I’ve never known of anyone who’s suffered that fate, but Zach Mettenberger proves there’s a first time for everything.
Filed under Crime and Punishment, Georgia Football
So much for transferring to Valdosta State, or any team that would have to play in Valdosta.
Listen, if you think for a millisecond that if VSU had a chance to sign Mett to be its QB the current charges wouldn’t disappear and a new plea deal for “disorderly conduct” or something like that take their place “nunc pro tunc” (another of those BS Latin phrases) you are smoking angel dust. The VSU Head Coach and President would be in the DA’s office along with the Mayor at warp speed to get that done.
P.S. “Banished” from Valdosta? I think every self respecting Dawg fan should boycott the place if you ask me. I would pay real American money to never darken the city limits of Remerton or Valdosta again.
There wasn’t anything in Valdosta worth visiting, anyway.
I at least hope they were double D’s.
ZachDawg- You got to pick a new destination for Spring Break.
Sounds like we should take him back, he would have to be one of the straightest arrows on the team or his butt would be in jail.
is that even a real punishment?
Hell yes I think it is too much! So he got drunk and tried to play grabass with some beer broad. I promise you that the only reason this got all blown up like this was he was a UGA ballplayer. The arresting officer made a bigger deal out of it than it should have been and the DA got a chance to get some free pub by prosecuting a football celebrity. I seriously question the plea deal as well. I have no problem with first offender treatment, the amount of the fine or the probation. I DO have a serious problem with letting this kid enter a guilty plea to “sexual battery” under this set of facts. That’s a lesser included charge that the jury finds when a guy rapes a gal but all the elements of rape were not proved. I do not care if his record is expunged if he serves out his probation. That charge and plea will follow him forever. Also, we have these fascists in control of state government right now who are passing laws willy-nilly against sex offenders whether the offenders are even guilty or not. I think he may have to register as one now, at least until the probation is over. Not to mention this: Suppose he f#cks up and violates his probation? My understanding is that the guy would have his probation revoked and must serve out the remainder of his sentence with no expunging of the record. Yeah, a really sweet deal. P.S. I don’t even think it is constitutional, as a part of a plea agreement, for the defendant to have to give up all his rights in advance and consent to ILLEGAL searches and seizures that have yet to take place, wherever and whenever they may occur. Also, while I have not looked it up, I do not think banishment is allowed anymore. This just proves to me that Lowndes County is not in the United States–it must be part of Russia. Every Dawg fan in Lowndes County, Georgia needs to vote against that publicity seeking asshole DA at the next election and, not only that, contribute money to his opponent. This guy is the Duke lacrosse team prosecutor all over again, Cliffnotes version.
I forgot to mention this: I guess he cannot ever go to Florida on I-75 again as that US highway goes through Valdosta, Russia on the way.
At least until the probationary period is over.
You must be privy to some facts that the rest of us aren’t.
Because, otherwise, every woman who goes out for a cocktail and is physically accosted by a large, drunk man should be considered a Beer Broad.
I take back the “Beer Broad” comment which was only included for purposes of alliteration. My bad. I do, however, with that retraction noted stick with the substance the rest of my posts on this subject.
So, alliteration aside, it’s okay for a young behemoth to grab ass, ’cause, after all, it’s a bar?
I’m pretty sure that you, like myself, is old enough to have a daughter/relative in that club.
How is it that you arrive at her culpability?
Its not ok at all.
But do you really think this punishment is at all appropriate for the crime?
We live in a state where a 17-year old could go to jail for a decade for having consensual oral sex with a schoolmate. How appropriate is that?
Ask Genarlo Wilson. He did go to jail for that and it took a decision of the Georgia Supreme Court to free him. In jail for 2+ years before being let out.
I know. That’s my point.
Well, I think the book was thrown a little too hard at Mett. I’m a Lowndes County resident and a huge Dawg fan. I do think it was him being a drunken hornball that night in Remerton, not a headhunting DA. That might be one of the most shortminded things I have ever read. Did the DA make some noise by doing this? Hell yes, but we don’t know the severity of the situation. If Mett would have fought the charges, what would have been the outcome? Imagine what the original suggestion for punishment was. For all of those that DO know the real situation, they have kept quiet and refused to leak info to the AJC, ESPN and other media outlets to take a careful stance on this case…Because it was a Georgia football player and there were some serious issues regarding it. Hell, even people that I know close to authorities wouldn’t give up the smack.
Mett made some awful decisions that night and even though he knew the girl; if has or has not had sex with her the past shouldn’t be the issue. Zach was rumored to be rounding third base and hoped to be heading home later. She saw it different and said No.
Besides, David Miller didn’t kick him off the UGA team. Coach Richt did.
