RUMOR REVEALED

UK Peregrine · Post by **UK Peregrine** » Wed Mar 02, 2005 1:16 pm

pdt1081 wrote:
BGDrew wrote:Who knows if it was Fitch or his friend.
There is a pretty simple way to tell if it was his or his friend's. Submit to a drug test. Seems pretty obvious to me. If it was me, I'd want to do everything possible to prove that it wasn't mine. Drug test is simple. Negative means a smoked blunt ain't mine. It's as simple as that. Suspend him until the test results come back. If positive, rest of the year. If negative, punishment served for being in this position to begin with.

Just my thoughts.

Actually there is a very good chance in this case for a "false" positive. If Germain was not the one smoking but was obviously in the car with a friend who was smoking, then there is a very good chance for a "false" positive. The American Cancer Society has shown that secondhand smoke can get into the body, so it can certainly get in the inner part of the hair too. My guess is a drug test would probably not help Germain in this case.

Flipper · Post by **Flipper** » Wed Mar 02, 2005 1:26 pm

To smoke the blunt, you have to put it in your mouth. If you put something in your mouth, you will leave saliva on it. Saliva contains your DNA and if you're a girl, cooties.

They could do a DNA test on the blunt to see who smoked it.

PGY Tiercel · Post by **PGY Tiercel** » Wed Mar 02, 2005 1:34 pm

Watching a little bit too much CSI. DNA can be easily left all over the place. being in his car his DNA could get on it without putting it in mouth. Secondly, There are molecules called DNases which chew up DNA, this can also make identification difficult. Regardless, I think this comes down to what each person says, and how much we're willing to believe them.

BGorDeath · Post by **BGorDeath** » Wed Mar 02, 2005 1:38 pm

manager wrote:
Rollo83 has a good point -- if this was a UT or Marshall student athlete this board would be brutal. Tough as it might be, we need to rethink our attitdues when it's an athlete from one of those institutions.

No we shouldn't. It's Turdledo and Marshall.

Flipper · Post by **Flipper** » Wed Mar 02, 2005 1:39 pm

I don't watch CSI....I did like "Quincy" though.

Thanks for the info...I shall now call you Mr Science

PGY Tiercel · Post by **PGY Tiercel** » Wed Mar 02, 2005 1:42 pm

Flipper wrote:I don't watch CSI....I did like "Quincy" though.

Thanks for the info...I shall now call you Mr Science

Please, no need to be formal. Science Guy would be fine.

OptionQB · Post by **OptionQB** » Wed Mar 02, 2005 1:49 pm

I'm sure the police and of course those who HAVE to know ( ie . . . Coaching Staff, U. personnel and prosecutors) are the only ones that know whether the weed was Germain's or not. My guess is yes. And if that is the case, regardless of his injuries or one year left or not, Dan has only one choice in front of him. Plain and simple, if it is his, he broke team rules. We have enough kids at this University that bust their ass to have their education paid for and struggle to do so (I'm one) to allow someone to continue on scholarship and make a severe lack in judgment like this. If you think we have attendance problems now, just wait until newspapers, tv and radio report it was Germain's weed and he's STILL on scholarship.

Falconfreak90 · Post by **Falconfreak90** » Wed Mar 02, 2005 1:50 pm

manager wrote:It all comes down to common sense. We all screw up and some of us have to learn things the hard way. If this is his first offense, he doesn't play until next year, period. If it's a second offense he should be finished as a Falcon. I agree with Grant, a violation of team rules is worse that the police charges. Those are promises with your teammates--not to be tossed aside for any reason.

Rollo83 has a good point -- if this was a UT or Marshall student athlete this board would be brutal. Tough as it might be, we need to rethink our attitdues when it's an athlete from one of those institutions.

I certainly agree with everything in this post. It does happen at BG as well.

I hope Fitch can get this straight. I feel badly for him. I've been thru stuff like that a few times so I won't cast any stones.

Coach did the right thing.

BEAT WMU!

Warthog · Post by **Warthog** » Wed Mar 02, 2005 2:07 pm

OK, this is the time for me to interject my big picture thoughts. Flame it if you choose. Here goes. In the long run, our team is much better off if Fitch is removed from the team. You have an injury prone player that already has a torn ACL with one year of eligilibilty left. How much can he contribute next year if he can play? If he is removed from the team, it allows us to go out and get another much needed player that will be able to contribute to the program for four/five more years, not just parts of one more like Fitch would, if at all. Strictly looking at it from the team on the court standpoint, I think we are better off if Fitch goes.

That is if he is guilty of this. (If not, please disregard all of this, Fitch brings all kinds of intangibles to the court that can not be measured

)

Tech83 · Post by **Tech83** » Wed Mar 02, 2005 2:24 pm

Warthog - I think you bring up some good points. This may come down to a "business" decision with health, eligiblity, scholarship all being factors. This incident may not be the real factor to any decision to keep or cut Fitch at the end of the season, but could be the excuse used.

But you know......He's is over the legal age to know better.

Lesson learned - choose your friends wisely.

BG EV · Post by **BG EV** » Wed Mar 02, 2005 3:24 pm

Unfortunately, the City Police in BG really give the black athletes a hard time. Some will not drive in town because they want to avoid the hassel. I am not trying to dismiss what may have happened, but if you talk to many of the athletes this is a too common complaint. They stoped a football player last week for an illegal right turn and it ended up in the same charge.

Warthog · Post by **Warthog** » Wed Mar 02, 2005 3:30 pm

BG EV wrote:They stoped a football player last week for an illegal right turn and it ended up in the same charge.

I think this has to be scrutinized by the rumor police. :duh:

BG EV · Post by **BG EV** » Wed Mar 02, 2005 3:37 pm

It was in the bloter, plus I know the athlete.

Rollo83 · Post by **Rollo83** » Wed Mar 02, 2005 3:46 pm

Unfortunately, the City Police in BG really give the black athletes a hard time...They stoped a football player last week for an illegal right turn and it ended up in the same charge.

By the "same charge," I am assuming you mean a disdemeanor drug possession charge?

If you are stupid enough to be driving while smoking weed and get pulled over for a traffic violation, I can't fault the cop unless it was Mark Furman?

Black, white, green or blue, stupidty was no color barriers.

OptionQB · Post by **OptionQB** » Wed Mar 02, 2005 4:31 pm

I would love to see proof of BGEV's post . . . b/c I have been present and witness to several occassions when the "black" athlete has been given the benefit of the doubt by the BG City Police, b/c of his/her "athletic" status. I don't want to minimilize this to a color issue either, as "athletes" in general are often given the benefit of the doubt.

Warthog,

I was thinking the exact same thing on my way over. However, does the 5/8 rule still apply. I was thinking it was overturned or something. But it all depends on how many "recruits" you count in the 2004/05 class. Given his eligibility and redshirt status, Germain could even be honored at Senior Day if the staff so chooses as he should be near the end of his degree given that he's been here for four years. Also, given the lack of forethought that when into his decision to get anywhere near a car that contained marijuana or anyone that had it on them, he should have to apply for FAFSA like all of the rest of us if he needs additional funding.