Georgia Southern suspends starting QB (coke) and DE (4 felonies)

Donate To GopherHole
After reading the police report, there are a few options for the cocaine finding:

1) At 80MPH, Wert threw the cocaine so hard it got far enough ahead of the car to hit the windshield. GSU does not have to worry about arm strength at QB.

2) The car was going much slower when the cocaine was thrown, but somehow he threw it towards the front of the car. GSU has a serious accuracy problem at QB.

3) The cocaine was previously on the car for some reason. Might have been his, might not be. I don’t think he would be convicted for simply having cocaine on the outside of his car. Not unless there was other evidence, like a positive blood test.

4) The field test for cocaine was wrong.

In the absence of other evidence, hard to see how he will be prosecuted.
 

I might buy that he didn’t know it was cocaine or how it got there if he didn’t go with the “it’s bird poop and I tried washing it off a couple days ago” line. That was clearly untrue which leads one to believe he was trying to cover up what he did know.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

If only that damn bird hadn’t been doing cocaine
 

Pompous Elitist said:
I mean, unless it was raining that night a wet, white paste on the car that tests positive for cocaine and some white powder residual around the nozzles and windshield only leads to one plausible conclusion. Unless you’re a GSU fan or convinced the police are at war with the black community.
Click to expand...

The roadsite kits are notoriously inaccurate


And this will be last post on subject

https://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/10/...-drug-test-sends-innocent-people-to-jail.html
 

salzie said:
The roadsite kits are notoriously inaccurate


And this will be last post on subject

https://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/10/...-drug-test-sends-innocent-people-to-jail.html
Click to expand...

Obviously any positive screening test needs to be followed up with definitive lab testing. This is standard practice among any medical or professional setting. If it isn’t then that law agency ought to be prosecuted for incompetence. That said most screening tests have relatively low false positives.
 


It is incredibly odd he would say it's bird poop when it was covering almost the entire hood like a spilled milk shake. Not to mention trying to evade police even if it was momentarily.
 

Obviously something isn't right. At some point the player is going to make a mistake in his poop story and everything will unravel if it hasn't yet. He'll still get off light though.
 

salzie said:
The roadsite kits are notoriously inaccurate


And this will be last post on subject

https://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/10/...-drug-test-sends-innocent-people-to-jail.html
Click to expand...

lol! no one gets arrested based solely on the results of a NIK test. usually, police aren't even testing suspected heroin these days because of the danger of fentanyl and carfentanyl. even with the NIK test, an officer needs to send the suspected substance to a lab for testing before trial. and even the lab tests aren't 100%. usually the NIK test is the last thing done in the investigation on the street. police need probable cause for an arrest. probable cause is not one piece of evidence.
 

Pompous Elitist said:
I mean, unless it was raining that night a wet, white paste on the car that tests positive for cocaine and some white powder residual around the nozzles and windshield only leads to one plausible conclusion. Unless you’re a GSU fan or convinced the police are at war with the black community.
Click to expand...

Turns out there was more than one plausible conclusion. And you did not have to be a GSU fan or be convinced the police are at war with the black community to remain open to that.

salzie’s skepticism about field tests, supported by a NYTimes article, was well placed, at least in this case.
 



I thought this was kind of funny. Below is an article that includes quotes from the arresting officer’s body camera. Here is an excerpt:

The arresting officer called his supervisor back, saying, “I took a picture of the test kit and it’s as pink as can be. It’s freaking me out because I stuck my finger in it.”

I am grateful to all police officers for doing a difficult and often dangerous job on behalf of all of us. And no doubt many strange things happen. I have no reason to believe the officer involved is anything but a good, professional cop.

But really, if the officer thought it might be a controlled substance, why did he stick his finger in it? Of course the same would be true of sticking a finger into suspected bird poop. I think a good rule of thumb is to never stick an unprotected finger into an unknown substance on a suspect’s car. Or anyone’s car. I follow that rule and I don’t even have police training.

