at 311 (school superintendent was "public servant" under Section 1.07(a)(41)(A)); In re F.C., No. 03-02-00463-CV, 2003 Tex. App. LEXIS 4709, at *10-11 (Tex. App.--Austin June 5, 2005, no pet.) (mem. op., not designated for publication) (teacher at Dobie Middle School was "public servant" for purposes of Section 22.01(b)(1)); In re J.L.O., No. 03-01-00632-CV, 2002 Tex. App. LEXIS 5730, at *8-9 & n.1 (Tex. App.--Austin Aug. 8, 2002, no pet.) (mem. op., not designated for publication) (education assistant at public school satisfied Texas Penal Code definition, which Legislature intentionally made broad "to extend the law's protection to all school employees"); In re B.M., 1 S.W.3d 204, 207 (Tex. App.--Tyler 1999, no pet.) (public servants include employees of independent school districts). http://www.juvenilelaw.org/CaseSummaries2007/PDF/07-3-13.pdf Have a great day. Great stuff. But the case in Van Zandt County said the Coach was not a Public Servant. Have a great Google Day. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CarthDawg77 Posted January 16, 2014 Share Posted January 16, 2014 Then according to your own analogy you have failed your children! If you like , yes, we all fail them in one way or another. Neither I, nor YOU, nor anyone is perfect... That is what forgiveness & REDEMPTION is about, unless you are one of those know it all, perfect, smoaky posters who seem to be ABSOLUTELY RIGHT, ALL the time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BringBacktheVEER Posted January 16, 2014 Share Posted January 16, 2014 Meanwhile, back in Gladewater....................... My early vote for post of the year for 2014. Great stuff !!!!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CarthDawg77 Posted January 16, 2014 Share Posted January 16, 2014 No I'm not perfect and that would be the reason if my kids choose to find a person that would inspire them other than myself I would not see it as an indictment on me as you are suggesting. Which brings home the point that kids look outside the home at times for role-models! I never said they didn't. My point is, was, and always will be that they should have parents IN THEIR LIVES, preferably at home, who give a damn about them enough TO BE role models for them so they have the ability to decide whether OR NOT to follow someone like a coach setting a BAD example. It is abundantly clear that many children lack the leadership role models I speak of, and even more than that, lack having TWO devoted parents to serve as those examples for their children to pattern their lives after. I still think that IF the coach in question is, and has done his job in all other aspects RELATED to coaching, he should be given the opportunity to redeem himself through counseling, AA, or whatever, to be able to continue to keep his job. IN REALITY, I expect nothing LIKE that to happen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CATATAFISH Posted January 16, 2014 Share Posted January 16, 2014 Administrative leave is Latin for "district lawyers making sure they can fire you without a lawsuit." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eagleborn Posted January 16, 2014 Share Posted January 16, 2014 side note... this ##### happens when you type the word c r a p ..... but da#$ is fine??? Pretty damn much. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mavchamp Posted January 16, 2014 Share Posted January 16, 2014 Pretty damn much. who the hell thinks that's a curse word? lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gtee2 Posted January 16, 2014 Share Posted January 16, 2014 My kids better...Atleast around me they better! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dawgman Posted January 16, 2014 Share Posted January 16, 2014 Administrative leave is Latin for "district lawyers making sure they can fire you without a lawsuit." Correct. I believe his time in Gladewater is almost over. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whodathoughtit Posted January 16, 2014 Share Posted January 16, 2014 Carthdawg77, no need to keep going on and on and on and on about parents. Its no great revelation to point out children need good parents that are role models. This is about this coach. Btw, our society is in a state of moral decay and our educational system (especially at the college level) had a hand in creating it. If the powers that be decide to keep him on and get him the help he needs that is fine but it should come out of his paycheck. Also, I would think there are some very real concerns employing a coach with a DUI. Besides the poor message it sends to the students, there are potential issues with liability, safety, negative publicity and increased over-site of said individual. All could cost the school $ and time better spent educating. Seems to me that more often than not the smart thing to do is just move on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CarthDawg77 Posted January 16, 2014 Share Posted January 16, 2014 Carthdawg77, no need to keep going on and on and on and on about parents. Its no great revelation to point out children need good parents that are role models. This is about this coach. Btw, our society is in a state of moral decay and our educational system (especially at the college level) had a hand in creating it. If the powers that be decide to keep him on and get him the help he needs that is fine but it should come out of his paycheck. Also, I would think there are some very real concerns employing a coach with a DUI. Besides the poor message it sends to the students, there are potential issues with liability, safety, negative publicity and increased over-site of said individual. All could cost the school $ and time better spent educating. Seems to me that more often than not the smart thing to do is just move on. That is why I believe his goose is cooked. The school will not risk any further incidents. And This time, I am as done with this thread as Coach Baugh's employment @ Gladewater. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Five0pd310 Posted January 17, 2014 Share Posted January 17, 2014 Great stuff. But the case in Van Zandt County said the Coach was not a Public Servant. Have a great Google Day. Just because that one court had that opinion does not mean every court in Texas will agree with it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldhornet Posted January 17, 2014 Share Posted January 17, 2014 Reminds me of last fall with the PT debacle Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigRedFan Posted January 17, 2014 Share Posted January 17, 2014 I was thinking the same thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LoneStardom5 Posted January 17, 2014 Share Posted January 17, 2014 disagree... PT was virtually all in house that got leaked, and a completely different set of circumstances... this guy was arrested.... way different Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigRedFan Posted January 17, 2014 Share Posted January 17, 2014 disagree... PT was virtually all in house that got leaked, and a completely different set of circumstances... this guy was arrested.... way different We are talking about the public lynching of the coach. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bluetooth Posted January 17, 2014 Share Posted January 17, 2014 We are talking about the public lynching of the coach. Public forum = Public Opinions Public Arrest at a Public Place = Public Opinion Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WP4L Posted January 17, 2014 Share Posted January 17, 2014 And Gladewater brings back like 20 starters from a quarters team too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beastmode11 Posted January 17, 2014 Share Posted January 17, 2014 I don't have a problem if they decide to let him go..... I do have a problem with people on here saying he MUST/SHOULD be let go. We do not have enough info to make that judgment. The biggest problem I have on SDC is the blanket judgments. Everytime a coach messes up, 30 people come on here and say he should/needs to be fired. They base it off of 1 article that gives basic facts and then they pass judgment. I know my saying anything isn't going to change people making these statements with only few facts. But I have 2 choices, state how I feel or quit reading Smoaky..... I like SDC, so I state how I feel. I have other rants too...... like people who sit in the stands and talk about how bad this or that coach is, then those same people say coaches are held to a higher standard. Really???? How can you have it both ways. Either they are in a profession that has a higher standard than other or they aren't. We have to behave differently than the ordinary person, we have to have different consequences than other people, yet we also have to sit here and getting run through the ringer by ordinary people because a play didn't work or we didn't win enough. Every person in the stands can do our job better than us, yet we are so above reproach we aren't allowed to mess up in our personal lives either? I don't mind HIGHER standards, but DOUBLE standards bug me. Sorry...... just had to rant a moment. lol Unfortunately we are held to a higher standard. Then again we also CHOSE to be in the profession knowing fully that this is what the job entails. I'm not saying it's right or wrong, but that just happens to be the way it is. If you (collective you) don't like it, get out of the profession. I don't like that I can't be seen or heard to have been in certain establishments, hang around certain people but that is just the way it is. On the other hand....I've been there. I've been popped for a DWI. Didn't lose my job. Learned a lot about life, choices, etc.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coachc45 Posted January 18, 2014 Share Posted January 18, 2014 Unfortunately we are held to a higher standard. Then again we also CHOSE to be in the profession knowing fully that this is what the job entails. I'm not saying it's right or wrong, but that just happens to be the way it is. If you (collective you) don't like it, get out of the profession. I don't like that I can't be seen or heard to have been in certain establishments, hang around certain people but that is just the way it is. On the other hand....I've been there. I've been popped for a DWI. Didn't lose my job. Learned a lot about life, choices, etc.... Trust me I know full well what my job entails. Been doing it for 22 yrs, and not at any time have I given a dang what those people in the stands have to say. Usually get a big laugh out of it. What I have a problem with is the people who come on here and publicly disparage a coach behind an anonymous name. If you have a problem with a coach air your grievances out in the open and not behind a screen name. But as far as the "don't like it, get out of the profession" comment. Why should a coach who loves what he does need to get out of the profession? Just because a coach doesn't like 1 aspect of his career doesn't mean he should quit. It also doesn't mean that we have to lay here and take it. I feel better after I rant. But I ain't quitting my profession over moronic people on the internet. Oh about the stuff in bold. Dude you are 21 and free. Go where you want to. I do. If people are gonna fire me over a certain establishment or who I hang out with.... I will go find another place to work. So far haven't had that problem. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now