This is a absurd beyond belief
Most schools that give a shit would have suspended him
Cannot..well actually I can...believe people are excusing this as an oh well
The conference should make a ruling against his continued playing... that is, if it is proven or confessed that he "supplied" the gun. If it is merely an accusation, let justice take its due course. If the Bama coach won't do the right thing.. if Bama's AD won't do the right thing.. if Bama's President won't do the right thing... the SEC Commissioner should. The NIL deal people.. he probably has a deal.. right?... the NIL people should pull whatever payments they are making.
The police had nothing to charge him with? How about ACCESSORY? Seems textbook accessory to me.. what did Milelr think.. Davis wanted the gun to... what? Take selfies with it?
Ala. Code 1975, § 13A-2-23
Accountability for Behavior of Another – Accessory
A person is accountable for the behavior of another constituting an offense if, with the intent to promote or assist the commission of the offense: [Read appropriate part]
(1) He/she procures, induces or causes the other person to commit the offense;
(2) He/she aids or abets the other person in committing the offense; [or]
(3) Having a legal duty to prevent the commission of the offense, he/she fails to make an effort he/she is legally required to make.
A person acts intentionally with respect to a result or to conduct described by a statute defining an offense, when his/her purpose is to cause that result or to engage in that conduct. [13A-2-2(1)]
“Aid or abet” is to help, assist, or facilitate the commission of a crime, promote the accomplishment thereof, help in advancing or bringing it about, or encourage, counsel, or incite as to its commission. (Black’s Law Dictionary)
“Aid and abet” comprehends all assistance rendered by acts or words of
encouragement, support or presence, actual or constructive, to render assistance should it become necessary. Radke v. State, 292 Ala. 290, 293 So.2d 314 (1974).
The perpetrator can commit the crime though he/she may vary the mode or
circumstances of the perpetration, or though no particular manner, time or place may have been counseled or instigated. Griffith v. State, 90 Ala. 583, 8 So. 812 (1891).
Mere presence at the scene, without more evidence, is not sufficient to prove complicity. See Hand v. State, 26 Ala. App. 317, 159 So. 275 (Ala. Cr. 1935).
No particular acts are necessary and it is sufficient to convict if the jury is convinced beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant was present with a view to render aid should it become necessary. Radke v. State, 292 Ala. 290, 293 So.2d 314 (1974).
The State has the burden of proof. The burden does not shift to the defendant.