Bills OL Coach arrested

[TKnight24]

#Bills OL coach Aaron Kromer was arrested last night and charged with battery with intent to cause bodily harm, per the Walton County Jail.

— Ian Rapoport (@RapSheet)

July 12, 2015

[ColtsBlueFL]

Wow, exempt list for a coach...  (a guess, but it is the new policy for NFL employees, not just players)

 

Interesting to see how Goodell / NFL handle this investigation and future actions.

[amfootball]

Wow, exempt list for a coach...  (a guess, but it is the new policy for NFL employees, not just players)

 

Interesting to see how Goodell / NFL handle this investigation and future actions.

I will save you the suspense. They will mess it up royally.

[shakedownstreet]

threw the kid's fishing poles in the water, tossed one kid to the ground, punched another in the face, and then threatened to kill his entire family

 

         

[ColtsBlueFL]

I will save you the suspense. They will mess it up royally.

 

define...

[southwest1]

threw the kid's fishing poles in the water, tossed one kid to the ground, punched another in the face, and then threatened to kill his entire family

 

         

Yeah, that about sums this whole situation up SDS. Punching a kid over moving a lawn chair is beyond ridiculous. Even if the boy took the chair without asking, there is no justification for doing this. 

 

Is this Rex Ryan bravado masquerading as invincibility among the Bills coaching staff? I'm not blaming Rex here just wondering if this guy is a colossal jerk or if he has an addiction to alcohol that he needs to get a handle on. Throw the book at Mr. Kromer & give him the steepest penalty possible Roger Goodell. Coaches must learn that they are not bullet proof & that there are consequences to stupidity. JMO.

 

What kind of example is Aaron setting for his own son? That it's okay to fly off at the handle & abuse a little kid? Unbelievable man. I don't expect coaches to be saints, but I do expect them to be descent human beings who resolve disagreements in a rational manner. 

 

There's no way Kromer can rationalize what he did. I'd suspend him 10 games minimum & he better explain to me why he doesn't deserve to be fired. Fall on your symbolic sword & take full responsibility for being a complete arrogant fool here. 

 

Remember, that Jets coach that got suspended for I think trying to trip a player running near the sidelines during a game? I don't think he's in the league anymore either, but I can't swear to it. 

[ruksak]

First of all, what do they mean by "kids"? Often times when the media says "kids", they're referring to "kids" that stand 6'3 and weigh 250 pounds. 

 

Secondly, as with most cases, I'll wait until the details come out to pass judgement. It is entirely possible those kids lied, and whatever it is they did, they deserved to get thrown into the water with their fishing poles. 

 

I almost got into a fight with some "kids" that were fishing in the backyard community pond of a home I had many years ago. It was a community pond, but it was against the rules to fish in the pond (#1) and it was against the rules to access the pond without permission from a homeowner (#2) and it was against the rules to stand or sit on a homeowners property without their permission (#3).

 

When I asked them to leave (nicely), I was told to go ___ myself by these "kids" who were 15-16 years old and every bit as tall as myself. I told them I'll just call the cops, and what one of them said next was so outrageous I couldn't believe it. "Do that and we'll them you were trying to lure us into your house for ____" (won't say exactly what they told me here, use your imagination). 

 

At that point, I went into berserker mode, saying only "I hope you ___'s can swim". 

 

They left. 

 

Point being, just because this guy was arrested, it may not mean he was in the wrong. It may mean the kids lied and the police were in the wrong. That's why we see charges get dropped so often. This typically happens when the police wrongfully arrest someone. 

 

So we'll see. Until then, I'd wait to brand this guy as a lunatic who went on a rampage against "children". 

[crazycolt1]

First of all, what do they mean by "kids"? Often times when the media says "kids", they're referring to "kids" that stand 6'3 and weigh 250 pounds. 

 

Secondly, as with most cases, I'll wait until the details come out to pass judgement. It is entirely possible those kids lied, and whatever it is they did, they deserved to get thrown into the water with their fishing poles. 

