Huge Piece of Shit and alleged Woman Abuser Chris Beard has been hired at Mississippi

[Loop 1604 227]

They are both fucking idiots and do not need to have any further association with the University of Texas. 

[Dahobbs 18324]

1 hour ago, Hookem2147 said:

Waiting for all the facts to come out and for the legal process to start playing out is the only way Texas protects itself in all situations.

If they fire him today with cause like 80% of the twitter warriors seem to want to do, and then the women comes out next week and says nevermind I was lying, Texas is absolutely screwed and is staring a $25-30 million buyout in the face and you can bet your ass Beard and his team aren’t accepting one penny less and things will get ugly.

Also, if the women decides she wants the case dropped because she doesn’t want a messy trial that doesn’t mean Beard is innocent of all charges. Texas can still get rid of him and save themselves any buyout money if evidence comes to light that allows them to do so, even if the case never sees a courtroom.

Making reactionary, emotional decisions is how you screw yourself as a university financially. This thing likely isn’t getting resolved this week or even this month, hell, there’s probably a better chance than not it drags on for several months. But Texas has to look out for Texas. It’s not just a Chris Beard thing.

People can’t seem to hold these multiple thoughts in their mind at the same time.

Texas would only pay the buyout if Texas wanted to pay the buyout (e.g., as a show of good faith for future coaching hires). But, if Texas didn't want to pay, there is nothing Beard's legal team could do to force Texas to pay the buyout. The University has sovereign immunity. This is well established, see Leach v. Texas Tech.

Texas is proceeding cautiously 1) because it really likes having a very good basketball coach and doesn't want to fire him prematurely, and 2) because firing him prematurely could impact the University's reputation among coaches and make future hirings more difficult. Concern about the University being forced to pay Beard's buyout is way down the list. 

[Dahobbs 18324]

11 minutes ago, Had Enough said:

I’m curious on the strangulation discussion from this. During and after what? Sounds like I suffer from strangulation quite often.

During strangulation and after strangulation. 

[Kennythetiger 9628]

25 minutes ago, TexArcher said:

 

I see that you’ve met my wife. 

[brojangles2 795]

Don't get me wrong, I am in here and reading, but how in the fuck are we still adding several pages daily to this thread? WTF is there to discuss at this point? 

[brojangles2 795]

8 minutes ago, Loop 1604 said:

They are both fucking idiots and do not need to have any further association with the University of Texas. 

You, most certainly are Ghostbusters status when it comes to identifying idiots. There is that. 

[Born to Run 6601]

Maybe I am reading the original story incorrectly but me impression is that this is his apartment, not hers.  She goes to his apartment, locks him out, and he is supposed to walk away?   I guess, personally I am calling the cops.  And if someone, anyone pulls a knife on me in my apartment in a aggressive faashion, I don't give a shit if its a woman, 6yr old child, or a fucking bunny rabbit, they are getting their ass kicked at the very minimum.  

Chick left his ass for hours on the side of the road, dumped his weed and beer out, then started attacking him.

You gtfo immediately and either call the cops then or the next day and get a restraining order.

Continuing to escalate and kick her out is a terrible move. Sure defend yourself when a knife is drawn, or better yet gtfo before the knife is drawn and the need to punch a woman comes up. Why invite legal or physical harm?

[Loop 1604 227]

14 minutes ago, brojangles2 said:

You, most certainly are Ghostbusters status when it comes to identifying idiots. There is that. 

So you think a known domestic abuser should stay on as head coach?

Edited December 15, 2022 by Loop 1604

[Hookem2147 22033]

25 minutes ago, Dahobbs said:

Texas would only pay the buyout if Texas wanted to pay the buyout (e.g., as a show of good faith for future coaching hires). But, if Texas didn't want to pay, there is nothing Beard's legal team could do to force Texas to pay the buyout. The University has sovereign immunity. This is well established, see Leach v. Texas Tech.

Texas is proceeding cautiously 1) because it really likes having a very good basketball coach and doesn't want to fire him prematurely, and 2) because firing him prematurely could impact the University's reputation among coaches and make future hirings more difficult. Concern about the University being forced to pay Beard's buyout is way down the list. 

Leach vs Texas Tech was never fully resolved and resulted in lawsuit after lawsuit with Leach searching for his money. I wouldn’t consider that a good example or a path I want this situation to follow.

If Texas fired him with cause, then Beard was acquitted of all charges and information came out that told a different side of the story than the one the fiancé told, Beard and his team are coming right back to Texas looking for his buyout money and suing. There is zero chance they are laying down easy in that situation.

Money is absolutely playing a role or will play a role in this thing and Texas is trying to protect itself from a messy situation down the road regardless of the outcome.

If Texas fires him, they aren’t paying him a penny nor should they, but they better be damn sure their T’s are crossed and I’s are dotted before they make that decision, which is why they are gathering facts and taking their time.

