Rocky Top Talk: An SB Nation Community

Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Pro Quality. Fan Perspective.
Around SBN: The Record of Wrongs: Vanderbilt Commodores

Janzen Jackson rejoins the Vols, will play Saturday


During Lane Kiffin's weekly media session today, he announced that freshman free safety Janzen Jackson has rejoined team activities as of today, and will play in Saturday's crucial contest at Kentucky, with both teams fighting for January 1 bowl bids.

VolQuest has Kiffin's comments about the situation here ($), mentioning that Jackson was cleared of all wrongdoing by the Knoxville Police Department, and re-emphasizing the importance of having high standards and conducting thorough investigations.  Jackson missed the Memphis game for failing a drug test, and has missed the Ole Miss and Vanderbilt games during the course of said investigation.  But he was a major contributor in the Vols' first seven games, starting at free safety.  The Vols hope Jackson's return helps a banged up Tennessee defense turn their fortunes back around to the group that was one of the nation's best in the first seven games of the season.  The Vols need him to return to form quickly.

0 recs  |  Comment 24 comments |

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Display:

He was at the team practice yesterday

but apparently not “with” the team?

by golfballs03 on Nov 24, 2009 1:29 PM EST reply actions   0 recs

Correct decision by Kiffin here

________________________________
Eric Berry is better at football than you.

by kidbourbon on Nov 24, 2009 2:32 PM EST reply actions   0 recs

My preference would have depended on details we don't know.

For being out at 2 AM on a school night after having already found the doghouse, 2 games is enough of a suspension. If he had been complicit with the drug stuff in the car or the attempted robbers, 2 games wouldn’t be enough. Since the precedent will shape the way Kiffin has to deal with the team from here on, I have to assume the former. And that would make this the right call.

Congratulations, kiddo. Welcome to the world.

by Hooper on Nov 24, 2009 3:13 PM EST reply actions   0 recs

I am somewhat worried by this.

However, I wont question Kiffin on it. Last time I had doubts was with Crompton and Kiffin was right there so Ill be willing to assume he knows what he is doing until proven otherwise.

by Muhler on Nov 24, 2009 3:49 PM EST reply actions   0 recs

If this was the right decision, we may never know it.

If it was the wrong decision, we may find out soon. Let’s hope it was right.

Lou Brock loves Lamp.

by birdjam on Nov 24, 2009 3:56 PM EST reply actions   0 recs

I'd be willing to bet

that there is no way in hades that Jackson could pass a drug test at this very moment.

by yellowhammer on Nov 24, 2009 4:18 PM EST reply actions   0 recs

unfortunately, there is reason to worry that JJ will relapse.

Hoop…i think we are being pollyanna-ish to not assume he knew and at some point smoked some of the weed in the car. Pretty obvious to me that the girl took responsibility for that knowing what a possession charge would do to the others.

I hope he has changed but he is in college so there will be many temptations.

by guilded on Nov 24, 2009 4:19 PM EST reply actions   0 recs

You may very well be right.

But if they clam up about it, what information does Kiffin have to go on? That’s the bear of it all.

by Hooper on Nov 24, 2009 4:40 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

How about the previous failed drug test? And potentially another one related to the incident?

I know the kid is a great athlete. But I wish he’d learn the off-the-field stuff from EB as well.

I really don’t like where this is going. Wish he were suspended through the regular season. If he passed drug tests and got his grades, then he could return to the team and participate in the bowl game. JMO.

by memphispete on Nov 25, 2009 5:10 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Given the circumstances and the details of the situation, of course this is the right decision by Kiffin...

…and it will remain so even if JJ happens to get into trouble in the future. It would’ve been wrong to can the guy on conjecture or suspicion, even if something happens a year from now that gets him kicked off the team for good. If that comes to pass (god forbid), I really hope I don’t hear comments to the effect of “Kiffin shoulda kicked him off the team a year ago.” Because no, he shouldn’t have.

Sure, this incident may be a harbinger of dire events to come, but we have just as much reason to believe that it will work an opposite magic. JJ isn’t likely to take off-field decisions quite so lightly in the future.

by davy on Nov 24, 2009 5:58 PM EST reply actions   0 recs

Let me put myself in the shoes of an immature 18 year old. . .