Sidenote: What I have seen of David Miller does confirm your speculation though, he is an ass. Also, this town does indeed suck with a passion sometimes. People in Atlanta drive better than down here. And that should speak volumes.
He’s “banished from the city of Valdosta”, so I guess an airlift into Remerton is still possible (but ill-advised)?
When did the sexual battery charges get added? I know those were rumored to be the extra spice that got him kicked off the team, but I never saw those charges confirmed until now.
this is just a guess, but I would speculate that ZM’s lawyer has been in contact with the local district attorney’s office since shortly after his arrest. He’s probably been negotiating what the charges would be, and what the punishment would be, for weeks. Since the DA indicated the plea was the result of negotiations, it’s reasonable to assume that once they struck a deal, the DA simply filed an accusation the morning ZM entered his plea.
Probably no one other than ZM, the victim, the police and the lawyers knew it would be pled out, although the victim and the police were almost certainly consulted by the DA to see if they had any comment or objection to the proposed disposition before it was scheduled for a plea. Again, an assumption, but the fact that none of them objected is a sure sign that all of them agreed with the proposed deal.
the good news for ZM in all this is that he stays off the sex offender registry, and by using the First Offender Act, he can honestly say he hasn’t pled guilty to or been convicted of a crime. Now all he has to do is learn the lesson and stay out of trouble, which is sometimes easier said than done for immature 19 year old guys. The next go round, if there is one, nobody will have any sympathy for him.
the banishment provision applies while he’s on probation only. Some jurisdictions like to do that to out of town defendants who have mortally annoyed the locals. ZM doesn’t really have any need to be there, and if I was him, Valdosta would be the last place on earth I’d want to be chillaxin’ right now.
Banning someone from counties, cities, and judicial circuits is pretty common down here in South Georgia. I hope the kid pulls it together and gets another chance. Anybody know if a misdemeanor sexual battery means you have to register as a sex offender? Its been a while since I did any criminal work but my memory is that it does, hopefully completing first offender wipes that too.
It said at the end that if he successfully completed his probation it would be removed from his record, so I assumed that would remove him from any sex offender lists as well.
Misdemeanor sexual battery doesn’t require sex offender registration (nor does misdemeanor statutory rape), but in any event, a first offender sentence would allow even someone who DOES have to register to come off the registry if the defendant completes his probation without getting into any trouble. This is one reason judges rarely agree to first offender sentences in sex offender cases, in my experience.
the sex offender registry law is one of the most poorly drafted, incomprehensible statutes I’ve ever seen, but that’s another story for another day.
If he ever decides to pursue his rap career his promoters can advertise him as “Banned in Valdosta”.
Mayor of Dawgtown:
As it happens, I don’t share a lot of Mark Richt’s worldview or particular moral frame of reference. But I’m happy he doesn’t dismiss sexual battery as playing “grabass with some beer broad.” Large drunken athletes need to learn definitively that they must control their sexual impulses and direct them towards the considerable segment of the female population that is willing to consent to their advances. If they can’t do that, I don’t know how they can be trusted to be a “leader” on a football team, or avoid felonious acts of sexual battery in the future.
Donkey, your name is appropriate. I wasn’t there so I don’t know exactly what happened but I do know one thing–you weren’t there either. Yet you are willing to label a young man who, as best I can tell, has never been in trouble before (and could not have qualified for first-offender treatment if he had been) as a “large drunken athlete” who needs to “control his sexual impulses” so as to “avoid felonious acts of sexual battery in the future.” One thing I do know is that the Remerton PD has a reputation for Gestapo tactics and making a mountain out of a molehill. I also know it is also all too commonplace for unethical prosecutors to overcharge people guilty of minor charges as a means of coercing them into pleading guilty to something more serious than what actually occurred. Fearing a felony charge defendants will often plead to a misdemeanor that is more serious than it should have been if the punishment is probation. This should have been a charge of misdemeanor assault, phony ID and drinking under age. The disreputable DA and his Remerton PD henchmen have now labeled a good kid as a sex offender. As for the notion that Mett does not have to register on the sex offender list, I suggest you (and everyone else) read the plain language of OCGA Sec.41-1-12 which states: “….first offenders, shall be subject to the the registration requirements of this Code section for the period of time prior to the defendant’s discharge after completion of his or her sentence…” whatever the hell that means. I take it to mean he has got to register. If the DA says the kid does not have to register he is either stupid or a liar. The jurisdiction where the kid is is the place that decides whether the kid registers–not the Lowndes County DA. They branded the kid as a sex offender for basically a whole bunch of nothing. But hey, the DA got some publicity and the Remerton PD got a big scalp.
Actually the punishment doesn’t seem that bad to me. It punishes Mett and lets him know that he screwed up but gives him a chance to straighten up. While it may always be around him a bit as it was so public it is also not something that will take away his oppurtunities in life. I hope he learns from this and that whatever we hear about him in the future is all positive.
