|
Post by Aggie One on Jul 21, 2008 20:05:47 GMT -5
Point of Clarification - He said it on the witness stand. It was on tape on all the local TV news reports the day he was sentenced.
|
|
|
Post by DOOMS on Jul 22, 2008 7:40:45 GMT -5
So in other words it went like this:
Defense attorney: Was A&T the first choice for your son to attend college?
Lowe: No.
Oh my goodness. It gets worse by the minute. Loud sigh.
|
|
|
Post by Aggie Monster on Jul 22, 2008 8:39:09 GMT -5
Whatever he said, whether it be rumor, fact, or whatever. I'll give him this. A man will say anything that helps get his child a lesser sentence. i would throw A&T under the bus if it would help my son out. So I cant blame him for WHATEVER he said to get that done.
Now, with that being said. When you do or say something like that you know some people are not going to like it, but what do you say to those people. Absolutely nothing! you did what you had to do, d**n yall MF'ers is what I would be saying.
But that now gives the "offended" the right to say "d**n you" back. "F your situation, you talked trash about my school".
So we both in the right. him for defending his sons situation and us for defending our school.
Who here wouldn't throw ANY University under the bus to save their child? I hope yall aint got that much Aggie Pride! I got friends kids that I would throw A&T under the bus for. I would be up on the stand like "Those Aggies are a bunch of thieving, lying, drug selling little punks. he should have never went there! if I hadn't found Jesus i would not have made it out!" LOL. I would say it with a straight face too.
Give him a little hell about it, but understand what the man choice was.
|
|
|
Post by aggiejazz on Jul 22, 2008 8:55:56 GMT -5
So in other words it went like this: Defense attorney: Was A&T the first choice for your son to attend college? Lowe: No. Oh my goodness. It gets worse by the minute. Loud sigh. You can bet the strategy of blaming A&T was discussed thoroughly in the lawyer's office prior to the sentencing. It started with Lowe's lawyer and each family member followed the same script. If Sidney Sr didn't want the uncle to speak at the hearing his crazy a** would have never spoke because its Sidney's son whose butt is on the line not the uncle's. The uncle stated that for his nephew to fit in at A&T you had to act dumb and wear your pants down past your butt. Last I looked at prestigious William and Mary I see guys wearing their pants the same way. As far as being dumb goes that will get you thrown out of college after your first year. Lowe Jr didn't act too dumb since UNCG accepted his transfer. Who's not to say that the trouble Lowe Jr found was out in the Greensboro's streets and not on the campus of A&T. If you are looking for trouble you can find it a lot quicker out in the streets than on the campus especially if you live off campus. I am not a lawyer but I'm not stupid either. In fact the Lowe's didn't need to drag A&T in it since Frye didn't want to send a rich family's son to prison anyway. Why I'm so-called wasting bandwidth because I think its worth it. A&T has had thousands of young men go through their halls in the same hip hop, gangster rap period and the number of students gone terribly bad is very rare. They come to A&T wanting to be high middle class. As far as throwing A&T under the bus, it is easier than say throwing UNC-Chapel Hill or NC State because you don't have to face your loan officer, or work supervisor or manager when you get back to work after all is said and done. In other words you can say anything about a black person or black institution because they normally don't have the clout to make you pay for what you say.
|
|
|
Post by DOOMS on Jul 22, 2008 9:05:27 GMT -5
I wouldn't, and my pop wouldn't. But my problem isn't with what he said. My problem is with the fact that it appears that he didn't say anything. There are a bunch of inferences and no hard quotes, and people are ready to go to war.
Even if he stood straight up and totally unprompted stated "I did not want my child to go to A&T" (which it becomes clearer and clearer he never said), I still would have no problem with it. Honestly, my first choice for my kid wouldn't be the state school with the lowest graduation percentage either. If you love your kid it wouldn't be your first choice either, even if you went there.