 

I almost got into a fight with some "kids" that were fishing in the backyard community pond of a home I had many years ago. It was a community pond, but it was against the rules to fish in the pond (#1) and it was against the rules to access the pond without permission from a homeowner (#2) and it was against the rules to stand or sit on a homeowners property without their permission (#3).

 

When I asked them to leave (nicely), I was told to go ___ myself by these "kids" who were 15-16 years old and every bit as tall as myself. I told them I'll just call the cops, and what one of them said next was so outrageous I couldn't believe it. "Do that and we'll them you were trying to lure us into your house for ____" (won't say exactly what they told me here, use your imagination). 

 

At that point, I went into berserker mode, saying only "I hope you ___'s can swim". 

 

They left. 

 

Point being, just because this guy was arrested, it may not mean he was in the wrong. It may mean the kids lied and the police were in the wrong. That's why we see charges get dropped so often. This typically happens when the police wrongfully arrest someone. 

 

So we'll see. Until then, I'd wait to brand this guy as a lunatic who went on a rampage against "children". 

The second he put his hands on anyone he made himself in the wrong. Kids or no kids. Self defense? Yes, any other reason no.

[jvan1973]

He sounds like a stable guy

[ruksak]

The second he put his hands on anyone he made himself in the wrong. Kids or no kids. Self defense? Yes, any other reason no.

Are you absolutely positive they didn't threaten him? 

 

Because if they so much as hinted at threat, while on his property no less, he is perfectly warranted in using physical means to repel them. Ever see a drunk get thrown out of a bar for not leaving when asked? 

 

It's a myth that you cannot use any physical force against people who haven't touched you. There are a number of mitigating circumstances which may allow physical force without having been physically touched first.

 

Let's not pretend that teenagers don't operate with a smug sense of impunity and entitlement, as if they can do and say anything they want.

 

OR.....it's possible that this coach is just a hothead and he got carried away. 

 

We shall see. 

[Derakynn]

Seems to be an influx in justice warriors on these forums lately. I personally choose to reserve judgement in matters such as this. Why people just blatantly assume that some guy would start beating up some random kids without a valid reason is beyond me. It is way more common to be provoked. Not everyone is a mass murderer waiting for some perceived trigger. 

[ColtsBlueFL]

Wasn't this the same guy that anonymously leaked to Ian Rapoport last year about the Bears having buyers remorse, then coming clean about it later and ticking Aaron Rodgers off because of it?

 

Curious to see what an investigation truly uncovers as the whole story.

[Synthetic]

Seems to be an influx in justice warriors on these forums lately. I personally choose to reserve judgement in matters such as this. Why people just blatantly assume that some guy would start beating up some random kids without a valid reason is beyond me. It is way more common to be provoked. Not everyone is a mass murderer waiting for some perceived trigger. 

 

 

Nice way to humanize someone that was just arrested for battery.

 

Like it or not, he just got arrested. 

 

I am not what you call a "social justice warrior". I just like to point out how these athletes and coaches are humanized, yet if they didn't entertain the masses, i doubt anyone would make them out to be such heroes. When it's poor people involved, we're told to pull ourselves up by our own boot straps or other silly nonsense and it's our own fault for the problems that to happen to us. 

 

No one has said he started beating up on them randomly. Even if they provoked a "retaliation" as was suggested last week when that college player was arrested, it still don't make it right that he commits criminal acts that lands him in jail.

[Synthetic]

 

 

It's a myth that you cannot use any physical force against people who haven't touched you. There are a number of mitigating circumstances which may allow physical force without having been physically touched first.

 

 

 

 

 

There are laws against using physical force against people that didn't touch you.

 

The myth is believing these laws don't exist. 

[jvan1973]

There are laws against using physical force against people that didn't touch you.

The myth is believing these laws don't exist.

Can I get a link to that very broad law you speak of?

[southwest1]

Are you absolutely positive they didn't threaten him? 

 

Because if they so much as hinted at threat, while on his property no less, he is perfectly warranted in using physical means to repel them. Ever see a drunk get thrown out of a bar for not leaving when asked? 

 

It's a myth that you cannot use any physical force against people who haven't touched you. There are a number of mitigating circumstances which may allow physical force without having been physically touched first.

