menu
Logo
99+
Bobcat Attack Menu
Logo
99+
General Ohio University Discussion/Alumni Events Topic
Topic: Emoni Bates arrested on gun charges
Page: 2 of 3
mail
person
BillyTheCat
9/22/2022 10:25 AM
Find this interesting that every one here is writing off that he is done at EMU. He was released on a personal bond, has no prior arrest, and is only suspended until the legal issue is taken care of. Charges could easily be reduced, dropped or plea bargained down and he may be back. Just have to wait and see.
mail
OhioCatFan
9/22/2022 11:25 AM
BillyTheCat wrote:expand_more
Find this interesting that every one here is writing off that he is done at EMU. He was released on a personal bond, has no prior arrest, and is only suspended until the legal issue is taken care of. Charges could easily be reduced, dropped or plea bargained down and he may be back. Just have to wait and see.
Not everyone, BTC, is writing him off as done at EMU. I pointedly said he was innocent until proven guilty.
mail
person
Ohio69
9/22/2022 2:43 PM
Bobcatzblitz wrote:expand_more
Black Guy in a nice car gets me every other month. What's crazy is you can see the entire fiasco play out in their eyes.
1. Controlled demeanor mildy professional but nervous eyes..hand on or close to his sidearm..partner on passenger side hand shaking on gun..
2. "Benign" questions (fishing) about your paperwork, comings and goings..job(how can you afford this car boy) , favorite Sports team..if it's OSU then why you got a gold duffle bag and you wouldn't mind if we looked in it.
3. Disappointment in their faces when no prior, clean paperwork but here comes THE DWB Hail Mary of course you don't mind if we search or bring the K9 if you have nothing to hide step out of the car.
AFTER ALL THAT "HAVE A NICE DAY"

I usually gotta throw up afterwards and I'm late for work AGAIN.

P.S I SOLD THAT CAR.

Heavy sigh. Doesn't look like this type of stuff is ever gonna end either.
mail
person
bobcat 2000
9/22/2022 4:17 PM
gary trent and dave jamerson played like they were five star players. not sure if they actually were.gary trent was a major coup in recruiting for ou though. i wonder if walt luckett was a five star?
mail
person
cc-cat
9/22/2022 5:25 PM
Look for a plea o misdemeanor - he'll be on he court this season (to begin at least)
mail
person
rpbobcat
9/23/2022 6:47 AM
bobcat 2000 wrote:expand_more
gary trent and dave jamerson played like they were five star players. not sure if they actually were.gary trent was a major coup in recruiting for ou though. i wonder if walt luckett was a five star?
I was at O.U. when we got Luckett.

I don't know how many stars he was (never even heard of "stars" back then).

But he was considered a major "get" for the school.

I still have the Sports Illustrated magazine with him on the cover.
mail
100%Cat
9/23/2022 7:05 AM
M.D.W.S.T wrote:expand_more
There's a WHOLE lot of assumptions being tossed about here. Pretty disappointing. Has recent history not taught us to maybe wait until all of the facts come out before we throw out theories?
In this case, facts are the facts.

I'm not familiar with Michigan law, but in most jurisdictions (every county in Ohio) when you assume control over the vehicle, it's your responsibility to check the vehicle. You assume possession for everything in the car.

It's a felony to be in possession of an unregistered firearm.

It's certainly plausible he just has terrible friends, but that doesn't make him less responsible for what he's being charged.

It's all quite disappointing.
I agree, there are facts. The disappointing assumptions to me are things like why he was really pulled over, why the car was searched, the motives of the officer(s), etc... I am absolutely in agreement that there could have been racial motives, but until I see body/dash cam footage (there has to be some in this day and age) that suggests that is what took place, I won't jump to that conclusion. All we know for sure is they said he was pulled over for a traffic violation, it was a borrowed car, the cops found an illegally modified gun. We don't know how the interaction went between the officer and Bates. We don't know if the gun was partially visible in the car. We don't know if there were other factors that led to the searching of the car (smell of drugs, Bates' conversation, etc...). There's too much we do not know.