Oh mayor of dawgtown…is this truly the kind of person you are.
“So he got drunk and tried to play grabass with some beer broad.”
You are another of those who excuses a person’s behavior based on how much alcohol they have consumed.
Here’s hoping you a have a girl one day that grows up and gets fondled by a 6’5″ football player that won’t take no for an answer. She will probably come home to dear old dad for help and your reply is going to be ” oh hell honey, he was just drunk, don’t pay him no mind. But your bra back on straight your embarrassing me in front of this fine young man that just happens to be a football player at UGA. GLORY GLORY!
Keith, your problem is you believe whatever the cops and the DA say. You probably think pro wrestling is real, too.
Thats not what you said. Did you or did you not make this statement..
“So he got drunk and tried to play grabass with some beer broad.”
That is to what I am referring. Please read my post and point out to me where I said that I believed the cops or the DA.
And after reading your reply to donkey up there I take it that you don’t believe anything happened. How do you know? Were you there? As a matter of fact, according to your above post, you weren’t there. If ZM didn’t do anything wrong, he wouldn’t have plead guilty. He would have been able to bring forth witnesses to corroborate his version and took his chances from there. I guarantee you he didn’t say to himself, well, I didn’t do anything wrong but I am going to plead guilty and let them charge me with sexual battery. Hogwash bullshit.
And another thing, I absolutely distrust cops and DAs out of my own experiences. Its just in this instance, I trust CMR to have gotten more of the truth than we are hearing, or he wouldn’t have kicked him off the team.
Look, you are all hung up on semantics. This isn’t about me. This is about, by all accounts, a good young man who got drunk, did something he shouldn’t have done and has gotten hammered for it beyond what should have been meted out. “Sexual battery” is trying to (I will clean this up) fornicate with a woman against her will. Touching her on the butt or boob is misdemeanor assault, not sexual battery. They browbeat this kid into pleading to a more serious misdemeanor by threatening him with a felony (probably attempted rape). He probably doesn’t really understand the consequences of the plea now, particularly if his lawyer and the DA told him he doesn’t have to register on the sex offender list. He will later.
FWIW, I agree with Mayor here. Y’all are overblowing this. Zach got handsy with a girl who was probably dressed like she wanted her ass and boobs grabbed anyway. Not saying it was right, but I’m not going to pretend that ZM belongs in prison, either. Personally, I think a slap in the face followed by a large bouncer tossing him out on his ass in the street, then being arrested for possession/consumption was probably enough punishment… and OH BY THE WAY KICKED OFF THE TEAM.
If this was any kid that the rest of y’all knew personally, you would be singing a much different tune. The truth is, ZM is probably paying a higher price for his mistake than any other kid his age would… and he’s not getting a second chance. He’s just getting kicked to the curb by everyone.
And while ZM will pay for a long time for this mistake, the girl that he “assaulted” (ridiculous term) probably had forgotten about being violated within 30 minutes of ZM being tossed out.
+10. Much more eloquent than I have been, sir.
That’s the crux of your defense of Mett.
And the crux of you prosecution of Mett is what you don’t know.
“…a girl who was probably dressed like she wanted her ass and boobs grabbed anyway.”
I’m sorry, but how a girl is dressed is NOT an invitation for groping, sexual assault, battery, etc.
Don’t assume she dressed like that for you, jackass.
Since you’re (most likely) not a woman, you have NO IDEA what it’s like to be ogled, grabbed, etc. by someone whose advances you are not welcoming. It’s embarrassing & demeaning at the very least, and yep, you guessed it, sexual assault & battery at its most extreme.
I’m not saying ZM deserved to be made an example of, I’m just saying that all of you out there throwing that girl under the bus for something you don’t even have all the facts for need to grow up & get some respect for your fellow humans.
I read this blog almost every day, and I’ve never commented on anything, but that kind of BS comment really burns me up.
Actually we seriously considered bringing charges against the young lady in question for “Indecent Exposure” but decided against it because that might have provided a defense to the primary defendant under the “Dress like a slut, get treated like a slut” line of cases approved by the Supreme Court of Georgia.
You can go ahead and play the naive card if you want. Go ahead and get mad. I don’t care. If you are wearing a dress that I can see your ass cheeks hanging out of, then YES, you ARE wearing it for me, and every other male that sees you that evening.
I don’t know if the girl in question was dressed like that, but don’t start with that “I’m not wearing it for you” crap. Let’s not even go down that road.
Like I said, I’m not letting Mett off the hook. But I’ve always believed that the punishment should fit the crime, and in this case, the punishment does not fit the crime. It is much more than he should have gotten.