 

Let's not pretend that teenagers don't operate with a smug sense of impunity and entitlement, as if they can do and say anything they want.

 

OR.....it's possible that this coach is just a hothead and he got carried away. 

 

We shall see. 

I suppose it is possible that the teenagers in question were full of themselves thinking that they were top dogs beholden to no one but their own self gratification I guess. I just am leery of doing anything of an aggressive nature because today with concealed gun laws a person has no idea if a guy is packing heat or not &, if they are, it's best to keep them calm like a hostage negotiator situation. 

 

If these kids are lying trying to ruin another person's life, I wouldn't just dismiss a false police report either. You don't get a pass because you thought a false allegation was funny or you got ticked off. No, you wanna pretend to be an adult kid I'll treat you like 1 son. 

[southwest1]

First of all, what do they mean by "kids"? Often times when the media says "kids", they're referring to "kids" that stand 6'3 and weigh 250 pounds. 

 

Secondly, as with most cases, I'll wait until the details come out to pass judgement. It is entirely possible those kids lied, and whatever it is they did, they deserved to get thrown into the water with their fishing poles. 

 

I almost got into a fight with some "kids" that were fishing in the backyard community pond of a home I had many years ago. It was a community pond, but it was against the rules to fish in the pond (#1) and it was against the rules to access the pond without permission from a homeowner (#2) and it was against the rules to stand or sit on a homeowners property without their permission (#3).

 

When I asked them to leave (nicely), I was told to go ___ myself by these "kids" who were 15-16 years old and every bit as tall as myself. I told them I'll just call the cops, and what one of them said next was so outrageous I couldn't believe it. "Do that and we'll them you were trying to lure us into your house for ____" (won't say exactly what they told me here, use your imagination). 

 

At that point, I went into berserker mode, saying only "I hope you ___'s can swim". 

 

They left. 

 

Point being, just because this guy was arrested, it may not mean he was in the wrong. It may mean the kids lied and the police were in the wrong. That's why we see charges get dropped so often. This typically happens when the police wrongfully arrest someone. 

 

So we'll see. Until then, I'd wait to brand this guy as a lunatic who went on a rampage against "children". 

This is a good post Ruksak because if I learned anything from my own father regarding smart caboose people it is this: The tone of your voice can go along way to letting people know that you're not screwing around anymore & as long as you maintain your composure & display no weakness of intimidation people tend to change their tune real quick. Just to be clear here, I not advocating vigilantism or unprovoked retaliation. Just knowing the proper way to not let others walk all over you. 

 

Facial expressions & tone often indicates when a situation just got real & usually the right demeanor makes all the difference in the world. Let the authorities do what they are trained to do naturally, but at the end of the day, worst case scenario, I have 1 ace in the hole. I don't give a darn how big or muscular a guy is when I hit him with an aluminum crutch in the knee he's going to drop like a stone & they always do too. I'm not a violent person, but I will defend myself if necessary meaning I've given the aggressor several opportunities to walk away & they chose not to do so.  

[crazycolt1]

Are you absolutely positive they didn't threaten him? 

 

Because if they so much as hinted at threat, while on his property no less, he is perfectly warranted in using physical means to repel them. Ever see a drunk get thrown out of a bar for not leaving when asked? 

 

It's a myth that you cannot use any physical force against people who haven't touched you. There are a number of mitigating circumstances which may allow physical force without having been physically touched first.

 

Let's not pretend that teenagers don't operate with a smug sense of impunity and entitlement, as if they can do and say anything they want.

 

OR.....it's possible that this coach is just a hothead and he got carried away. 

 

We shall see. 

While each case is different it still is against the law to take the law into your own hands without a law being broken. If you or someone you are with are not in danger it is against the law to attack. Don't get me wrong as I understand with what your point is but the legality of it might be in question. Dishing out any punishment may or may not be needed but law wise you cant draw the first blood so to say. Being a minor has nothing to do with size. A minor may be smug as you say but till they break the law you cant strike them legally. He should have called the cops and let them handle it IMO. If they threatened him with what was stated that would have had to be proved. IMO he just got too mad and let his self get out of control. I could be wrong but I guess we will wait and see as you said.