The below is worth a click:

https://www.wtoc.com/2019/08/08/wtoc-obtains-georgia-southern-quarterback-arrest-video/
 

MrC said:
Turns out there was more than one plausible conclusion. And you did not have to be a GSU fan or be convinced the police are at war with the black community to remain open to that.

salzie’s skepticism about field tests, supported by a NYTimes article, was well placed, at least in this case.
Click to expand...

You’re correct nobody’s convicted and the test or tester can be faulty, but I stand by my statement. Surprising since you were one of the posse leaders in a far muddier case vs the players, no?

Interesting case all around...
 

MrC said:
I thought this was kind of funny. Below is an article that includes quotes from the arresting officer’s body camera. Here is an excerpt:

The arresting officer called his supervisor back, saying, “I took a picture of the test kit and it’s as pink as can be. It’s freaking me out because I stuck my finger in it.”

I am grateful to all police officers for doing a difficult and often dangerous job on behalf of all of us. And no doubt many strange things happen. I have no reason to believe the officer involved is anything but a good, professional cop.

But really, if the officer thought it might be a controlled substance, why did he stick his finger in it? Of course the same would be true of sticking a finger into suspected bird poop. I think a good rule of thumb is to never stick an unprotected finger into an unknown substance on a suspect’s car. Or anyone’s car. I follow that rule and I don’t even have police training.

The below is worth a click:

https://www.wtoc.com/2019/08/08/wtoc-obtains-georgia-southern-quarterback-arrest-video/
Click to expand...

As stated before until the definitive testing comes in nobody should ever plead guilty...the public defenders should know this and yet push for plea deals all too often. If a fraction of the time, money, and energy spent on...propaganda purposes...was spent on funding and/or educating competent legal defense (TBF public defenders are swamped and probably burned out) it would keep a lot of people out of jail and prison.

This doesn’t invalidate field testing properly done but obviously this officer and his superior should be written up and sat down. Some people aren’t cut out for law enforcement.
 




FMofDT said:
It is incredibly odd he would say it's bird poop when it was covering almost the entire hood like a spilled milk shake. Not to mention trying to evade police even if it was momentarily.
Click to expand...

Sounds like it actually was bird poop, but I'll offer this anecdotal explanation. Speaking from unfortunate experience, bird crap can be an incredible mess. You get a good load on the hood of your car, then try to wet it and wipe it when it's still a little damp? A spilled milkshake is exactly what it would look like unless you had a good twenty minutes or a hose or something so to use cleaning it. Just smears around. And then if that dries your mess is even bigger than when you started!
 

MrC said:
I thought this was kind of funny. Below is an article that includes quotes from the arresting officer’s body camera. Here is an excerpt:

The arresting officer called his supervisor back, saying, “I took a picture of the test kit and it’s as pink as can be. It’s freaking me out because I stuck my finger in it.”

I am grateful to all police officers for doing a difficult and often dangerous job on behalf of all of us. And no doubt many strange things happen. I have no reason to believe the officer involved is anything but a good, professional cop.

But really, if the officer thought it might be a controlled substance, why did he stick his finger in it? Of course the same would be true of sticking a finger into suspected bird poop. I think a good rule of thumb is to never stick an unprotected finger into an unknown substance on a suspect’s car. Or anyone’s car. I follow that rule and I don’t even have police training.

The below is worth a click:

https://www.wtoc.com/2019/08/08/wtoc-obtains-georgia-southern-quarterback-arrest-video/
Click to expand...

Am I the only who thought it was odd that he even thought to test it for Cocaine lol? I understand he drove for awhile to pull over in a lit area but still.
 

tato2001 said:
Sounds like it actually was bird poop, but I'll offer this anecdotal explanation. Speaking from unfortunate experience, bird crap can be an incredible mess. You get a good load on the hood of your car, then try to wet it and wipe it when it's still a little damp? A spilled milkshake is exactly what it would look like unless you had a good twenty minutes or a hose or something so to use cleaning it. Just smears around. And then if that dries your mess is even bigger than when you started!
Click to expand...