Edited December 15, 2022 by Hookem2147

[Doc Daneeka 6793]

I think it’s more likely than not that Beard keeps the job. 

Feels like a mea culpa for responding to her violence rather than exiting the situation. Counseling, maybe. “I need to do better and set a better example.”

I thought Texas would win in Lubbock, too, so there’s that. 

[Horn Dog 10158]

This does bring up a potentially lucrative business idea.  With all these highly compensated and contractually locked in coaches all probably having this "with cause" for being charged clause in their contracts.   We need a group of women who will stalk them out, maybe in a bar, get the mark drunk, women initially get friendly, then break their glasses and spit in their faces.  We record the reactions and have the police called in advance.  Get the coach charged.  Collect 20% buy out fee from school/booster.  Coach is released with cause.  Profit. 

[hookem48 4857]

1 hour ago, elguapo said:

That would describe me after wrestling with my dog 

[derpyhorndog 2702]

48 minutes ago, CurlyDumps said:

There is no audio recording that is going to exonerate Beard.  

Fiancée: "Chris, it has been over three years. If you don't commit right fucking now that we will go to the courthouse tomorrow and make it official, I sweater god I will send you to the courthouse myself. You want to know how? First, I'm going to beat the shit out of you best I can. Then, I'm going to call the cops while I proceed to rough myself up. When they get here, I will show them the marks and explain my version of what is about to happen - let the whole world know you're a piece of shit woman abuser. I will drag your name through the mud with everyone we know, your family, and every media outlet that will listen. I will tell the court that you are unfit to be around your teenage daughter, and apply to be her guardian. I will ruin your your career, your relationships, everything I possibly can. You will lose everything." 

Beard: "K. You are literally insane."

Fiancée: "Last chance. I am dead serious, you muledick. [locks door behind her]."

Beard: "No."

[tumbling/screaming ensues]

[MoJames 8258]

[derpyhorndog 2702]

Just now, MoJames said:

It's hyperbolic for emphasis, but equally absurd to taking the position that there is literally no potential audio recording that could exonerate.

[MAUFRAIS 6740]

I watched Gone Girl last night.

[MoJames 8258]

1 minute ago, derpyhorndog said:

It's hyperbolic for emphasis, but equally absurd to taking the position that there is literally no potential audio recording that could exonerate.

[hobbes2702 13479]

2 hours ago, po elvis said:

 

so now he beat her up?

It sounds from reports that he slapped her in the face, choked her, and dragged her off the bed. Bruises, bite marks, etc. What is your definition of “beat her up”?

[CycleTex87 3037]

1 hour ago, elguapo said:

If there was some recording that existed that proves he was just defending himself the whole time, wouldn't his lawyer have gotten it out there in public by now?

No

[CycleTex87 3037]

16 minutes ago, hookem48 said:

That would describe me after wrestling with my dog 

I thought the exact same thing.

[totallynotabuttpirate 5484]

6 minutes ago, hobbes2702 said:

..... What is your definition of “beat her up”?

[Dahobbs 18324]

11 minutes ago, Hookem2147 said:

Leach vs Texas Tech was never fully resolved and resulted in lawsuit after lawsuit with Leach searching for his money. I wouldn’t consider that a good example or a path I want this situation to follow.

Yes it was. It went as far as a lawsuit can go. While the Texas Supreme Court didn't rubberstamp the appellate decision, its denial of the petition for review effectively ended the lawsuit and left the appellate decision as the de facto ruling on Texas law. Sure, Leach could have kept litigating for some sort of declaration that Tech didn't give him due process. But he could never get any money from Tech, particularly the buyout, which is what we are talking about.  The other lawsuits you're talking about related to open records requests. Leach wasn't a party to them, and they could not compel Tech to pay his buyout. 

[Grade of D as in David 13255]

19 minutes ago, hookem48 said:

That would describe me after wrestling with my dog 

 

2 minutes ago, CycleTex87 said:

I thought the exact same thing.

It's ok because it's your dog.

 

 

[Guest]

3 hours ago, Deej said:

Some of y'all are going to be disappointed when we keep him around, it sounds like. 

Hate to have any of you on a jury, with your knack for sniffing out the truth without evidence. 

I’ll fist myself if he stays

[MAUFRAIS 6740]

Well now I can’t change my mind.

[Briuis 61]

35 minutes ago, Loop 1604 said:

So you think a known domestic abuser should stay on as head coach?

How is he a "known domestic abuser" ? 

"Known" would indicate that he has either been convicted of a crime involving domestic violence or has a well documented history of encounters with the cops regarding domestic violence. 

 

 

 

[Guest]

3 hours ago, royiv said:

Sounds like you had plenty of chances to just walk away before punching a woman and you didn't take them. 