[Bubbz]

Can I get a link to that very broad law you speak of?

In many states (maybe all) you can't forcibly remove people from your own property. I can't think of any other situation where you would be more justified using force on someone who hasn't touched you physically. If you can find a law stating where you can use force on someone who isn't physically harming you or posing a physical threat to someone else or yourself I would be mildly surprised

[ruksak]

In many states (maybe all) you can't forcibly remove people from your own property. I can't think of any other situation where you would be more justified using force on someone who hasn't touched you physically. If you can find a law stating where you can use force on someone who isn't physically harming you or posing a physical threat to someone else or yourself I would be mildly surprised

Assault. By it's very definition, does not require any actual contact between parties. It requires both the threat of bodily harm, as well as the apparent ability to carry out the threat. Yelling at someone is not assault. Getting in someones face and yelling at them may not necessarily be assault. Doing so with a rock, stick, or other potential weapon...IS assault. Getting in someones face while threatening to kick their butt, IS assault. 

 

What this looks like in practice;

 

Assaulting someone while presently committing the crime of trespassing (or many other crimes) may give cause for the "victim" to feel threatened enough to use reasonable physical measures to dissuade the assault, if the assailants do so with intimidation and suggestion of harm. 

 

It is ALWAYS best to call the police over a simple trespass, if possible. We simply don't know what occurred here, exactly. The coach apparently didn't file assault charges here, so that may be an indicator that he simply lost his temper and took things too far. Absolutely everything in this case depends on exactly what these "kids" did, acted like, and how they behaved toward the coach. 

 

I'm very interested in what Kromer has to say about this. 

[ruksak]

There are laws against using physical force against people that didn't touch you.

 

The myth is believing these laws don't exist. 

Under the right circumstances, there are many scenarios in which you can justifiably KILL someone who hasn't touched you. Not applying that to this case, just sayin'.....

[amfootball]

define...

See this past season and off-season ...

[jvan1973]

In many states (maybe all) you can't forcibly remove people from your own property. I can't think of any other situation where you would be more justified using force on someone who hasn't touched you physically. If you can find a law stating where you can use force on someone who isn't physically harming you or posing a physical threat to someone else or yourself I would be mildly surprised

If someone comes into my home (Indiana) without my consent or knowledge, I can lawfully shoot them

[Coffeedrinker]

First of all, what do they mean by "kids"? Often times when the media says "kids", they're referring to "kids" that stand 6'3 and weigh 250 pounds. 

 

Secondly, as with most cases, I'll wait until the details come out to pass judgement. It is entirely possible those kids lied, and whatever it is they did, they deserved to get thrown into the water with their fishing poles. 

 

I almost got into a fight with some "kids" that were fishing in the backyard community pond of a home I had many years ago. It was a community pond, but it was against the rules to fish in the pond (#1) and it was against the rules to access the pond without permission from a homeowner (#2) and it was against the rules to stand or sit on a homeowners property without their permission (#3).

 

When I asked them to leave (nicely), I was told to go ___ myself by these "kids" who were 15-16 years old and every bit as tall as myself. I told them I'll just call the cops, and what one of them said next was so outrageous I couldn't believe it. "Do that and we'll them you were trying to lure us into your house for ____" (won't say exactly what they told me here, use your imagination). 

 

At that point, I went into berserker mode, saying only "I hope you ___'s can swim". 

 

They left. 

 

Point being, just because this guy was arrested, it may not mean he was in the wrong. It may mean the kids lied and the police were in the wrong. That's why we see charges get dropped so often. This typically happens when the police wrongfully arrest someone. 

 

So we'll see. Until then, I'd wait to brand this guy as a lunatic who went on a rampage against "children". 

You are a voice of reason in a troubled, turbulent world.

[lollygagger8]

I saw "Bills" and "coach arrested" and immediately thought "uh oh who's feet did Rexy go after?" 

[BOTT]

threw the kid's fishing poles in the water, tossed one kid to the ground, punched another in the face, and then threatened to kill his entire family

 

         

Old school.....I like it.

