Comments on: Journell’s preliminary hearing continued again to May 21

By: Jonathan

Jonathan — Fri, 11 May 2012 21:29:14 +0000

Well, as far as believing it, it’s my opinion. So yeah, I believe my opinion.

As far as hearing he’d still be on the team, it was mainly the story that the reason he’s still suspended months later and not officially kicked off the team is due to the chance that it might be reduced to a misdemeanor.

By: hokie24

hokie24 — Thu, 10 May 2012 18:28:03 +0000

Where exactly do you “keep hearing” this from, Jonathan?

Marcus wasn’t the Vick attached to the Mexico nickname either. And seriously… a pellet gun would be “lower” than all of the stupid things that Marcus did? Come on, man… did you even believe that when you typed it?

I don’t think Journell will be back on the team, but that’s just my opinion.

By: Andy Bitter

Andy Bitter — Thu, 10 May 2012 16:15:17 +0000

Point of clarification: prosecutors say Dunton had the gun and drew it from a pizza box. Journell and Brady’s lawyers have argued that their clients didn’t know Dunton had one. Take that for what it’s worth.

By: Jonathan

Jonathan — Thu, 10 May 2012 15:41:51 +0000

I keep hearing that he might be allowed back on the team if the charges are dropped from the felony level due to it being a pellet gun, or some such nonsense. If we let a guy back on the team who pointed a gun of any kind at another person, this will be a new low. Lower than any of Marcus “New Mexico” Vick’s transgressions, in my opinion.

I hope there are enough people outraged at this idea that they don’t do it, but I fear that won’t be the case.

By: proof reader

proof reader — Thu, 10 May 2012 12:08:45 +0000

Roger, your head is really buried in the sand . Congrats ….

By: Roger

Roger — Thu, 10 May 2012 00:16:10 +0000

Maybe a UVA graduate

By: Trevor

Trevor — Wed, 09 May 2012 21:30:40 +0000

Sounds like the Commonwealth Attorney is trying to buy time. For what? I don’t have the foggiest idea.