It's just flat wrong to attack somebody for something they did not say, especially the way some of y'all have attacked him on this thread. It's even worse to amass a coalition to e-mail him to death about it (I've since gotten about five e-mails pleading me to e-mail him and the uncle).
I did not get one e-mail about our grad rate sinking to worst in the state. But I got three bragging about how many "students" we had.
I did not get one e-mail about us having four underpaid counselors for 10,000 students. But I got three bragging about how many "students" we had.
I did not get one e-mail about "conditionally accepted" students or whatever they are called. But I got three bragging about how many "students" we had.
When we "conditionally accepted" all these dumbass kids that have no right to an A&T education, we let in a lot of "dumbed down and thugged up" jerks. Sorry, our secret is out.
The uncle said the kid wanted to be accepted. I would be offended if I didn't know that a good half the kids on campus run around with their britches aroudn their butt showing their underwear. I would be upset if I didn't understand that that was what the kid felt he needed to do to "be cool." I would be upset if I didn't realize that that is the culture at a school with a sub 40% grad rate.
As far as uncle lawyer speaking, heck yeah I would want my managing partner at a law firm brother to be a character witness to keep my son from getting a harsh jail sentence.
Flip the script. Exact same scenario, except it's your shy kid that got caught up in foolishness. The lawyer says a good strategy would be to infer, not even flatly state, but infer, that your own alma mater had an element that added to your son's chances at doing misdeeds. You gonna be high and mighty and tell the lawyer naw or are you going to take his $850 an hour advice? Don't even answer that, just think. Don't react, just think about it.
|
|
|
Post by DOOMS on Jul 22, 2008 9:07:02 GMT -5
As far as throwing A&T under the bus, it is easier than say throwing UNC-Chapel Hill or NC State because you don't have to face your loan officer, or work supervisor or manager when you get back to work after all is said and done. In other words you can say anything about a black person or black institution because they normally don't have the clout to make you pay for what you say. jazz, what exactly did he say? ExactlyIt appears y'all are reacting to things that have not been said. That is silly.
|
|
|
Post by aggiejazz on Jul 22, 2008 9:18:19 GMT -5
It is very apparent we see what was printed quite differently. Of course blaming others doesn't work for everyone unless you have money. Lets see if blaming A&T will work for the next criminal. Being shy is rough on any 18 year old going away from home for the first time to any college. Lawyers do whatever do they and as said before we have the right to criticize what we see is not right. Sidney Sr quotes from Raleigh's News and Observer The elder Lowe said he was not happy with his son's decision to leave home for A&T.
"I didn't think he was ready for that environment," the father said. "He's quiet, he's shy, he's vulnerable. I worried about him. We kept contact ... but you could see changes starting to occur."------------------------------------------------------------- Judge Frye reasons for leniency www.news-record.com/content/2008/07/19/article/for_lowe_a_rare_strategy_nets_less_timeIn Lowe's case, Frye cited several reasons he believed extraordinary mitigation was warranted. Among them:
Lowe admitted to bringing a gun to the home invasion. Investigators originally had believed it was co-defendant Brian Martin. Martin is expected to be sentenced next week;
Lowe has the support of his church community;
He has support of his family and friends. His father told the judge Lowe would have a curfew, as he has had since he was released on a $450,000 bond pending trial.
He was under the influence of marijuana and Ecstasy, which changed his behavior, according to testimony. He lacked coping skills, was immature and reacted poorly to peer pressure.
|
|
|
Post by DOOMS on Jul 22, 2008 9:41:02 GMT -5
You know what I don't see in that quote. I don't see Lowe said "I was not happy with my son's decision to leave home for A&T." I see where the paper stated that.
I see where what came out of Lowe's mouth was "I didn't think he was ready for that environment," ... "He's quiet, he's shy, he's vulnerable. I worried about him. We kept contact ... but you could see changes starting to occur."