Yep. Unless she’s blocking your exit with a knife, that made little sense as I read it. It’s funny, like Indiana Jones shooting the swordsman. 

[Guest]

3 hours ago, petscii said:

While he was sitting in the room thinking about her and about how terrible she was, he should have stopped and thought this relationship was going to cost him his job.

The first words out of his mouth to Texas should have been "I have shamed the university by my actions.  Here is my resignation"

He's gone before Friday 5:30pm central is my bet.

20+ years ago a few members of the Baylor baseball team did some horrible animal cruelty.   People still refer to the entire team as catkillers.  

He's got to go.  Everyone knows this.  

 

Baseball team is a bunch of winners relative to their rapist football buddies and murderous hoopsters. 

[petscii 1195]

13 minutes ago, Porterhouse said:

I’ll fist myself if he stays

You were doing that anyways...

[Guest]

2 hours ago, orangebird said:

As I've said before, if Beard is guilty as charged, then his ass needs to be gone.

But I'm fine with the process the administration is using.  Suspend him until we have all the facts and a clear understanding of what happened.  Then if the facts do indeed bear out that Beard had culpability in the situation, then yes, fire him under the conduct clause of the contract.

You don't want to fire him prematurely, though, and then have it come out later that his firing happened to be unjust.  If that were to happen, we would never be able to land another coach worth a shit here.  So yes, caution and due process is an absolute must, even if it means that things are proceeding slower than we would like.

His firing would be just regardless of what happens. For having terrible judgement - at the VERY least - of being with this crazy bitch. It’s unfathomable how he’s still, technically, employed. 

[CustersDoctor 585]

As a person who wears glasses, I can tell you almost nothing makes me angrier faster than somebody messing with my glasses. Doesn't matter to me if they did it in jest or anger. Doesn't matter your gender, race, size or relationship. You pull my glasses off my face and I'm going full force swinging, kicking, punching, hair pulling... You might be bigger than me and end up kicking my arse, but you will regret tearing the glasses off of my face.

[Herpa Derpa 6344]

2 hours ago, HookEm said:

Either way, I'm willing to wait to see all the facts presented before making a judgement.

 

1 hour ago, Loop 1604 said:

They are both fucking idiots and do not need to have any further association with the University of Texas. 

If idiocy was a disqualification for association with UT, this board would be a ghost town.

 

35 minutes ago, hookem48 said:

That would describe me after wrestling with my dog 

18 minutes ago, CycleTex87 said:

I thought the exact same thing.

There is help for you both.

[Horn Dog 10158]

37 minutes ago, hookem48 said:

That would describe me after wrestling with my dog 

LOL.  Let your dog it will never by a Texas basketball/football coach now!   Softball is still a possibility though.

[Guest]

2 hours ago, Fondren & Main said:

My hope is that he will be cleared and that they will.  If he's guilty then so be it.  I would think they will wait until all the facts come out so that they don't repeat what happened to Kendall Sanders and Montrell Meander or even the Duke La Crosse case.

Who the fuck is Duke La Crosse?  He sounds hot. Can he fist me?

[Guest]

1 hour ago, Born to Run said:

Chick left his ass for hours on the side of the road, dumped his weed and beer out, then started attacking him.

You gtfo immediately and either call the cops then or the next day and get a restraining order.

Continuing to escalate and kick her out is a terrible move. Sure defend yourself when a knife is drawn, or better yet gtfo before the knife is drawn and the need to punch a woman comes up. Why invite legal or physical harm?

User name most definitely checks out. But I totally agree with you. Escalating it to the point where she brandishes a weapon is not smart. But I’ll allow it because he was 19 and hit her in the forehead. Makes me chuckle. 

[CTC2 2865]

34 minutes ago, Porterhouse said:

I’ll fist myself if he stays

 

[Native Horn 3581]

16 minutes ago, Horn Dog said:

LOL.  Let your dog it will never by a Texas basketball/football coach now!   Softball is still a possibility though.

Translation, por favor?

[strangulation! 1716]

1 hour ago, Had Enough said:

I’m curious on the strangulation discussion from this. During and after what? Sounds like I suffer from strangulation quite often.

[ztejas 44227]

Page 6 of this thread: "Man, this is a total shit sandwich. Are we the most cursed program in the country or what? Just when things were looking up."

Page 60 of this thread: "Hypothetically - a woman is shooting you in the face with a shotgun. Is it acceptable to attempt to pry the gun away from her?"

[Tylerocks 2603]

37 minutes ago, CustersDoctor said:

As a person who wears glasses, I can tell you almost nothing makes me angrier faster than somebody messing with my glasses. Doesn't matter to me if they did it in jest or anger. Doesn't matter your gender, race, size or relationship. You pull my glasses off my face and I'm going full force swinging, kicking, punching, hair pulling... You might be bigger than me and end up kicking my arse, but you will regret tearing the glasses off of my face.