The “beer broad” label should sicken everyone. I’ve experienced nothing but hard working women who attend to beer needs in bars. I suggest you use the term “Nurse” when referring to any woman bringing you your drug of the day. For some of you lost sickos, you might try “Nurse Rachett” . Waitressing is an honored trade for hard-working people and it’s no different if they bring alcohol only. They provide a service to infirm drunks and deserve good monetary tips in appreciation. If you are a cheapo, go sit at the bar. If you can’t hold your liquor, don’t go into bars. It’s for mature men and women to socialize over drinks.
See my retraction of the “Beer Broad” comment above which was ill advised and not intended to offend. I used to be a bartender myself and have a great deal of respect for waitresses working in a bar setting. Lots of things happen in bars, some innocent some not, but they should not be overblown which is what happened here.Touching a woman’s breast or buttocks without permission is wrong but it is not “sexual battery.” This is classic overreaching by the prosecution. I do agree with you that only mature people should be in bars. Even then men and women (with alcohol added to the mix) plus improperly motivated law enforcement (who are trying to make a name for themselves) can turn a minor thing into something it is not.
On that note, mayor –
I would ask everyone to think back when the initial charges came out. Did you not all think “man, they really tacked on every charge they possibly could?” I sure did. What was it, 4 or 5 different charges they put on him for once incident? Tell me they didn’t throw the book at him.
So, with that in mind, do y’all not think it possible that they also reached for the book again when charging him for the incident inside the bar? I mean, you don’t find it ridiculous that he was charged with TWO counts of sexual battery for one incident with a single girl? They literally charged him a count for the boobs and a count for the ass. For touching them.
I’m just asking y’all to bear in mind that the Remerton PD has been lighting up his record like they are going for the high score on a pinball machine, and that maybe ZM, a kid who had the reputation of being a good kid his whole life, maybe isn’t an evil ruffian out on the prowl.
“They should not be overblown, which is what happened here.”
Voila! You WERE there.
Rum-Dawg is right. How do you charge him with TWO counts if it was just one girl?
It’s pretty well documented what happened. Let me know if there is some report of him taking her out back and punching her in the vagina that hasn’t been talked about.
On http://www.dawgsandbstreet.blogspot.com you can vote for who you want to be next years punt returner.
Ben Roethlisberger is a 28 year old man who plays QB for an NFL team, and took a college girl into the bathroom and raped her, and he’s getting a 6 game suspension.
Zach Mettenberger is a 19 year old kid who got drunk and grabbed a girls ass, and he’s getting two years probation, kicked off his football team, and probably a longshot for any chance at a profession career.
None of you think that ZM is getting the shaft?
Wow what a legal debate. Seems to come to mind if you can’t do the time don’t do the crime. Mett was raised right and has had all the advantages including a mother who works for the AD, does that make him less responsible for his acts because he’s a “GOOD” boy. He did what he was accused of, he was represented by an attorney, and he plead. End of story, nothing more to see here move on.
That’s my point 69. From the facts as they have been reported I do not think he is guilty of what he pleaded to. An overzealous bunch of cops, a prosecutor looking for an easy conviction of a celebrity jock, compounded by bad legal advice. The whole thing stinks.
…don’t forget a crooked University President looking to avoid bad pub by forcing a coach to throw a kid under the bus.
You raise a legitimate point R-D. I wondered if I was the only member of DawgNation who thought that Mett got sacked from the team prematurely. The facts are what are important, not the label some cop or DA wants to put on them. Mett got drunk and touched a girl on the buttocks and the breasts. I do not endorse or condone that. But there was no violence (as in striking) or actual sexual contact (as in penetration of an orifice with a body part or object). Not only has Mett been overcharged by the police/DA but he has been overpunished by UGA. How many times did Montez beat up his significant other before being dismissed from the team? I think at least one “second chance” was in order for Mett and he didn’t get it. This has the aroma of Mike Adams all over it.
You left out the part where he LIED TO COACH RICHT about the incident. Which, in and of itself, should be an offense worthy of removal from the team.
O.C.G.A 188.8.131.52 Sexual Battery
(a) For the purposes of this Code section, the term “intimate parts” means the primary genital area, anus, groin, inner thighs, or buttocks of a male or female and the breasts of a female.
(b) A person commits the offense of sexual battery when he or she intentionally makes physical contact with the intimate parts of the body of another person without the consent of that person.
(c) Except as otherwise provided in this Code section, a person convicted of the offense of sexual battery shall be punished as for a misdemeanor of a high and aggravated nature.
Sounds to me like the information reported in the story fits the statute like a glove. Yes, I can see where it would be a lesser included if all of the eliments of rape are not present, but it is also a stand alone charge for a spacific set of actions – which are a crime in and of themselves. Could he have been charged with a lesser, non-sexual, offence based on the simple actions of unwanted touching of another, sure. Would that have been accepted by the victim, who does have a voice in a court proceeding? More than likely not.