Thanks for the description- no really, thanks


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

KoolAid said:
https://deadspin.com/georgia-southern-qb-has-charges-dropped-after-cops-mist-1837100238

Charges and suspension dropped. What a silly story
Click to expand...

Thanks for the link. Very much worth reading and shed a bit of light on the whole false positive issue. I was wondering where they got the figure of 1 in 5 to 1 in 3 tests showing a false positive, and it was in the WAPO article they linked. Also worth reading:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...ice-departments-still-using-drug-field-tests/

An excerpt:

The ProPublica report also found that the most commonly used tests didn’t include warnings about the high false-positive rate, despite a 2000 guideline from the Justice Department to do so. Surprisingly, the report found that more than half of those wrongly charged after a false positive actually pleaded guilty, an indication of how the threat of serious jail time can persuade innocent people to falsely confess.
 
Last edited:

Chest cam footage has been released. https://twitter.com/TheBigGuyWJCL/status/1159896224251686913?s=20

A few things:

1. Moments before the police used the test kit several of the officers agreed it looked just like a lot of bird poop.

2. The officer was being a jerk for no reason the whole time.

3. The footage looks just like a milkshake has spilled and it matches right up with Werts story that he tried to squeegee a bunch of bird poop off his windshield at a gas station and it ran down the front of his hood and dried back up.

4. Not only was it a "false positive" but several people are pretty sure the officer conducted the test incorrectly anyway. That kit has 3 small vials in it, you're supposed to break one at a time and he just smashed all three and started shaking. If you do that it's SUPPOSED to turn pink - whether or not it's positive for cocaine is indicated by blue particles floating around in the pink that he never mentioned.

5. I don't think the officers had any ill will toward Werts, but the whole situation was not handled well.

6. Glad this is over (minus the hefty speeding fine he will have to pay)... maybe. The cop lost sight of Werts for several minutes so there is no proof it's the same car he got with his radar gun, his lawyer might be able to get that dropped too.
 

I’m not even convinced he was speeding at this point. His attorney should be able to get that dropped too. What a bunch of BS this turned out to be.

I would also explore the possibility of a lawsuit for having his name dragged through the mud for a week. The articles mentioning his name and “cocaine” in the same sentence will be on the internet forever, and not all of them will be updated with the facts.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Last edited:

PitinoFan said:
LOL...I’m not even convinced he was speeding at this point. His attorney should be able to get that dropped too. What a bunch of BS this turned out to be.

I would also explore the possibility of a lawsuit for having his name dragged through the mud for a week. The articles mentioning his name and “cocaine” in the same sentence will be on the internet forever, and not all of them will be updated with the facts.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Yeah. Honestly, the lawsuit idea isn't bad, but if I were Werts I'd just want to be done with all of it so I can focus on football. Also in regard to the speeding. the Cop wrote 80 mph in the police report but he said TWICE while his camera was on that he caught Werts doing 78... why is this important? Because 80 puts him in the 25+ reckless driving range (55 mph speed zone).
 

It's another case of Driving While Black.
 

Radley Balko in the Washington Post makes an interesting point in a column today:

Oddly, Werts’s own lawyer doesn’t think he should seek an apology, much less sue the Saluda County Sheriff’s Office.

“They had a pretty credible basis for pursuing, and ultimately stopping him and that is speeding,” Jones said. “Then they didn’t do anything wrong by attempting to collect evidence, or what they saw as evidence even though they had no basis from looking at him and looking at the inside of his car to think that he was transporting drugs.

“But they still saw what they saw on the hood of his car and made a common-sense determination of what they thought it was and they collected it. It tested positive so they were acting within the bounds of the law at the time.”

This is ridiculous. These field tests are notoriously unreliable. That hasn’t stopped police departments from using them, of course. And it also doesn’t mean we should just shrug it off when someone is falsely arrested, portrayed in the media as a drug user, and subjected to national ridicule because the police relied on tests known to have a high rate of false positives.