[BOTT]

Can I get a link to that very broad law you speak of?

www.bullshat.com

[Synthetic]

Under the right circumstances, there are many scenarios in which you can justifiably KILL someone who hasn't touched you. Not applying that to this case, just sayin'.....

 

 

And under those circumstances, you'll be trialed by law and sent to prison. The state makes the laws, not the people, just sayin'. 

 

You can find murderers everyday in prison that argue their actions of killing an individual were justified because they're right and everyone is wrong. Just another reason to be glad we have a state, and not wild wild west law. 

[jvan1973]

And under those circumstances, you'll be trialed by law and sent to prison. The state makes the laws, not the people, just sayin'.

You can find murderers everyday in prison that argue their actions of killing an individual were justified because they're right and everyone is wrong. Just another reason to be glad we have a state, and not wild wild west law.

No, not really. If someone breaks into my house I can use whatever force necessary to remove then whether they are physically attacking me or not

[pacolts56]

The Bills front office must be absolutely delighted at the prospect that none other than Richie Incognito may have a position coach with an anger management problem.

[Coffeedrinker]

The truth will probably come out eventually but there are a couple of items that were mentioned in the article that no ones has yet to mention in this thread:

 

One, the coach's son confronted the trespassers, so at that point, if they were law abiding citizens they should have moved on and vacated the premises.

 

Two, After being confronted by the son, they did not leave, at that point the trespassers become criminals.

 

Three:  it's easy for people to sit back and say "he should have called the police.  But the truth is no one on this forum knows what was said at the son when he confronted the criminals.  They may have threatened him, they may have said they didn't care if they were using someone else's property.

 

Four:  The coach may have lost his temper but from the minimal reports so far, it sounds more like a case of the coach protecting his family and property from some criminals who made the conscience decision to break the law rather than moving on when they discovered they were on someone's property and using someone's stuff.  if that is the case, then he should be commended not arrested.

[ruksak]

No, not really. If someone breaks into my house I can use whatever force necessary to remove then whether they are physically attacking me or not

Castle Doctrine.   ((Indiana))

 

Under the right circumstances, this even applies to a home owner using deadly force against POLICE. This right is extended to your vehicle as well. 

[ruksak]

And under those circumstances, you'll be trialed by law and sent to prison. The state makes the laws, not the people, just sayin'. 

 

You can find murderers everyday in prison that argue their actions of killing an individual were justified because they're right and everyone is wrong. Just another reason to be glad we have a state, and not wild wild west law. 

Though I think you're incorrect on the specifics, I'll agree that using physical/lethal force is only something people should resort to when no other option exists. Err on the side of caution, and you'll find yourself avoiding wrongful imprisonment simply for defending yourself. 

 

Here is perhaps the most brutal and sickening abuse of castle doctrine laws, totally misunderstood and taken well beyond the spirit of the laws. 

 

The case of Byron Smith ((Warning, disturbing content))

 

[southwest1]

The Bills front office must be absolutely delighted at the prospect that none other than Richie Incognito may have a position coach with an anger management problem.

LOL! It does seem ironic that Mr. Incognito is not at the root of an incident like this one. No more pep talks about masculinity Ritchie. Just kidding! A very astute observation PAC56. 

[southwest1]

Castle Doctrine.   ((Indiana))

 

Under the right circumstances, this even applies to a home owner using deadly force against POLICE. This right is extended to your vehicle as well. 

There was a case in Madison, WI about 2 years ago where a burglar broke into a home & a teenager ill from school shot the intruder with his dad's glock. Right after he mowed the guy down, he called 911 to report it & the DA filed no charges since the damaged door & broken glass proved he entered the home illegally.

 

Susan Simon a female reporter on News 3 was troubled by it the use of deadly force but the kid was permitted to use lethal force & no charges were filed. I'm no legal expert but I do remember that WI case.  

[Synthetic]

Though I think you're incorrect on the specifics, I'll agree that using physical/lethal force is only something people should resort to when no other option exists. Err on the side of caution, and you'll find yourself avoiding wrongful imprisonment simply for defending yourself. 

 

Here is perhaps the most brutal and sickening abuse of castle doctrine laws, totally misunderstood and taken well beyond the spirit of the laws. 

 

The case of Byron Smith ((Warning, disturbing content))

 

 

 

 

I remember that case, that guy I believe just wanted to kill somebody, anybody. The way he described the killings said it all, one sick dude. 

[ruksak]

I remember that case, that guy I believe just wanted to kill somebody, anybody. The way he described the killings said it all, one sick dude. 

He had been robbed of thousands of dollars in family heirlooms, cash, and guns twice in the weeks leading up to it. Turns out, evidence showed the teenage boy he ended up murdering was the same punk who was breaking in on the previous occasions. 

 

I really had no problem with the general idea of what he did, setting a trap and "catching" them. But this guy.....my god he went full-psycho. Setting up a "shooting gallery" (as the prosecution described it) and then effectively executed both of the teens. He even waited until the next day to report the incident, leaving the dead teens laying wrapped in tarps in his basement. The reason he gave to the police the next day? He said he didn't want to bother the police on Thanksgiving. 

 

During an interview with the detective afterward, he described giving the girl he had already shot some 5 times a "Clean kill shot", placing the gun under her chin and murdering her. 

 

I always said that I didn't care what happens to people who break into a home, as I find it one of the most personally violating crimes there is, just below rape. But I never imagined a scenario where I would begin to feel empathy for the intruders, as I did with this case. 

 

Though I fully support Castle Doctrine and Stand Your Ground laws, this case is a prime example of the dangers of such self defense clauses, as some people don't bother to understand them, they operate with a sense of impunity, as if granted a license to kill. 

 

As a gun owner and a person with a permit to carry a sidearm, I honestly feel nobody should be allowed to buy a gun without passing a general knowledge test regarding gun laws, self defense statuettes, and other related material. We have to do such things to drive a car, so why not with guns, an implement meant only to kill. 

[crazycolt1]

There was a case in Madison, WI about 2 years ago where a burglar broke into a home & a teenager ill from school shot the intruder with his dad's glock. Right after he mowed the guy down, he called 911 to report it & the DA filed no charges since the damaged door & broken glass proved he entered the home illegally.

 

Susan Simon a female reporter on News 3 was troubled by it the use of deadly force but the kid was permitted to use lethal force & no charges were filed. I'm no legal expert but I do remember that WI case.  

After reading all these comments I can tell there are different laws from state to state just like opinions on what is legal or not. It seems like it is up to each case and if the prosecutor chooses to file charges. Years ago I had charges put on me for shooting a thief who was stealing a 4-speed transmission out of a smoke house that was on the property were I was living. I couldn't see who it was but he was running away with the transmission on his shoulder. I then in turn shot him after yelling at him to stop. I shot him with a 12 gauge shotgun from a pretty good distance and scattered him from his neck down to his buttocks. I was charged with assault with the intent to murder. At trial I was found not guilty by a jury because they found I had reasonable cause even though I was not being threatened or in danger. My point being each case is different and it is up to the prosecutor to call any charges made. At the time I was plenty scared after thinking I did the right thing but you never know, it could have went different.

[Bubbz]

If someone comes into my home (Indiana) without my consent or knowledge, I can lawfully shoot them

that's not true in every situation, but you have a point I guess

[southwest1]

After reading all these comments I can tell there are different laws from state to state just like opinions on what is legal or not. It seems like it is up to each case and if the prosecutor chooses to file charges. Years ago I had charges put on me for shooting a thief who was stealing a 4-speed transmission out of a smoke house that was on the property were I was living. I couldn't see who it was but he was running away with the transmission on his shoulder. I then in turn shot him after yelling at him to stop. I shot him with a 12 gauge shotgun from a pretty good distance and scattered him from his neck down to his buttocks. I was charged with assault with the intent to murder. At trial I was found not guilty by a jury because they found I had reasonable cause even though I was not being threatened or in danger. My point being each case is different and it is up to the prosecutor to call any charges made. At the time I was plenty scared after thinking I did the right thing but you never know, it could have went different.

I'm glad to hear that you were not found guilty of a crime CC1. You're a good guy to me & I'm glad it worked out well for you in the end. Yes, a district attorney's discretion about bring charges does seem to vary geographically speaking.