Why would anyone’s first reaction be to blame the victim, arresting officer or the DA? With no more information than what was printed in an article, people automaticly blame everyone but the guy who was arrested. I have no problem with standing up for a wrong, but to arbitrarily jump to the defence of the arrested and ridicule the actions of all others tells me, and it should tell a lot of the rest, plenty.
And just for all of those who are to busy jumping on the, “he did nothing wrong, the cops and the DA just don’t know how to have a good time” bandwagon, to do a google search-
The following offenders are required to register:
Offenders placed on probation, parole, supervised release or released from prison after July 1, 1996, for one or more of the following offenses:
-O.C.G.A. § 16-6-1 Rape
-O.C.G.A. § 16-6-2 Sodomy (against a minor); Aggravated Sodomy (against a minor or an adult)
-O.C.G.A. § 16-6-3 Statutory Rape (unless the age of the perpetrator is 18 years of age or younger)
-O.C.G.A. § 16-6-4 Child Molestation; Aggravated Child Molestation
-O.C.G.A. § 16-6-5 Enticing a child for indecent purposes
-O.C.G.A. § 16-6-22.2 Aggravated Sexual Battery
-Kidnapping of a minor, except by a parent
False imprisonment of a minor except by a parent
-Criminal sexual conduct toward a minor
Solicitation of a minor to engage in sexual contact
-Use of a minor in sexual performance
-Solicitation of a minor to practice prostitution
-Any conviction resulting from an underlying sexual offense against a victim who is a minor
-Use of a minor to engage in any sexually explicit conduct to produce any visual medium depicting such conduct
-Creating, publishing, selling, or distributing any material depicting a minor engaged in sexually explicit conduct
-Transmitting, making, selling, buying, or disseminating by means of a computer any descriptive or identifying information regarding a child for the purpose of offering or soliciting sexual conduct of or with a child or the visual depicting of such conduct
-Any conduct which, by its nature, is a sexual offense against a minor (this language replaces O.C.G.A. § 42-1-12 (a)(4)(A)(vii)
The offence of Sexual Battery is not an offence that requires registration, only Aggravated Sexual Battery. So the questions about him having to register should be answered, should it not?
Bottom line is everyone that is saying Met was a good young man and he has gotten a raw deal, don’t know if Met is a good young man or not. Not saying he is not a good kid but did any of you grow up with him? Even if you did, do you know everything he has ever done. Did you spend every second with him to know that he has done nothing but good in his life. Yet you know even less about the cops or the DA and you draw the conclusion that they are the ones that are wrong, acting in an overzealous manner for some personal agenda. I think it is clear who has an agenda. Those that are quick to judge often do so with reason or prejudice. I wonder what that could be?
He screwed up, but accepted responsibility for his actions. Let him deal with it and move on with his life. Good Luck to him.
Thanks Just2Cents for the research. If you carefully read the subsections of the statute in question, OCGA Sec. 16-6-21.1, they outlaw intentional physical contact, without consent, with certain body parts of another person. That is “sexual battery.” However my reading of those sections leads me to the conclusion that such contact must be direct, not through clothing. It is one thing (although still wrong) to, without consent, touch a girl on her breast through her clothes. It is quite another thing to touch her bare breast. The former, in my opinion, is clearly simple battery, not “sexual battery.” The accounts of this incident indicate to me that everyone was dressed and no contact was made to “bare” skin. If that is true the kid got charged with, and pleaded guilty to, the wrong crime. Also, how can there be 2 “sexual battery” charges when there was only 1 female accosted by Mett? The thing stinks. That was, and is, my point.
Are you serious? In no way can anyone legitimately, and with a strait face, defend this incident by saying that ” I did not grab her butt, I grabbed her pants” or “I did not grab her breast, I just grabbed her shirt and bra.” It’s called intent. If you are falling and reach for anything available to keep from busting your tail and it just so happens to be a female’s chest, that is not sexual battery – No Intent. If you are following a girl around a bar gropping and grabbing her chest and butt, the intent is to make contact with her chest and butt. You nor I have all the details, but if comments were made of a sexual nature during the incident and could have been offered, if needed in court, that would have gone to show that his intent was to touch the brest and/or butt and not to critique her tast in clothing fabrics. We don’t know what was available to the DA to offer as evidence. What ever they had, it was enough to get Mett to not only take an offer, which was negotiated by his lawyer, but to also recognize and accept his actions as being wrong. Regardless, the code section makes no stipulation that the intimate part must be bare. The intent is to touch her intimate parts, not her clothing, the clothes just happen to be in the way.
