Jump to content

Peanut Tillman got a new job. He's now an FBI agent.

Goo Punch

By Goo Punch
in Football

 Share

Recommended Posts

Tex Pete

Tex Pete 20194

Posted
Posted

I know at least one Surly poster played HS ball with Charles. Maybe he’ll chime in.

BTW, Charles is a very good dude. Well thought of by his HS, college, and pro teammates to this day. Truly cares about other people, and I think his FBI venture speaks to that. He’s a guy who recognizes he’s been given a platform to help people around him. And he’s an Army brat who was raised to work hard and get along with all types of people. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
South Austin

South Austin 52170

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, hookemATL said:

How exactly does one become an FBI agent?  IIRC he hasn’t been retired all that long. I assume there is some formal criminal justice education, but after that did he have to do any time in PDs or he is able to just start the FBI training academy?

Was curious about that.  According to Wiki:

Quote

The applicant must also hold U.S. citizenship, be of high moral character, have a clean record, and hold at least a four-year bachelor's degree. At least three years of professional work experience prior to application is also required.

Wikipedia

I wonder what his three years professional work experience was outside of football. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
South Austin

South Austin 52170

Posted
Posted
Just now, Tex Pete said:

It doesn’t say the work experience can’t be football. 

I understand, and I’m not arguing there’s no value to the FBI in the discipline of career in professional football. But seems like you might be a bit behind the curve if you start at the FBI Academy with no significant experience in law enforcement.

But good for Tillman. It’s not an easy career choice after retirement from the NFL.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
TwiceHorn

TwiceHorn 31322

Posted
Posted (edited)
43 minutes ago, hookemATL said:

How exactly does one become an FBI agent?  IIRC he hasn’t been retired all that long. I assume there is some formal criminal justice education, but after that did he have to do any time in PDs or he is able to just start the FBI training academy?

There is no specific qualification for thr FBI, other than a degree.  They do have a fondness for accountants and lawyers.  And they take dipshits straight out of college frequently, but you are not eligible to be a Special Agent gman until you have acquired the experience.

You can be reasonably assured that he didn't smoke a lot of pot, or survived a polygraph on that issue.

Edited by TwiceHorn
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Chili dog

Chili dog 1787

Posted
Posted

Yeah, as Tex Pete said, I played with the guy in high school. We were both safeties. He moved to corner after I graduated. I was a year ahead of him. Hell of a guy. We had four or five other guys on that team we all thought were more likely to make it to the league than Charles. Charles just out-worked all of us. And he was a goofy mother fucker. I’ll never forget watching him cover Roy at DKR and being shocked by how well he did. I assumed he’d get smoked. And then going to his house to watch his college highlight film right before the draft and being twice as shocked. His forty time dropped from a 4.7 in high school to a 4.41 in college. We lost touch after he moved to Chicago. My dad worked with his dad for a long time, so I kinda kept up that way. Really proud of that dude. Very humble, too. 

  • Like 8
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Chili dog

Chili dog 1787

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, TwiceHorn said:

There is no specific qualification for thr FBI, other than a degree.  They do have a fondness for accountants and lawyers.  And they take dipshits straight out of college frequently, but you are not eligible to be a Special Agent gman until you have acquired the experience.

You can be reasonably assured that he didn't smoke a lot of pot, or survived a polygraph on that issue.

It’s not whether or not you’ve smoked pot, it’s whether you lie about it that the feds care about. I’ve heard they’ll even give you a pass on coke if you’re honest and aren’t currently or recently using. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest

Guest

Posted
Posted
3 hours ago, South Austin said:

I understand, and I’m not arguing there’s no value to the FBI in the discipline of career in professional football. But seems like you might be a bit behind the curve if you start at the FBI Academy with no significant experience in law enforcement.

But good for Tillman. It’s not an easy career choice after retirement from the NFL.

As opposed to the NFL, He could have been sitting around flying a desk in the Air Force, right?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Chili dog

Chili dog 1787

Posted
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, NeverMarryAStripper said:

Seems a little hypocritical when their current program is to lock users up for as long as possible and confiscate all of their worldly possessions so that the Montgomery County Sheriffs Department can buy a margarita machine for their office

So you’re saying a federal agency is giving proceeds from marijuana raids to a state agency, and that state agency is using those funds for margarita machines??? You got a link? 