. . . I got suspended for one game for taking drugs. A week later, I got caught out at 2 am in a car that has more drugs in it.

I also witnessed an armed robbery and rather than react like any normal person should when witnessing an armed robbery, whether or not its my friends committing it, I had no idea would happen, I got in the car with the armed robbers and headed out.

But because I’m an extremely talented free safety, and this is a very important game, all the above is no big deal.

This is supposed to make me take off the field decisions LESS lightly? I know UT is academic ranking is in the bottom half of SEC schools, but you should be capable of a little more logic than that Davy.

by mtri on Nov 24, 2009 8:29 PM EST reply actions   0 recs

That's all well and good

But the official word (from the DA) is that he didn’t witness an armed robbery, and didn’t actually know about it until they had already left the gas station. That changes things significantly.

by Incipient_Senescence on Nov 24, 2009 8:30 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Ok yeah that does change things on that end. . . doesn’t change the fact that he seemed to not take his first punishment for drugs seriously at all. And now he’s going to get nothing again. Obviously it can’t be proven that he knew anything at all about the weed either, and so he most definitely shouldn’t be prosecuted under the law for it. But Kiffin can use some comment since here and make sure he sets a better tone than this. The other kids and the recruits see this too.

by mtri on Nov 24, 2009 8:33 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Maybe I'm just not impressed by being in a car at 2 AM with drugs in it

When I was an undergrad, I was out at 2 AM more often than not. Usually the time of night I’d start getting really hungry. And I’ve hung out with people that had drugs, but I didn’t know it. Of course I didn’t have any failed drug tests making people suspicious, but still. . . you shouldn’t suspend someone unless you have some evidence that they actually did something wrong. If you suspect but don’t know, they’d better walk soft, but you shouldn’t act on suspicions alone.

by Incipient_Senescence on Nov 24, 2009 8:42 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Let me second that...

…and even add onto it a little bit. Like Incipient, I was often out at 2am in college with people that had drugs on them. Unlike Incipient, I knew about it.

Let me assure you, mtri, that “knowledge of someone else’s possession of marijuana” is not a criminal offense in any of the 50 states, the district of columbia, or even Guam.

Have a great day.

________________________________
Eric Berry is better at football than you.

by kidbourbon on Nov 25, 2009 2:16 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Yes, there's room for doubt.

Both ways, and that’s what makes this so pesky as fans. I’m not declaring him clean by any means, but I just hate holding things over people when I can’t know they’re in the wrong. If I have to err, I’ll err that direction. And I have no problem with people going the other way.

It’s not even an ‘agree to disagree’ thing. At the moment, we can’t even rightly make a conclusion. Which is why I’m glad I’m not Kiffin with this deal.

by Hooper on Nov 25, 2009 5:29 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

We don't really know a lot

Let me point out an important particular choice of words from Kiffin’s statements, and it is important to note that it is from his prepared portion of his statements. First, the KPD and the DA’s office did not “clear Janzen of wrongdoing” as Kiffin said. They dropped the charges of attempted aggravated robbery because it was their opinion that there was insufficient evidence to bring a conviction in a court of law. These are not the same things. He wasn’t found innocent. If you read Kiffin’s quotes from his prepared statement, Kiffin stressed his point by saying the “cleared of wrongdoing” phrase twice, meaning he meant what he said.

Kiffin carefully chose his words because, like Jackson’s lawyer, Kiffin in this situation is Jantzen’s advocate. He is sticking up for his player.

That is an admirable trait. But at the same time, it makes me increasingly suspicious of Kiffin’s future statements about anything, especially after his recent use of the word “incident” which backfired on him a bit.

We don’t know the whole story of Jantzen Jackson, from Memphis game suspension to today, regardless of what his lawyer says, or what the store clerk says, or what Cory Zickefoose says, or what Lane Kiffin says, or what anybody says.

What will speak louder than anything is what Jantzen Jackson chooses to do with his life and his god-given talents. As Mike Strange wrote in his column Tuesday at GVX, it is Jackson’s choice to be like Eric Berry off the field, somebody he has been compared to on the field, or to become like a long string of former Vol players who squandered their talents and careers at Tennessee with off-field troubles.

by NorCalVol on Nov 25, 2009 4:09 AM EST reply actions   0 recs

Prosecutors almost NEVER say 'innocent' when dropping charges.

That’s pretty standard legal phrasing whenever charges are dropped. In Venn diagram terms, the DA will normally stake out as much area as possible in case future discoveries do actually change the equation, so they always say insufficient evidence (which includes, but isn’t limited to, innocence).

The only ‘innocent’ declaration I can remember was in the Duke lacrosse case when the DA who took over the investigation (Cooper?) declared innocence because of the severe amount of publicity and the toll that the case had already taken on the players’ lives because of the abuse of power by Nifong. And even then, the DA had no obligation to say ‘innocent’.

Outside of that, there’s really nothing we can do but trust the processes. And I think we’re pretty much all on board with your last paragraph.

by Hooper on Nov 25, 2009 9:05 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Besides

isnt there supposed to be a presumption of innocence or did we actually drop that notion?

by Muhler on Nov 25, 2009 3:27 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Clear me of wrongdoing

Hooper – if you are saying that the phrase “cleared of wrongdoing” is the standard legal phrasing to which you are referring (which I think you are because after reading your comment, I gathered it is after some searching), then that completely changes my opinion on Kiffin’s statement and the inferences that could be made from that. My bad. I edited a post because of that. Thank you.
I of course understand and covet the presumption of innocence, which had nothing to do with my point (Muhler).

by NorCalVol on Nov 25, 2009 10:54 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

np

Just keep in mind that I’m saying this with a yeoman’s understanding of the legal process. But since the lawyers around here haven’t jumped all over me, I’m guessing I said it alright.

Prosecutors don’t declare innocence; that’s the judge’s/jury’s job. But prosecutors wield an insane amount of power otherwise.

by Hooper on Nov 25, 2009 11:29 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Yayyy!

Our d will be good again

by cincyvol6198 on Nov 25, 2009 10:51 AM EST reply actions   0 recs

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

Welcome to the SB Nation blog about the Tennessee Volunteers.
Start posting about the Volunteers »

Join SB Nation and dive into communities focused on all your favorite teams.

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recent FanPosts

Gromit_small
2010 Tennessee Football T-Shirt: Suggested Revisions
Images_small
How We Will Finish
Hardesty_small
Vols QB battle buzz
Small
Tee Martin knows a lot about wide receicvers
Small
Accountability - Bruuuce Coaches 'em up
Gromit_small
Come Try Curling in Knoxville!
Small
Josh McNeil
Small
Where we stand
General-neyland_small
With all the snow in Knoxville we will find true Vols!
Script_small
Vol fans are losers

+ New FanPost All FanPosts >

Animated Drive Charts

RTT Classics

RTT Classics 2008 Animated BlogPoll2007 Animated BlogPollLOL! Your logo is so scary! Welcome to Rocky Top Talk Tradition! Fiddlin' on the Roof2008 Animated BlogPoll The Season of Which We Do Not Speak Pearlfection Case Study: 2QB Systems and the 2005 Tennessee Volunteers The 2007 College Football Blogger Awards The 2006 College Football Blogger Awards The 20 coolest college football logos The 10 worst college football logos The 29 most boring college football logos 2006 Animated BCS Race 2005 Animated Race to the Rose Bowl

FanShots

Quick hits of video, photos, quotes, chats, links and lists that you find around the web.

Recent FanShots

Picture of Steven Pearl being circulated on opposing team blogs.
Vote for the official 2010 Tennessee Football t-shirt
Tatum has sprained right ankle
Texas vs. the Nation Dish: QBs Crompton, Perrilloux boost NFL draft stock
Boys will be boys....
UT hires Chuck Smith to coach defensive line
A Look into DeMar Dorsey's Past
Running Backs coach
Tooting their own horn
Former Vol Tee Martin to UK

+ New FanShot All FanShots >

YouTube


Editor-in-Chief

Fiddler_on_the_roof_fiddler_1__small Joel

Senior Editor

Gromit_small Hooper

Tennessee_logo_small Will

Official Partner of CBS Sports