Exactly what is wrong with saying that the kid wasn't ready for A&T? That's not saying A&T is thug training ground by any stretch of the imagination. That is my point. That is what the paper wants you to think he's saying, but he clearly isn't saying it. If he said it, then it would be printed there. He said the kid wasn't ready for A&T, period. You find that insulting?
He could say the exact same quote about Carolina or State. The exact same quote. Nobody would have a problem with it. What the quote pretty clearly says to me is the kid was (I'll be blunt) a little oreo that wasn't ready to be around a bunch of black kids and in order to fit in he would try to find the worst of the bunch and be the worst of the worst. He did a good job there.
This is the exact same paper that turned a thirty second post game shoving match into a nationally syndicated brawl less than a year ago. But now they're playing fair with us? I apologize for failing to fall for their crap, it's just so apparent that they want to paint A&T in a light that Lowe's not trying to paint it's ridiculous.
"The elder Lowe said he was not happy with his son's decision to leave home for A&T." Please. No he didn't. It's right there. He said "I didn't think he was ready for that environment," period. Again, if he'd said it, it would be in quotes.
What's even worse is the kid was no longer a student at A&T. A&T really has nothing to do with the story, yet the paper finds a way to put us in it. And you want to blame Lowe?!?!?
The paper is the villian, point blank, period, end of story.
This reminds me of when Tom Joyner got on the radio talking about how we were going to lose our right to vote because the the Voting Rights Act would expire in 2007. People were busy writing letters to Congress at Tom's urging not realizing that the Voting Rights Act had nothing to do with our right to vote and that the 15th Amendment guaranteed our right to vote.
It made us look dumb. We running around rallying against something that is untrue. I didn't appreciate that at all. But I learned a lot about people and a lot about looking at things from that. I question almost everything I read and hear as a result of that. I've learned to spot little nuances in things (like the lack of a direct quote and the use of a self-serving statement prior to a quote that can be twisted).
Man, trust me on this one. A man saying his son is not ready for the environment at A&T is by no means trashing the school. At all. The insult is that graduates of the school can be so easily led to believe that it somehow is trashing the school.
The second quote in green doesn't even mention or insinuate A&T. You are clearly out looking for reasons to be insulted. Here's another one: my first choice for my child will not be A&T. It will be an Ivy League school, then A&T. And if the kid hauls off and shoots somebody at G in the behind and my lawyer says "blame A&T" I'll probably go so far as to say they have a class on it to get the kid out of trouble.
|
|
|
Post by aahhbigboy on Jul 22, 2008 9:53:08 GMT -5
With the exception of DOOMS, how old are you guys.....really? Are your PANTIES really in a bunch over a comment he may or may not have said? Has it wounded you that deeply? ?? Please tell me you aren't serious. I really have to make sure. This is so ludicrous that it feels like the joke's on me. I bet that most haven't even responded because they had the sense to stand back and realize what most of us do. GROWN UPS DON'T CRY OVER SPILLED MILK. BABIES DO. Get over it and stop making more of a baffoon out of your school that Sidney did.
|
|
|
Post by aggiejazz on Jul 22, 2008 10:09:20 GMT -5
I placed Lowe Sr statements in context and in conjunction Not conjection with the lawyer's and uncle's statements as this was all said during sentencing hearing.
I posted Judge Frye's explanination of his sentencing for info. I didn't see any insults towards A&T in Judge Frye's statements.
I don't look for insults.
|
|
|
Post by DOOMS on Jul 22, 2008 10:16:34 GMT -5
I'm going to call the word "conjection" i.e., conjecture, a freudian slip on your part.
Go ahead and laugh with me mane, you know it. If you had to string together a bunch of statements to make it mean what you wanted it to mean, the Raleigh N&R has a job for you today! That's exactly what the paper is insinuating. It's exactly what was not said.