Edited by Chili dog
In other words, I don’t believe you.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
NeverMarryAStripper

NeverMarryAStripper 21784

Posted
Posted

Well, the funds probably came from their own armed robbery asset forfeiture profits, but a margarita machine was one of the things that they purchased.  I'm sure it necessary for them to perform their job as heroes and return to their families safely at night.  I was living in Montgomery County when the DA finally admitted to the allegations, after of course denying them repeatedly.  Kind of like committing perjury, one of the other things that gets ordinary citizens locked up.  

The law also limited how law enforcement can spend the money they seize, banning officials from using it to pay for things like margarita machines, as former Montgomery County District Attorney Michael McDougal did in 2005

So, yes I have a problem with the FBI saying past drug use is okay for their agents when they are using it as an excuse for locking up ordinary citizens and seizing their property.

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
dingleberryswitzer

dingleberryswitzer 2724

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, Chili dog said:

It’s not whether or not you’ve smoked pot, it’s whether you lie about it that the feds care about. I’ve heard they’ll even give you a pass on coke if you’re honest and aren’t currently or recently using. 

When I applied (never got past the multiple choice test  phase ) they only cared about weed if it was within a year or two years  (can't remember)  they even went as  far as to say if you smoked  51 weeks ago, they could postpone  your polygraph such that you can say it's been a year. 

And yea, I was almost fresh out of college when I applied.  Was hoping to work in cyber crime stuff .  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Chili dog

Chili dog 1787

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, NeverMarryAStripper said:

Well, the funds probably came from their own armed robbery asset forfeiture profits, but a margarita machine was one of the things that they purchased.  I'm sure it necessary for them to perform their job as heroes and return to their families safely at night.  I was living in Montgomery County when the DA finally admitted to the allegations, after of course denying them repeatedly.  Kind of like committing perjury, one of the other things that gets ordinary citizens locked up.  

The law also limited how law enforcement can spend the money they seize, banning officials from using it to pay for things like margarita machines, as former Montgomery County District Attorney Michael McDougal did in 2005

So, yes I have a problem with the FBI saying past drug use is okay for their agents when they are using it as an excuse for locking up ordinary citizens and seizing their property.

 

I’m not doubting that a bunch of local elected officials misused proceeds from lawful forfeitures. That happens all the time. But those assets are acquired from local law enforcement operations, not from federal investigations. You need to understand the difference. 

Second, there is a huge difference between use and SALES. If the Feds are involved, it’s about drug sales of tremendous amounts. Pounds and pounds. Probably hundreds of pounds if it’s weed. They don’t care if you used it. Many of them probably used it. In Texas, use isn’t even illegal. Possession is illegal, but not use, ironically. So you can tell a cop who smells weed from your car that you don’t have any of the weed he smells because you just smoked it all, and you won’t be arrested. Of course, he will tear your car apart searching it because you just gave him probable cause. 

So they’re not really being hypocrites. However, if you’ve been a drug dealer, you’re fucked and they won’t hire you, just like you’re fucked if you’re caught currently selling drugs. See the consistency there? So call the Feds whatever you want; hate drug laws all you want, but understand that what you are calling hypocrisy isn’t really hypocrisy. 

Further, do you really have a problem with seizing the proceeds of criminal activity? Is it wrong to use drug money to pay for court appointed attorneys, or would you rather, as a tax payer (I’m making a big assumption there), pay for those attorneys yourself? I understand the argument that we should raise the burden of proof required to seize the assets, but the cocksuckers who break the law should lose all rights to their ill-gotten gains. I’ll concede that a margarita machine is not an appropriate use of the seized funds. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
TwiceHorn

TwiceHorn 31322

Posted
Posted
11 minutes ago, Chili dog said:

I’m not doubting that a bunch of local elected officials misused proceeds from lawful forfeitures. That happens all the time. But those assets are acquired from local law enforcement operations, not from federal investigations. You need to understand the difference. 

Second, there is a huge difference between use and SALES. If the Feds are involved, it’s about drug sales of tremendous amounts. Pounds and pounds. Probably hundreds of pounds if it’s weed. They don’t care if you used it. Many of them probably used it. In Texas, use isn’t even illegal. Possession is illegal, but not use, ironically. So you can tell a cop who smells weed from your car that you don’t have any of the weed he smells because you just smoked it all, and you won’t be arrested. Of course, he will tear your car apart searching it because you just gave him probable cause. 