Whole article here: https://www.washingtonpost.com/opin...caine-his-car-was-bird-poop-it-was-bird-poop/
 

MrC said:
Radley Balko in the Washington Post makes an interesting point in a column today:

Oddly, Werts’s own lawyer doesn’t think he should seek an apology, much less sue the Saluda County Sheriff’s Office.

“They had a pretty credible basis for pursuing, and ultimately stopping him and that is speeding,” Jones said. “Then they didn’t do anything wrong by attempting to collect evidence, or what they saw as evidence even though they had no basis from looking at him and looking at the inside of his car to think that he was transporting drugs.

“But they still saw what they saw on the hood of his car and made a common-sense determination of what they thought it was and they collected it. It tested positive so they were acting within the bounds of the law at the time.”

This is ridiculous. These field tests are notoriously unreliable. That hasn’t stopped police departments from using them, of course. And it also doesn’t mean we should just shrug it off when someone is falsely arrested, portrayed in the media as a drug user, and subjected to national ridicule because the police relied on tests known to have a high rate of false positives.

Whole article here: https://www.washingtonpost.com/opin...caine-his-car-was-bird-poop-it-was-bird-poop/
Click to expand...

Washington Post, doing the Lord's work as always. No cause too small
 

hungan1 said:
It's another case of Driving While Black.
Click to expand...

Pulled over for 78 in a 55 is profiling? Get real. The officer is an obvious idiot that probably should be fired (the details on the three vial test are disturbing) but the driver was reckless. Let’s not minimize that fact.

This is why good defense lawyers exist.
 

MrC said:
Thanks for the link. Very much worth reading and shed a bit of light on the whole false positive issue. I was wondering where they got the figure of 1 in 5 to 1 in 3 tests showing a false positive, and it was in the WAPO article they linked. Also worth reading:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...ice-departments-still-using-drug-field-tests/

An excerpt:

The ProPublica report also found that the most commonly used tests didn’t include warnings about the high false-positive rate, despite a 2000 guideline from the Justice Department to do so. Surprisingly, the report found that more than half of those wrongly charged after a false positive actually pleaded guilty, an indication of how the threat of serious jail time can persuade innocent people to falsely confess.
Click to expand...

The accuracy of the tests vary. Sounds like this department used a more accurate version but the officer either wasn’t trained or he’s an idiot. There shouldn’t be a long wait for more definitive testing and there wasn’t in this case.
 

Pompous Elitist said:
Pulled over for 78 in a 55 is profiling? Get real. The officer is an obvious idiot that probably should be fired (the details on the three vial test are disturbing) but the driver was reckless. Let’s not minimize that fact.

This is why good defense lawyers exist.
Click to expand...

Ogee Oglethorpe said:
Washington Post, doing the Lord's work as always. No cause too small
Click to expand...

Pompous Elitist said:
The accuracy of the tests vary. Sounds like this department used a more accurate version but the officer either wasn’t trained or he’s an idiot. There shouldn’t be a long wait for more definitive testing and there wasn’t in this case.
Click to expand...

And yet you know that if you wait 2 days your hair will show Meth, coke or Heroin. If the police wanted to push it they would ask for a sample.
 



Pompous Elitist said:
Pulled over for 78 in a 55 is profiling? Get real. The officer is an obvious idiot that probably should be fired (the details on the three vial test are disturbing) but the driver was reckless. Let’s not minimize that fact.

This is why good defense lawyers exist.
Click to expand...

No, assumming that bird **** on the hood of a 20-something black kid's car is cocaine is profiling.

Nothing about that assumption made sense. No wonder this kid wanted to drive into town. He's lucky the officer didn't try to plant a gun under his seat.
 

hello-world said:
No, assumming that bird **** on the hood of a 20-something black kid's car is cocaine is profiling.

Nothing about that assumption made sense. No wonder this kid wanted to drive into town. He's lucky the officer didn't try to plant a gun under his seat.
Click to expand...

Wow. Prejudice is alive and well.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom