Cowboys' Josh Brent Will Remain Free Before Trial Despite Failing Alcohol Test
Dallas Cowboys nose tackle Josh Brent, who was involved in a drunk-driving related crash that resulted in the death of teammate Jerry Brown Jr. last December, is back in trouble with the law after reportedly violating the terms of his bond.
UPDATE: Friday, May 24th at 7:30 p.m. ET by Kyle Vassalo
According to the AP's Nomaan Merchant, a judge on Friday denied a request to revoke Brent's bond:
"Dallas Cowboys defensive tackle Josh Brent will remain free while he awaits trial for intoxication manslaughter, as a judge on Friday denied a request by prosecutors to revoke his bond due to problems with alcohol monitoring."
The report says both sides agreed that the alcohol monitoring device most likely went off because of the presence of alcohol in the air.
"Brent's ankle monitor was set off for alcohol four times in February and March, but both sides agreed Friday that those instances were most likely caused by the presence of alcohol in the air or near Brent — not drinking."
---End of Update---
According to a report from ESPN Dallas, the Dallas County District Attorney's office detected signs of alcohol in his monitoring device. He will attend a hearing on Friday morning to determine with prosecutors if he violated the terms of his release from prison.
Here's an excerpt from the piece:
Debbie Denmon, a district attorney office spokesperson, said the office is seeking to have Brent's $100,000 bond revoked because he is not meeting the conditions of his release.
Brent is schedule to appear in front of Dallas State District Judge Robert Burns at 9 a.m. CT Friday. [He] is awaiting trial on charges of intoxication manslaughter in the death of Cowboys practice squad player and [his] best friend, Jerry Brown.
After being released on a $100,000 bond following the events of the December crash, Brent was ordered to wear the alcohol monitoring device.
For now, sources close to Brent speaking to ESPN are claiming that the device going off has nothing to do with Brent drinking alcohol. It claims he has not used any alcoholic beverages, and that Brent's attorneys are trying to figure out what substance (food or drink) might have set off the monitor.
However, the source goes on to admit that the monitor has gone off several times since Brent started wearing the device.
Prior to the Dec. 2012 tragedy, Brent already had a history with DUIs. In 2009, he was pulled over near the University of Illinois campus, where he and the deceased Brown both attended college.
As reported by Rebecca Lopez, who works for an ABC affiliate in Dallas, prosecutors are also trying to prepare a case on Brent for tampering with the device during the time he has worn it since making bond:
Prosecutors also accuse Cowboy Josh Brent of tampering with alcohol ankle monitor.Full story on WFAA.com.— Rebecca Lopez (@rlopezwfaa) May 23, 2013
The news of Brent's return to the Dallas County Courthouse comes on the heels of yet another endorsement from Cowboys owner Jerry Jones, who has supported his defensive tackle throughout the past five months and told the Dallas Morning News in late April he wanted Brent to be involved with the team as much as legally possible.
Jones also allowed Brent to be on the sidelines the week after the tragedy that took Brown's life occurred.
In that same spirit, Brent isn't being counted out yet. Dallas radio personality Ben Rogers is among those living by the innocent-until-proven-guilty mantra. He notes that the device Brent is wearing can be set off by daily products:
Hearing Josh Brent thing *MIGHT* not be exactly what it seems. Lots of common every day products can set off SCRAM device. POSSIBLY the case— Ben Rogers (@BenRogers) May 23, 2013
Brent has played all three of his NFL seasons with the Cowboys, after the team selected him in the seventh round of the 2010 NFL supplemental draft. In those three seasons, he has 31 career solo tackles and 1.5 sacks to his name.
What is the duplicate article?
Why is this article offensive?
Where is this article plagiarized from?
Why is this article poorly edited?