So they’re not really being hypocrites. However, if you’ve been a drug dealer, you’re fucked and they won’t hire you, just like you’re fucked if you’re caught currently selling drugs. See the consistency there? So call the Feds whatever you want; hate drug laws all you want, but understand that what you are calling hypocrisy isn’t really hypocrisy. 

Further, do you really have a problem with seizing the proceeds of criminal activity? Is it wrong to use drug money to pay for court appointed attorneys, or would you rather, as a tax payer (I’m making a big assumption there), pay for those attorneys yourself? I understand the argument that we should raise the burden of proof required to seize the assets, but the cocksuckers who break the law should lose all rights to their ill-gotten gains. I’ll concede that a margarita machine is not an appropriate use of the seized funds. 

The feds seize things without a conviction all the time.  They may not use it for margarita machines, but that doesn't make it right.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Chili dog

Chili dog 1787

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

The feds seize things without a conviction all the time.  They may not use it for margarita machines, but that doesn't make it right.

That is true. What isn’t true is that feds seized money and then gave it to a local state agency. Feds keep their seizures and state agencies keep theirs. 

I am in the camp that you’d better be able to prove the crime if you’re taking the assets, though. The burden is currently too low. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Chili dog

Chili dog 1787

Posted
Posted (edited)
4 minutes ago, NeverMarryAStripper said:

It's a civil proceeding that doesn't require a criminal conviction, or even a criminal indictment.

That’s correct. But you can raise the burden from preponderance of the evidence to clear and convincing and require more proof. That would put it at the same burden required to remove kids from a home or commit someone to a mental hospital. And it should probably take place after the case is adjudicated. 

Edited by Chili dog
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Chili dog

Chili dog 1787

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, Tex Pete said:

When his career ended, he wrote (or co-wrote, whatever) a book for teens. He also came back to Texas and helped raise money for his hometown ISD’s educational foundation. He is a “normal” person who seeks to do good. 

Still married to his high school sweetheart, too. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Chili dog

Chili dog 1787

Posted
Posted

Charles was a big prankster, too. All the DBs used to jack with the linemen. Charles and this other kid Jason used to put icy hot in the fat guys’ jock straps. They put it in one of our DT’s boxers that he had to wear to school. It was hilarious watching their faces change as their nuts started to burn. 

I remember when they got this kid Lavonce, our LT who went on to play at North Texas. Lavonce went after Jason first, and Jason curled up in his locker screaming, “Charles did it; Charles did it; Charles did it!” A chase ensued. Charles was naked, so he couldn’t run outside. The other fat guys grabbed ahold of him and Lavonce used Charles’s face to wipe up the icy hot. Needless to say, it cracked me up to see that guy on my TV every Sunday. 

  • Like 2
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
PsychMike

PsychMike 1539

Posted
Posted

This article sheds more light on his qualifications.

Quote

Tillman has reportedly expressed interest in joining the FBI for years, to the point that he occasionally trained with law enforcement officers during the offseason while still an active NFL player. Tillman has a degree in criminal justice from the University of Louisiana at Lafayette.

https://sports.yahoo.com/ex-nfl-star-charles-tillman-135000488.html?src=rss

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
hornimal

hornimal 80

Posted
Posted
On 2/27/2019 at 10:19 AM, Chili dog said:

Charles was a big prankster, too. All the DBs used to jack with the linemen. Charles and these other kids named: takashi, gilbert, and booger used to put liquid heat in the fat guys’ jock straps. They put it in one of our DT’s boxers that he had to wear to school. It was hilarious watching their faces change as their nuts started to burn. 

liquid-heat.png?w=600&h=358

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
 Share
Go to topic listing


Football ... Basketball ... Baseball ... Other Sports ... Futbol ... 🤫995🤫 ... Gambling ... Movies & TV ... Music ... Hobbies ... Lulz ... Food & Travel ... Daily Texan ... Business and Markets ... Cloak Room ... Help ... For Sale ... Board Discussion ... Subscribe!... Donate!... Advertise... COOKIE MONSTER!

×
×
  • Create New...