This story is closed for comments.

Oldest First
  • HANS FOR PRESIDENT!!!!! JK Oct 1, 2013

    As far as other news outlets reporting a technicalty on the judge's name, why doesn't the headline read "Charges Dropped, or Cae Disissed" instead of "not guilty"?

  • HANS FOR PRESIDENT!!!!! JK Oct 1, 2013

    whats the point of the judicial system if they will not hold up the law? Maybe the victim never showed up to court and they dismissed the case? People need to understand that if you do not show up as the victim in a court case, there isn't much that can be done.

    johnny2times
    ==========================================

    A lot of assuming there. What if that wasn't the case and the law was upheld? You said maybe she didn't show up.

    Maybe she didn't have to. Maybe her lawyer could in her place. Maybe she lied. Maybe he was falsely accused or arrested and needed to be exonerated. Maybe it was her fault and she was being vendictive. Maybe it was a technicality. Either way, a judge found him not guilty based on evidence before him. That's law upheld

  • this is fdup Sep 30, 2013

    Other new media outlets have reported the warrant read the protection order was issued by another Judge not Judge Knox this was her given reason not based on if he actually violated the order.She let him off on a technicality that should be appealed by the DA's office.

  • johnny2times Sep 30, 2013

    whats the point of the judicial system if they will not hold up the law? Maybe the victim never showed up to court and they dismissed the case? People need to understand that if you do not show up as the victim in a court case, there isn't much that can be done.

  • tina2117 Sep 30, 2013

    WTVD says the charges were dropped & that the recent charge stemmed from a parking ticket. He paid for a parking ticket the wife got on a family vehicle. He paid it and wrote a letter telling her he'd deduct the amount he paid from child support. He had their son take her the letter when he returned from visitation with the father. The violation was communicating with her through a third person which is prohibited by the order.

  • HANS FOR PRESIDENT!!!!! JK Sep 30, 2013

    Ithey believed in him enough to keep him last time when he did make a mistake they should have no problem rehiring him since he was cleared of wrongdoing

  • HANS FOR PRESIDENT!!!!! JK Sep 30, 2013

    Wow! I'm surprised to read the first 5 posts. Yes, he was found not guilty THIS time. But there was a previous incident that he was GUILTY of doing. The school was correct to part ways with this trouble in the making.

    DeathRow-IFeelYourPain-NOT
    __________________________________________

    Previous incident over. No double jeopardy. If they fired him for being arrested for something he was found not guilty of this time, he should be reinstated. Two sides to every story. What if she made the contact up that got him arrested???? Still think he should be canned then?

  • keithjinnc Sep 30, 2013

    Domestic cases are always a mess in the judicial system. It’s a “he” said “she” said situation, and with a lot of these incidents what “he” or “she” may have said at the time one of them gets arrested is not what they say at trial. Loss of jobs which result in the inability of one to pay their bills, like support, often times play a factor in what is said at trial. Regardless, second run-in with law enforcement authorities for similar incidents is a poor representation for the school, not to mention a poor example to the students who he is supposed to be mentoring.

  • DeathRow-IFeelYourPain-NOT Sep 30, 2013

    Wow! I'm surprised to read the first 5 posts. Yes, he was found not guilty THIS time. But there was a previous incident that he was GUILTY of doing. The school was correct to part ways with this trouble in the making.

  • adeal064 Sep 30, 2013

    Honestly, is this as news worthy, as what is going on with our tyranny gov't officials?! Who cares about him loosing his job, I bet many others have done exactly as he has. Though we hear nothing of them... That's it, I'm leaving country, setting forth on a pilgrimage, as our ancestors did in finding 'FREE land' to prosper!

  • Obamacare for everyone Sep 30, 2013

    He should sue the school for his firing. Sounds just like the way our beloved NCAA rules committee makes decisions without hearing any factual evidence first.

  • mrr03 Sep 30, 2013

    Give the man his job back and move on

  • Wolfpack Fanatic Sep 30, 2013

    No,it is GUILTY until proven INNOCENT!

  • feistyredhead2001 Sep 30, 2013

    I thought in this country it was INNOCENT UNTIL PROVEN GUILTY??.... guess I was wrong...

  • gingerlynn Sep 30, 2013

    Can you say Cart Before Horse?

Oldest First