Some people here want to jump to bad motives for why he was pulled over and searched. Me, the more we do NOT hear from Bates or his attorney to show body or dash cam footage, the more I am led to believe that footage doesn't look good for him. I'd love to see it, whether we will or not I have no idea.
mail
person
BillyTheCat
9/23/2022 8:51 AM
100%Cat wrote:expand_more
There's a WHOLE lot of assumptions being tossed about here. Pretty disappointing. Has recent history not taught us to maybe wait until all of the facts come out before we throw out theories?
In this case, facts are the facts.

I'm not familiar with Michigan law, but in most jurisdictions (every county in Ohio) when you assume control over the vehicle, it's your responsibility to check the vehicle. You assume possession for everything in the car.

It's a felony to be in possession of an unregistered firearm.

It's certainly plausible he just has terrible friends, but that doesn't make him less responsible for what he's being charged.

It's all quite disappointing.
I agree, there are facts. The disappointing assumptions to me are things like why he was really pulled over, why the car was searched, the motives of the officer(s), etc... I am absolutely in agreement that there could have been racial motives, but until I see body/dash cam footage (there has to be some in this day and age) that suggests that is what took place, I won't jump to that conclusion. All we know for sure is they said he was pulled over for a traffic violation, it was a borrowed car, the cops found an illegally modified gun. We don't know how the interaction went between the officer and Bates. We don't know if the gun was partially visible in the car. We don't know if there were other factors that led to the searching of the car (smell of drugs, Bates' conversation, etc...). There's too much we do not know.

Some people here want to jump to bad motives for why he was pulled over and searched. Me, the more we do NOT hear from Bates or his attorney to show body or dash cam footage, the more I am led to believe that footage doesn't look good for him. I'd love to see it, whether we will or not I have no idea.

We also know that Blacks get pulled over at a higher rate then whites. Now we can read two things into that fact. #1 Blacks are either worse drivers than whites. #2 Or well you know....

https://www.nyu.edu/about/news-publications/news/2020/may...
mail
100%Cat
9/23/2022 9:40 AM
BillyTheCat wrote:expand_more
There's a WHOLE lot of assumptions being tossed about here. Pretty disappointing. Has recent history not taught us to maybe wait until all of the facts come out before we throw out theories?
In this case, facts are the facts.

I'm not familiar with Michigan law, but in most jurisdictions (every county in Ohio) when you assume control over the vehicle, it's your responsibility to check the vehicle. You assume possession for everything in the car.

It's a felony to be in possession of an unregistered firearm.

It's certainly plausible he just has terrible friends, but that doesn't make him less responsible for what he's being charged.

It's all quite disappointing.
I agree, there are facts. The disappointing assumptions to me are things like why he was really pulled over, why the car was searched, the motives of the officer(s), etc... I am absolutely in agreement that there could have been racial motives, but until I see body/dash cam footage (there has to be some in this day and age) that suggests that is what took place, I won't jump to that conclusion. All we know for sure is they said he was pulled over for a traffic violation, it was a borrowed car, the cops found an illegally modified gun. We don't know how the interaction went between the officer and Bates. We don't know if the gun was partially visible in the car. We don't know if there were other factors that led to the searching of the car (smell of drugs, Bates' conversation, etc...). There's too much we do not know.

Some people here want to jump to bad motives for why he was pulled over and searched. Me, the more we do NOT hear from Bates or his attorney to show body or dash cam footage, the more I am led to believe that footage doesn't look good for him. I'd love to see it, whether we will or not I have no idea.

We also know that Blacks get pulled over at a higher rate then whites. Now we can read two things into that fact. #1 Blacks are either worse drivers than whites. #2 Or well you know....

https://www.nyu.edu/about/news-publications/news/2020/may...
So because of this, the cop who witnessed the violation was supposed to do nothing because of the race of the driver? Which is another thing that has been assumed. This traffic stop happened at night, in the dark. If the officer was behind Bates' vehicle, would it be possible to know the race of the driver from behind, at night? More information we do not know or have...
Last Edited: 9/23/2022 9:45:53 AM by 100%Cat
mail
person
BillyTheCat
9/23/2022 10:10 AM
100%Cat wrote:expand_more
There's a WHOLE lot of assumptions being tossed about here. Pretty disappointing. Has recent history not taught us to maybe wait until all of the facts come out before we throw out theories?
In this case, facts are the facts.