The argument you make, is specifically negated by the language of the sexual battery statute, which identifies the parts of the body that fit the statute and thus make it a separate offence.
If you read the simple battery statute you reference;
(a) A person commits the offense of simple battery when he or she either:
(1) Intentionally makes physical contact of an insulting or provoking nature with the person of another; or
(2) Intentionally causes physical harm to another.
I see no mention of making contact with “bare skin” here either. It is worded in much the same as the sexual battery. It makes no mention of the covered or un-covered portion of the “person” that is contacted, just like the sexual battery statute makes no mention of the area being bare. Based on your argument, he could not even be charged with simple battery because the defence would be that “I did not touch her, I touched her clothing and according to the simple battery statute I had to make contact with the person not the clothing the person was wearing.” If someone punches you in the arm, is he hitting you or is he just punching your shirt? I would argue, as would most people not defending the ridiculous, that the punch was directed at the person’s arm under the clothing and not the person’s shirt. The same goes for the grabbing of a girl’s breast or butt. The intent is to contact what is under the clothing, not the clothing.
You are attempting to defeat the spirit of the law with the letter of the law. Sorry, but I do not see it and thankfully neither does the criminal justice system.
So a Mettenberger is just like a Roethlisberger, only hold the mayo?
Asshole, before you come over to this blog and start talking about UGA players, coaches or fans why don’t you get your own house in order. Can you spell Paul Bryant, Jr.?
Lighten up, dude. It was a joke.
Not funny, dude.
I thought it was pretty funny.
Mayor, I thought you said you weren’t there but yet you say this….
“But there was no violence (as in striking)or actual sexual contact (as in penetration of an orifice with a body part or object). Not only has Mett been overcharged by the police/DA ….”
Just how do you know these things. Do you really think Mett would plead guilty to what we all know is a lesser charge, without having committed something worse.
What you mentioned about Montez makes me believe even more that he committed worse but got off with a lesser charge. There is no way that CMR kicks him off the team without just cause. Especially with his mom an AD employee. If anything CMR has always been fair.
No Mayor, sometimes its just a duck.
This matter was extensively reported in the media which said there was touching but no mention was made of the other stuff. You can bet if that happened it would have been reported.
Ok, so I’ve read all this speculation and ranting and all the legal ignorance I can handle, I couldn’t disagree more with the Mayor and Rummy, and I have two specific reasons for doing so…1) I know first hand how over the top and aggressive the Remerton police frequently act…however 2) I also know someone present at the bar that night (my only brother) who witnessed Mett’s getting bounced out and the outrageous self-righteous drunken s h1t he pulled outside the club to the police, the world and anyone else who dared to not realize who he was including the girl he wouldn’t leave alone despite her multiple warnings to him and pleading to the bouncers.
Mayor, Rummy, when you don’t know f@$%, stop acting like you know who was really at fault here. Yes, Mett maybe a ‘good kid’, but he acted like a horses azz that night and there ought to be consequences. When you don’t know nothing, maybe Richt has earned some benefit of the doubt that maybe he knows more than you. So stop playing the conspiricy theorist. Personally I as libertarian as they come but you simply don’t know what you are talking about so don’t talk about it.
I never said Mett did nothing wrong, I’m saying his punishment is far greater than his crime.
Whew, at least I know the truth now. The media said so.
Last question for you, above I made mention that CMR has always been fair and he has a history of that fact, so with that in mind, do you really believe that he would kick Mett off the team on his first offense if that was all he did? Cause I sure as hell don’t. Even the lying isn’t enough cause IMO.
I believe CMR read the DAs case and asked Mett if it was true and adios amigos. And we may never know what really happened.
I also agree that Richt’s history is to be fair. But we have had a rash of bad player stuff recently, Montez got kicked off and I think Richt got pressure from either Adams directly or through the AD to do something that would make UGA look like it was taking affirmative steps to stop player misconduct. It’s all about protecting Adams’ image. After all, he is trying to get the job as NCAA Prez and we all know the world revolves around him.
“Since you’re (most likely) not a woman, you have NO IDEA what it’s like to be ogled, grabbed, etc. by someone whose advances you are not welcoming. It’s embarrassing & demeaning at the very least, and yep, you guessed it, sexual assault & battery at its most extreme.”
Wow……. At its “most” extreme?
Being ogled is more extreme than rape now?
Life includes a wider spectrum that totally blameless innocence and serial rapist.
What Mett is accused of doing is far too minor for the sexual battery charge. That’s just outrageous.
I am sure you didn’t read all the posts above so let me point it out to you.
O.C.G.A 184.108.40.206 Sexual Battery
Also the girl sazymae didn’t say being ogled was more extreme than rape,….you did. The charge that he plead guilty to was a lesser offense than what he did. It always is.