So anyways, y'all e-mailed all them people yet?
|
|
DECKS
Official BDF member
2008 Poster of the Year
Charter Member of the BDF
Posts: 10,415
|
Post by DECKS on Jul 22, 2008 10:19:34 GMT -5
The following is an editorial blog from Allen Johnson, N&R Editorial Page Editor: blog.news-record.com/staff/outloud/archives/2008/07/a_lowe_blow.shtmlA Lowe blowIn defense of Sidney Lowe II, who was sentenced Tuesday to 15 months at the Guilford County Prison Farm Tuesday for his involvement in two armed robberies, his lawyers painted an unflattering and unfair picture of N.C. A&T. Lowe’s father, N.C. State coach Sidney Lowe, and other relatives, essentially blamed A&T, where Lowe II had been a student, for turning his son to crime and drugs. Lowe said A&T wasn’t his first choice as a college for his son. Added his uncle, Winston-Salem attorney Michael Grace: “He wanted to dumb down and thug up when he went to school. He wanted to be accepted. He wanted to drop his britches around his butt and show his underwear.” In the interest of full disclosure, I have taught at A&T part time for the better part of 18 years. And I have seen little to support a culture of crime and drugs that sucks students into armed robberies. Ironically, the judge in the case, Henry Frye Jr., is the son of an A&T alumnus, a former Supreme Court chief justice. And the blame placed on A&T hardly accounts for the younger Lowe’s troubles with the law before enrolling at A&T. He was charged with assault in 2002. Posted by Allen Johnson on July 16, 2008 11:52 AM | Permalink
|
|
Aggie77
Official BDF member
Member Since: September 2004
Posts: 5,572
|
Post by Aggie77 on Jul 22, 2008 10:33:57 GMT -5
You have a good point about what was exactly said, and that can be determined "Exactly". At first I was under the impression that they were post trial comments to a reporter. It is now my understanding that the alleged comments are part of the character witness testimony and therefore part of the court record. I’m willing to bet in that setting there were very few “Yes or No” questions, and mostly a prepared statement, and probably no cross by the DA, since “II” pleaded guilty. So based on that, it’s likely the comments reported by the media are just the short version. Don’t forget, I don’t see where there was question on the table about A&T. Each comment was voluntary, unprovoked, unsolicited.
Now, are you really taking his comment about “the environment” to mean a rigorous educational intuition challenging you at every academic level or being or code words for a dumb down school of thugs? I don’t see how Sidney Lowe and family get a pass. Their comments were not intended build A&T up, only make it look as bad as possible, and we do enough of that ourselves.
If we don’t stand up for A&T who will? It definitely will not be the Lowe family; surely we can agree on that.
|
|
|
Post by DOOMS on Jul 22, 2008 10:48:57 GMT -5
I'd still much rather see the transcript or a direct quote from it devoid of ellipses before I can even begin to take offense. When we still have to use words like "alleged comments" and "essentially blamed" then we, in my opinion, don't have the whole story. I don't believe in attacking without having the whole story. A lot of unnecessary damage can happen as a result.
Even dude's editorial plainly states that his lawyers painted an unflattering and unfair picture of N.C. A&T. Dude the proceeds to take with the same out of context quotes that the paper did and runs about five laps around the track.
If the issue is with the lawyers, the issue is with the lawyers. If the issue is with the lawyers then we are wasting resources on the wrong target.
As for his comment about the environment I'm taking it just as I stated previously: What the quote pretty clearly says to me is the kid was (I'll be blunt) a little oreo that wasn't ready to be around a bunch of black kids and in order to fit in he would try to find the worst of the bunch and be the worst of the worst.
Frankly, I feel like the energies that will be and have been expended on Sidney Lowe for comments he did not make are wasted. I agree that we have to stand up for A&T, but against who?
|
|
DECKS
Official BDF member
2008 Poster of the Year
Charter Member of the BDF
Posts: 10,415
|
Post by DECKS on Jul 22, 2008 10:49:08 GMT -5
Perhaps Lowe and attorney didn't mean to point the finger at A&T? Perhaps the remarks were taken out of context? That's why they need to step forward and add some clarity and perhaps an apology. I suspect we'll be seing as much in the next few days.
|
|