I'm not familiar with Michigan law, but in most jurisdictions (every county in Ohio) when you assume control over the vehicle, it's your responsibility to check the vehicle. You assume possession for everything in the car.

It's a felony to be in possession of an unregistered firearm.

It's certainly plausible he just has terrible friends, but that doesn't make him less responsible for what he's being charged.

It's all quite disappointing.
I agree, there are facts. The disappointing assumptions to me are things like why he was really pulled over, why the car was searched, the motives of the officer(s), etc... I am absolutely in agreement that there could have been racial motives, but until I see body/dash cam footage (there has to be some in this day and age) that suggests that is what took place, I won't jump to that conclusion. All we know for sure is they said he was pulled over for a traffic violation, it was a borrowed car, the cops found an illegally modified gun. We don't know how the interaction went between the officer and Bates. We don't know if the gun was partially visible in the car. We don't know if there were other factors that led to the searching of the car (smell of drugs, Bates' conversation, etc...). There's too much we do not know.

Some people here want to jump to bad motives for why he was pulled over and searched. Me, the more we do NOT hear from Bates or his attorney to show body or dash cam footage, the more I am led to believe that footage doesn't look good for him. I'd love to see it, whether we will or not I have no idea.

We also know that Blacks get pulled over at a higher rate then whites. Now we can read two things into that fact. #1 Blacks are either worse drivers than whites. #2 Or well you know....

https://www.nyu.edu/about/news-publications/news/2020/may...
So because of this, the cop who witnessed the violation was supposed to do nothing because of the race of the driver? Which is another thing that has been assumed. This traffic stop happened at night, in the dark. If the officer was behind Bates' vehicle, would it be possible to know the race of the driver from behind, at night? More information we do not know or have...
Like I said, obviously Blacks just continue to be bad drivers. I have no idea what else could be at play.
mail
100%Cat
9/23/2022 10:17 AM
BillyTheCat wrote:expand_more
There's a WHOLE lot of assumptions being tossed about here. Pretty disappointing. Has recent history not taught us to maybe wait until all of the facts come out before we throw out theories?
In this case, facts are the facts.

I'm not familiar with Michigan law, but in most jurisdictions (every county in Ohio) when you assume control over the vehicle, it's your responsibility to check the vehicle. You assume possession for everything in the car.

It's a felony to be in possession of an unregistered firearm.

It's certainly plausible he just has terrible friends, but that doesn't make him less responsible for what he's being charged.

It's all quite disappointing.
I agree, there are facts. The disappointing assumptions to me are things like why he was really pulled over, why the car was searched, the motives of the officer(s), etc... I am absolutely in agreement that there could have been racial motives, but until I see body/dash cam footage (there has to be some in this day and age) that suggests that is what took place, I won't jump to that conclusion. All we know for sure is they said he was pulled over for a traffic violation, it was a borrowed car, the cops found an illegally modified gun. We don't know how the interaction went between the officer and Bates. We don't know if the gun was partially visible in the car. We don't know if there were other factors that led to the searching of the car (smell of drugs, Bates' conversation, etc...). There's too much we do not know.

Some people here want to jump to bad motives for why he was pulled over and searched. Me, the more we do NOT hear from Bates or his attorney to show body or dash cam footage, the more I am led to believe that footage doesn't look good for him. I'd love to see it, whether we will or not I have no idea.

We also know that Blacks get pulled over at a higher rate then whites. Now we can read two things into that fact. #1 Blacks are either worse drivers than whites. #2 Or well you know....

https://www.nyu.edu/about/news-publications/news/2020/may...
So because of this, the cop who witnessed the violation was supposed to do nothing because of the race of the driver? Which is another thing that has been assumed. This traffic stop happened at night, in the dark. If the officer was behind Bates' vehicle, would it be possible to know the race of the driver from behind, at night? More information we do not know or have...
Like I said, obviously Blacks just continue to be bad drivers. I have no idea what else could be at play.
You didn't answer the question. What was the officer supposed to do upon witnessing the violation?
mail
person
BillyTheCat
9/23/2022 11:01 AM
100%Cat wrote:expand_more
There's a WHOLE lot of assumptions being tossed about here. Pretty disappointing. Has recent history not taught us to maybe wait until all of the facts come out before we throw out theories?
In this case, facts are the facts.

I'm not familiar with Michigan law, but in most jurisdictions (every county in Ohio) when you assume control over the vehicle, it's your responsibility to check the vehicle. You assume possession for everything in the car.

It's a felony to be in possession of an unregistered firearm.

It's certainly plausible he just has terrible friends, but that doesn't make him less responsible for what he's being charged.

It's all quite disappointing.
I agree, there are facts. The disappointing assumptions to me are things like why he was really pulled over, why the car was searched, the motives of the officer(s), etc... I am absolutely in agreement that there could have been racial motives, but until I see body/dash cam footage (there has to be some in this day and age) that suggests that is what took place, I won't jump to that conclusion. All we know for sure is they said he was pulled over for a traffic violation, it was a borrowed car, the cops found an illegally modified gun. We don't know how the interaction went between the officer and Bates. We don't know if the gun was partially visible in the car. We don't know if there were other factors that led to the searching of the car (smell of drugs, Bates' conversation, etc...). There's too much we do not know.

Some people here want to jump to bad motives for why he was pulled over and searched. Me, the more we do NOT hear from Bates or his attorney to show body or dash cam footage, the more I am led to believe that footage doesn't look good for him. I'd love to see it, whether we will or not I have no idea.

We also know that Blacks get pulled over at a higher rate then whites. Now we can read two things into that fact. #1 Blacks are either worse drivers than whites. #2 Or well you know....

https://www.nyu.edu/about/news-publications/news/2020/may...
So because of this, the cop who witnessed the violation was supposed to do nothing because of the race of the driver? Which is another thing that has been assumed. This traffic stop happened at night, in the dark. If the officer was behind Bates' vehicle, would it be possible to know the race of the driver from behind, at night? More information we do not know or have...
Like I said, obviously Blacks just continue to be bad drivers. I have no idea what else could be at play.
You didn't answer the question. What was the officer supposed to do upon witnessing the violation?
Was there really a violation? What was it? According to reports there is no mention of a citation. And the list is so long, and the verbiage so vague as to how officers write their reports, but where is the citation for this supposed offense? Again, I will just have to submit to your proof that Blacks get pulled over more often because they must be bad drivers.

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/inside-100-million-p...

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/inside-100-million-p...

Of course what real data is 100,000,000 million traffic stops? I mean, what could researchers at Stanford possibly know?
Last Edited: 9/23/2022 11:07:31 AM by BillyTheCat
mail
person
Kevin Finnegan
9/23/2022 1:32 PM
All interesting. I get what 100% Cat is saying and he doesn't seem to be disagreeing with BTC that the numbers of blacks pulled over for ridiculous reasons is exorbitant. His question seems to be, did the cop know he was black when he saw Emoni fail to stop at an intersection (and was this a red light or a stop sign)? Was the initial stop just for the violation?

The crazy thing to me is that it seems to be a felony to have a concealed weapon if you're 21, but Emoni's issue was that he was 18. Is possessing alcohol underage a felony? Pretty sure that's a misdemeanor. So it's crazy that something that could be legal three years later is determined to be a felony at that age. My sister used to carry a gun below her driver's seat for safety (nevermind that I disagreed with it, it was legal for her to do so). If her 18 year-old daughter had driven the car, would she then be guilty of committing a felony?

As for the scratched off serial number, that's a different story...
mail
100%Cat
9/23/2022 1:46 PM
"Bates was pulled over by the Washtenaw County Sheriff's Office at 10:43 p.m. when an officer saw Bates failed to stop at the intersection of Nottingham and Clark Road in Superior Township, according to the sheriff's office."

https://www.freep.com/story/sports/college/2022/09/19/eas... /

And yes to Kevin's post. I am in agreement that the things mentioned in this post have and do happen. My disappointment in some posts on this thread is the refusal to hold judgement and speculation until ALL of the facts come out. Rush to judgement on incomplete information and national averages is foolish and reckless, in my opinion.
mail
person
Kevin Finnegan
9/23/2022 3:55 PM

https://www.google.com/maps...