Whatever you say, Poindexter.

[Loop 1604 227]

21 minutes ago, ztejas said:

Page 6 of this thread: "Man, this is a total shit sandwich. Are we the most cursed program in the country or what? Just when things were looking up."

Page 60 of this thread: "Hypothetically - a woman is shooting you in the face with a shotgun. Is it acceptable to attempt to pry the gun away from her?"

Page 99: 

[MoJames 8258]

[Fondren & Main 6903]

[ATXbronco 4507]

1 hour ago, hobbes2702 said:

It sounds from reports that he slapped her in the face, choked her, and dragged her off the bed. Bruises, bite marks, etc. What is your definition of “beat her up”?

Not that I'm taking any sides because I'm not - we don 't have enough info for anyone to form opinions yet.
But I wanted to use this to point out how everyone reads the police report differently.   Or rather, everyone is going to "translate" the report differently.
And most don't read it at all.

"slapped her in the face"
I didn't see anything at all in the report that suggested he slapped her or struck her with his hand in any manner.

"choked her"
This one is totally up on the air for me.  Might have been a choke but based on how he used an arm rather than hands, I tend to think it's slightly more likely that he was restraining her.  

"dragged her off the bed"
He was the one in the guest room bed, reading his book (I guess you might say de-escalating?) and she walked in on him.
So, since he was the one on the bed first, I'd say it's slightly more likely that he shoved/kicked her off of him, off the side of the bed.  

"Bruises"
Hard to know if this is because she was kicked/shoved off of him, off the side of the bed and onto the floor.  Or if it's from something else.  She never indicated that he "hit" her, so it's unlikely that it's from any striking.  

"bite marks"
lol WTF, Beard.  I have zero ideas on how/why this might have happened.  

"What is your definition of “beat her up”"
I know that social justice warriors (not calling you one) like to think it's black vs white.  1's vs 0's.  On vs. Off.  But in real life there is so much gray area in between a verbal argument vs beating someone up, but in my mind it requires punching someone at least once to fall under the category of "beating someone up".  Anything else might be physical abuse or physically injured or whatnot.   

I'm not doing any arguing here.  Just typing out stuff that's been floating around in my brain the last couple of days.

[Cousin Strawberry 1273]

6 minutes ago, ATXbronco said:

bite marks"
lol WTF, Beard.  I have zero ideas on how/why this might have happened.

She was choking him from behind and her bit her to get her off of him and stop.

[TexasTroll 454]

2 hours ago, Born to Run said:

Chick left his ass for hours on the side of the road, dumped his weed and beer out, then started attacking him.

You gtfo immediately and either call the cops then or the next day and get a restraining order.

Continuing to escalate and kick her out is a terrible move. Sure defend yourself when a knife is drawn, or better yet gtfo before the knife is drawn and the need to punch a woman comes up. Why invite legal or physical harm?

Equal rights

equal fights

[4th and 5 5006]

3 hours ago, CooterBrown said:

No worries.  The $5M deposit + a one way plane ticket out of state for a signed confession that it was made up and any injuries were self inflicted she started the physical altercation and he was just defending himself will exonerate him.

FIFY, and this may be closer than you think

[royiv 9791]

8 minutes ago, ATXbronco said:

Not that I'm taking any sides because I'm not - we don 't have enough info for anyone to form opinions yet.
But I wanted to use this to point out how everyone reads the police report differently.   Or rather, everyone is going to "translate" the report differently.
And most don't read it at all.

FWIW, the affidavit states that she went back to the master bedroom after she snatched and broke the glasses in the guest bedroom. Her story is that he then came to the master bedroom 10-15 minutes later and that's where he allegedly pulled her out of the bed. If that part of the story is true, it throws a lot of doubt on the self defense theory. Since none of us were there, no one here will ever know exactly what happened.

[Eugene11 379]

1 hour ago, ztejas said:

 

Page 60 of this thread: "Hypothetically - a woman is shooting you in the face with a shotgun. Is it acceptable to attempt to pry the gun away from her?"

as long as you don't hit her.  because it is never ever ok to hit a women.  i mean like never ever ever.   just walk away.   you can reasonably just walk away from a women.  but if you are in the same situation with a dude its ok to hit him.  because you cant just walk away from that kind of situation...... 

[ATXbronco 4507]

8 minutes ago, royiv said:

FWIW, the affidavit states that she went back to the master bedroom after she snatched and broke the glasses in the guest bedroom. Her story is that he then came to the master bedroom 10-15 minutes later and that's where he allegedly pulled her out of the bed. If that part of the story is true, it throws a lot of doubt on the self defense theory. Since none of us were there, no one here will ever know exactly what happened.

Thanks for the correction.... I remember that part now.