Thanks, Keith. Apparently MB forgot to read the “etc” in my post. I thought that was inclusive & that most intelligent readers would understand that.
I guess for some of you posters, no doesn’t mean no depending on what a girl is wearing, but according to the law, it does. And yet I’m naive. Right. Some of you make me sick.
You weren’t there. You don’t know what really happened. You don’t know what she was/wasn’t wearing. No means no. Like I said before, I don’t think ZM should have had the proverbial book thrown at him, but don’t blame the girl for his behavior.
And you weren’t there either, so don’t pretend that you know the girl was just some sweet Quaker girl who was brutally assaulted.
Maybe you should scale back on the hyperbole.
Groping is not sexual assault and battery “at its most extreme.”
Sexual assault and battery at its “most extreme” is called rape.
When you overreact to actions of this degree, you deaden people’s sensitivity to more serious crimes like ACTUAL rape.
I should note that I have a wife and two daughters, so I am pretty sensitive to this issue.
But I think it is extremely dangerous for people to freak out over crimes of this degree as it can only cause a tragic backlash and result in less concern for more serious crimes against women.
“..ogled, grabbed, etc…”
With the etc… part I was implying more serious actions, like rape. I guess I should have spelled it out. I was under the impression that the commenters here were intelligent enough to get that. And I’m not “freaking out” over this incident. Go back to my original post. I’m pissed because certain posters apparently believe that what a woman is wearing makes it okay for her to be ogled, grabbed, assaulted, raped, ETC. I never said or even implied the girl was a sweet Quaker. What I was trying to get across was that it does not matter if she was dressed like a two dollar hooker, NO means NO.
I generally enjoy reading the comments on here about football, I really do. And I usually think RDM & most others are spot-on & funny with their comments about football. But I just don’t get the lack of respect for women & their bodies.
Mett had to learn the hard way. A good kid (by all accounts) lost a lot, and so did DawgNation. That really stinks. I sincerely hope he’s able to move on and build a good life for himself. My mistake for also hoping some of you would get it before it’s too late.
Keith, reread those statutes. They deal with contact with bare skin. Touching a girl’s breast through clothing, while wrong (and I think IS simple battery), it is not “sexual battery.” My understanding of the facts is that everybody had their clothes on. The kid got a raw deal.
No they do not! It makes absolutely NO mention of “Bare Skin”. Just because you think it should, doesn’t make it so. The statute has been spacifically worded to remove the “intimate parts” of a person from the simple battery statute and allow it to be a standalone charge. If the law was intended to apply to bare skin only, it would have said so. The simple battery statute does not spell out bare or covered when making the unwanted touching a crime, just like the sexual battery statute makes no delineation between covered and uncovered intimate part.
Not to go all over this again but if someone punches you in the chest, is that person punching your shirt or your chest? Your “covered” chest is the intended target, not the cothing covering your chest. Based on your interpretation of the sexual battery statute, which would have to be equally applied to the simple battery statute as it also makes no mention of covered or uncovered either, punching somone in the chest is not a crime, because it was not “bare skin”. It goes to intent. Was the intent to touch the person or the clothing? If you grab the breast or butt of a girl your intent is to grab the breast or butt, not the clothing covering it. Just like punching someone in the chest has the intent of hitting the person and not the shirt he/she is wearing. The clothing is not mentioned in the two statutes, one way or the other, because it is errelevent.
Mayor…just shows how much you keep up. The prez has already been passed over for someone.
I also believe that CMR wouldn’t bow to pressure from Adams.
Then you are extremely naive.
The new president of the NCAA was named 6 days ago. Mett was kicked off the team before that.
There are some whiny posters today…maybe I will have a different attitude when I found out if I am having a boy or a girl today, but I doubt it.
Mett = over-served asshole. The “do-you-know-who-I-am” rant is enough to make me want him off the team.
His parents are f’in stupid for allowing him to plead to a sexual battery charge. What Ed Tolley doesnt do road trips.
Getting drunk and grabbing some ass doesnt equal sexual battery, it equals a slap in the face and getting tossed on your ass. The a fore mentioned rant gets you a new set of bracelets.
And doesnt Mett have any friends?
Actually getting drunk and grabbing ass does equal sexual battery as well as underage possession. I’m supposing that even Mett’s “friends” would acknowledge this.
I read this blog all the time and wanted to give some insight, first off, you should know that only felonies or misdemeanors that accompany felonies are indicted and/or handled in Superior Court in Lowndes County. Thus, if there was not an alleged felony, no indictment process and no Superior Court. If it were only misdemeanors, they would have been handled in State Court or quite possibly in Remerton itself. The case was not indicted but accused which is why all of the “details” did not come out. The early contact between Mett’s attorney and the DA’s office allowed the defense to have a say-so in how the accusation was drafted. I have knowledge of what charges they were going to attempt to indict him for and the factual allegations that those charges were based upon and that is something I’m sure they didn’t want printed in the paper or anywhere else. Thus, instead of a graphic depiction of the alleged acts, which is what we would have got through an indictment, we got the PG rated version based on the early contact with the DA’s office and plea negotiations. Had he been indicted, it is likely he would have ultimately received the same thing, but with alot more embarrassment on the defendant and the victim. In addition, by accusing rather than indicting, they probably avoided alot more heat on the DA’s office than they would have for indicting and “pleading down” from the original charges. While there is a group of folks that think athletes are targeted, there is also a large group that thinks they get special treatment and those people would come out in droves if they knew the original charges were “plead down.” This way, nobody knows what he was going to be charged with, if anything, and nobody knows what the victim/prosecution was going to allege. The accusation, much like Mett’s statement, was a press release as much as a legal document, in that they wanted to control the story in the media and only release the details absolutely necessary to justify the accusation and nothing more. Now, this could have been done for a several reasons the most likely of which were a combination of, (1) the story or allegations were weak but the defendant did not want to risk a trial (2) the allegations were strong but the victim did not want to go through the embarrassment of a trial. Either way, the parties came to an agreement.
Now, for the punishment, the punishment he received would be what you could expect down here for a first time in trouble guy like Mett. 12 months probation, fine, 40 hrs community service per count. The banishment was probably from the Southern Judicial Circuit or Lowndes County, not just Valdosta. And yes, banishment is legal, however, you cannot banish someone from the entire state of Georgia. The first offender treatment is also pretty standard, even with these charges. All in all, based on what I heard of the allegations and what I know about the system, it played out pretty much like any other case of this nature would have, regardless of the status or celebrity of the Defendant.
Finally, the voice of reason. Nevertheless, I am still of the opinion that the incident was overblown by the authorities.
P.S. Please see my post re: OCGA Sec. 16-6-21.1 above.
M of D- It’s “ok” for you to be wrong-opinioned. There is a lot of that going around. What fascinates me about these posts is the denial of the facts presented by learned posters. There is a lot of that going on in our society. Some of you are hell-bent on maintaining a defense of your antisocial words/meanings and can’t seem to grasp a social conscience. We all have made legal assumptions (i.e.,the waitress was over 21) yet we can’t contemplate that an underage female could also be involved. If that was true, then Mett would be in a sexual registry already. Did anyone look? If it was true that nasty ole media would have already informed you. It be what it be, folks.
Fiend alcohol has claimed another victim in the person of someone we all wanted to like, but now cannot since he represents something that all alumni feel is abhorrent in any representative of UGA. Richt’s timing was impeccable to prevent our institution (not Adams) further embarassment. Imagine what the stupid bloggers in the AJC would be writing and goughing you with if he was still a student and through our football team, a representative of our University when he was dismissed. And Richt has to go in and face Mett’s Mother each day as we approach Mother’s Day. What approbation does she face each day at the same desk where a couple of months ago she was so proud? Zach’s thoughtlessness while under the influence cannot be plead down for his family, Richt and friends. They have to serve his sentence with him. If you did or didn’t think he got a bad deal, you all might consider sending commisserations to anyone that you feel you could help or stand by in their time of genuine need. A Mothers Day card from every Dawg on here sent to the UGA Athletic Dept and directed toward her might help.
Zach can go forward and never make the same mistake again as he expressed in his deposition/letter to the court. More than anything, we all can take something good forward from here also and that is to be cognizant at all times that what we do as individuals in public can hurt more than ourselves. When drinking in public act as an adult by knowing how much is enough, rabblerouse only in private and safe confines and don’t get behind a car wheel (also motorized and unmotorized bikes, 4-wheelers, lawnmowers, tractors and semis). Always drink with friends who can take care of you if you violate your own rules of conduct. Don’t drink with white football players since they sexually batter others, punch out their friends and urinate in public. These European-ancestry white kids can’t handle their liquor!
HAAA…Rum dawg…another one that goes on my list of hopefuls that one day has a daughter that leaves the sorrority house in daisy dukes and a come and get me shirt and comes home crying because some 6’5″ football player doesn’t know what NO means. You are the kind that has it coming.
But of course you will be the one who has the boy and you coddle him and tell him he can do no wrong and then he touches a girl somewhere not wanted and ends up in jail and you will be screaming about what a slut the girl is.
Well, if you are lucky it won’t be my daughter your son grabs.
Or better yet, his son will be trying to play grabass at Boneshakers.
ohhh….thinly-veiled internet threats…this thread has it all…
nothing like hoping someone’s daughter is raped to maintain that seat on your high horse…congrats…
Subscribe in a reader