Not sure how well this cuts and pastes, but this is the Google Maps of that intersection. Actually raises more suspicion to me. A neighborhood stop sign, not a blown red light or a big city intersection. I've been pulled over twice for a rolling stop. Was let off both times with a warning. Never once was there a search of the vehicle. I really would love to hear more details, but as OCF said, I will most certainly hold off any rush to judgment on either side of the issue here.

mail
person
BillyTheCat
9/23/2022 4:09 PM
OMG!!! A stop sign in a neighborhood! That’s definitely worthy of tossing a car! Especially at such a late hour!!! No one has any business being out that late!!!
mail
person
Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame
9/23/2022 4:44 PM
Kevin Finnegan wrote:expand_more
=His question seems to be, did the cop know he was black when he saw Emoni fail to stop at an intersection (and was this a red light or a stop sign)? Was the initial stop just for the violation?
I think this question misses a bit of context and assumes micro targeting of minorities rather than macro targeting. I'm doing this off the top of my head, but if I recall a lot of the reason that blacks end up pulled over more frequently is that traffic stops occur at a much greater rate in certain neighborhoods than they do in others. It's effectively 'stop and frisk' by zip code, justified by traffic violations.
Last Edited: 9/23/2022 4:50:53 PM by Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame
mail
person
PhiTau74
9/23/2022 5:21 PM
We also know from 2019 FBI statistics that blacks commit 51.2% of all Murders and 57.1% of robberies, source 2019 FBI stats. 13% of the population commits 51.2% of the murders, go figure. Democrats totally believe the FBI regarding everything regarding Trump so live with it.
mail
person
Kevin Finnegan
9/23/2022 5:50 PM
PhiTau74 wrote:expand_more
We also know from 2019 FBI statistics that blacks commit 51.2% of all Murders and 57.1% of robberies, source 2019 FBI stats. 13% of the population commits 51.2% of the murders, go figure. Democrats totally believe the FBI regarding everything regarding Trump so live with it.
So, what, exactly is your point? Should we search every car driven by a black person because of your cited statistics? This has little to do with the discussion about whether his car should’ve been searched if he didn’t come to a full stop at a neighborhood stop sign.
mail
person
Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame
9/23/2022 5:53 PM
PhiTau74 wrote:expand_more
We also know from 2019 FBI statistics that blacks commit 51.2% of all Murders and 57.1% of robberies, source 2019 FBI stats. 13% of the population commits 51.2% of the murders, go figure. Democrats totally believe the FBI regarding everything regarding Trump so live with it.
There were 4,078 black people arrested for murder in 2019.

Not 41.6 million. Which is what the number would be if "13% of the population" was really committing murders. Rather, a small subset of 41.6 million people committed murders.

But go on. Really curious how you're going to conclude that little point of yours.
mail
gedunkman
9/23/2022 11:01 PM
Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame wrote:expand_more
We also know from 2019 FBI statistics that blacks commit 51.2% of all Murders and 57.1% of robberies, source 2019 FBI stats. 13% of the population commits 51.2% of the murders, go figure. Democrats totally believe the FBI regarding everything regarding Trump so live with it.
There were 4,078 black people arrested for murder in 2019.

Not 41.6 million. Which is what the number would be if "13% of the population" was really committing murders. Rather, a small subset of 41.6 million people committed murders.

But go on. Really curious how you're going to conclude that little point of yours.
You apparently weren't a math major, or you've misconstrued PhiTau74's statement. What he clearly said was that blacks make up 13 percent of the U.S. population, but disproportionally committed 51.2 percent of the murders in 2019 (most of them against other blacks, as we all know from other reporting). The number of murders and non-negligent homicides that year, according to FBI stats that I looked up, was 14,915. That would mean blacks committed roughly 7636 of those murders or non-negligent homicides, which is disproportionate to their percent of the total population. He did not say that every black in the U.S. committed a murder. That's the only way you come up with your ludicrous figure of 41.6 murders.

I'm not taking a position on the debate about Emoni Bates, as I have no idea what the circumstances in the case are, and am willing to wait for the evidence to come forward and the actual facts to be known. He may very well have been subjected to an unfair DWB arrest. I simply wanted to point out that PhiTau74's statement was factual, not that I agreed with any implication that he might be making or inference he might be drawing from those statistics.
mail
person
Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame
9/24/2022 7:54 AM
gedunkman wrote:expand_more
We also know from 2019 FBI statistics that blacks commit 51.2% of all Murders and 57.1% of robberies, source 2019 FBI stats. 13% of the population commits 51.2% of the murders, go figure. Democrats totally believe the FBI regarding everything regarding Trump so live with it.
There were 4,078 black people arrested for murder in 2019.

Not 41.6 million. Which is what the number would be if "13% of the population" was really committing murders. Rather, a small subset of 41.6 million people committed murders.

But go on. Really curious how you're going to conclude that little point of yours.
You apparently weren't a math major, or you've misconstrued PhiTau74's statement. What he clearly said was that blacks make up 13 percent of the U.S. population, but disproportionally committed 51.2 percent of the murders in 2019 (most of them against other blacks, as we all know from other reporting). The number of murders and non-negligent homicides that year, according to FBI stats that I looked up, was 14,915. That would mean blacks committed roughly 7636 of those murders or non-negligent homicides, which is disproportionate to their percent of the total population. He did not say that every black in the U.S. committed a murder. That's the only way you come up with your ludicrous figure of 41.6 murders.
Sorry dude, but I wasn't clear. I didn't suggest that there were 41.6 million murders. I was pointing out that not all black people commit murders, and in fact the vast, vast majority do not. So a stat like " 13% of the population commits 52% of the murders" lumps 41 million+ innocent American citizens with ~5,000 criminals. Statistics don't get less meaningful than that.

You might also want to note that PhiTau cited this stat as a critique of others who had the audacity to suggest that racial profiling is bad. In other words, it was cited as justification for said profiling.

Given the huge disparity between the number of black Americans and the number of black Americans committing murders, do you think racial profiling is justified? Because without realizing it, you're choosing to support PhiTau's argument that it is.

So, yes, I know Phi didn't say every black person committed a murder. What he did suggest is that because murders are perpetrated by black people at a high rate, it's justified that police profile them. And I think the rights and freedoms of 41 million perfectly innocent, hardworking Americans are important to protect.

But curious to hear if you all disagree.
Last Edited: 9/25/2022 9:47:22 AM by Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame
mail
person
Pataskala
9/25/2022 1:10 AM
FJC31 wrote:expand_more
Jeez. Will be an interesting 30 for 30 in the future. I'm not sure how he is going to salvage his career from this
Next steps... declare for NBA draft. Go undrafted. Struggle to catch on in Summer League. Back to Michigan around the same crowd that he needs to carry a gun around.

Sad.
Lawyer claims he borrowed someone’s car. Nonetheless, needs a different crowd around him for sure.
I don't think we can assume that he's been running with a bad crowd. My wife was on a jury last year in a case where a man borrowed his daughter's car and when he had an accident with it the cops found a handgun under the front seat. He claimed his daughter had used it for target practice at a local shooting range and left it under the seat, and he didn't know it was there. He was convicted anyway because he was responsible for what was in the car.

According to what the judge said at the hearing, apparently Michigan still requires training for people to carry handguns. In Ohio, any dufus can own a handgun without any training at all.
mail
person
bobcatsquared
9/25/2022 8:45 AM
Not only that, Pataskala, but the new law "permits a qualifying adult to legally carry, possess, or conceal a handgun without a license, background check, or training requirements."

Except Ohioans can't bring a gun into the statehouse, where our GOP-controlled legislature passed said law.
mail
person
Pataskala
9/25/2022 11:10 AM
bobcatsquared wrote:expand_more
Not only that, Pataskala, but the new law "permits a qualifying adult to legally carry, possess, or conceal a handgun without a license, background check, or training requirements."

Except Ohioans can't bring a gun into the statehouse, where our GOP-controlled legislature passed said law.
Oh, and during traffic stops you're supposed to tell the cop that you a have a concealed gun, as if that's ever going to happen. They passed the law despite the opposition of every police group in the state. The gun lobby's money (most of which comes from gun manufacturers than gun owners) talks louder than law enforcement.
Showing Messages: 26 - 50 of 64
reply
vertical_align_top
vertical_align_center
vertical_align_bottom
add_comment
chevron_backward
chevron_forward
MAC News Links



extra small (< 576px)
small (>= 576px)
medium (>= 768px)
large (>= 992px)
x-large (>= 1200px)
xx-large (>= 1400px)