UT freshman Jacques Smith arrested for Cumberland Ave. altercation

A loss to South Carolina wasn't even the end.

After closing out October without a victory, the last day of the month provided one more bit of bad news for the Tennessee football team.

According to UT officials, freshman defensive lineman Jacques Smith was involved in a fight early Sunday morning after the Vols lost at No. 18 South Carolina, 38-24. It is the first arrest during the season under coach Derek Dooley in his first year with the program. According to Volquest.com, Smith was issued a warrant for simple assault for his role in the fight on Cumberland Avenue.

The Knoxville Police Department has not yet responded to requests for more information from the News Sentinel.

"We had an incident last night involving Jacques Smith," UT associate athletic director for communications Jimmy Stanton said before Dooley's Sunday teleconference. "Based on what we've heard from both the police and Jacques, there was an altercation between Jacques and another student regarding a girl. Once the altercation started, members of our team who were present stepped in and diffused the situation.

"All parties then walked out on their own accord and without major injuries. There were no further incidents, and several hours later the other student and his mother decided to press charges. Those are the facts as have been relayed to us."

Based on what has been presented, Dooley indicated he would handle punishment for Smith "internally," which would appear to be unlikely to him missing any playing time at this point.

© 2010 govolsxtra.com. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

  • Discuss
  • Print

Related Topics

Comments » 85

ctownvol writes:

Great. Just great.

Bogus writes:

I may be wrong, but isn't simple assault the equivalent of a verbal threat where the victim feels threatened, and nothing physical actually happens?

revjulian writes:

WHY???? This is his first run in with his temper. He was suspended for a playoff game in HS because of it to. Get it under control Jacques.... we need you

FBFan writes:

No surprise, remember the nightclub incident? Did the police officer drop the charges after getting mugged by a gang of players? Funny how these incidents seem to disappear. I am sure this one will as well. When kids(and coaches) continue to have serious infractions go away it fosters future problems. There are no repercussions at UT.

orangecountyvols writes:

Cumberland Ave. strikes again. Almost made it through the season.

This and a QB controversary...........hope it all clears up and we can move right along.

Go Vols

TommyJack writes:

in response to VolnotHAMILTONfan:

(This comment was removed by the site staff.)

What have you done with the real VolnotHAMILTONfan?

FWBVol writes:

in response to FBFan:

No surprise, remember the nightclub incident? Did the police officer drop the charges after getting mugged by a gang of players? Funny how these incidents seem to disappear. I am sure this one will as well. When kids(and coaches) continue to have serious infractions go away it fosters future problems. There are no repercussions at UT.

What's surprising is that people continue to repeat allegations against the players that were never substantiated.

Yes, there were players involved in a fight at the Bar, but never did any witness come out and accuse a UT football player of beating the off duty police officer.

I'm not saying the players are without fault, but they were never accused or charged with anything involving the officer.

That said, I wish these kids would get their acts straight so they can concentrate on football.

RaineyVol writes:

In other news Eric berry has his 2nd pick in 2 weeks!

thevoice writes:

in response to BIVOLAR_BEAR:

(This comment was removed by the site staff.)

Perhaps the most thought-provoking comment in several weeks. Keep 'em coming Biggest...

SummittsCourt writes:

in response to KingFulmer:

(This comment was removed by the site staff.)

Really... please stop, your stupidity is overwhelming.

agentorange writes:

in response to Bogus:

I may be wrong, but isn't simple assault the equivalent of a verbal threat where the victim feels threatened, and nothing physical actually happens?

yes

FBFan writes:

in response to FWBVol:

What's surprising is that people continue to repeat allegations against the players that were never substantiated.

Yes, there were players involved in a fight at the Bar, but never did any witness come out and accuse a UT football player of beating the off duty police officer.

I'm not saying the players are without fault, but they were never accused or charged with anything involving the officer.

That said, I wish these kids would get their acts straight so they can concentrate on football.

Don't you find it interesting that the hospitalized police officer was never heard from? If you believe there was nothing to that story we disagree. My point is as long as kids see you can get in trouble and nothing happens nothing will change... once it starts it is a cancer.

Halls3 writes:

Well, well, well. Funny how things tend to happen this way. Not gonna throw any stones but if he actually touched her & it wasn't just verbal he should be done. If verbal, the rest of the season should suffice since it's 4 games, 5 with the bowl game. Just want to say remember Vol fans throw stones if you want but it could be you tomorrow.

RoadTrip writes:

Young, strong and full of phooey = trouble when a boy/man becomes intoxicated. The question is whether he was celebrating the loss or drinking his blues away. Please don't try to convince me that he was not drinking. Please.

VolWoman writes:

in response to Halls3:

Well, well, well. Funny how things tend to happen this way. Not gonna throw any stones but if he actually touched her & it wasn't just verbal he should be done. If verbal, the rest of the season should suffice since it's 4 games, 5 with the bowl game. Just want to say remember Vol fans throw stones if you want but it could be you tomorrow.

Maybe you should wait until the facts come out. Dooley just said it was a "puppy love" type thing & will be handled internally.

Some guy was dancing with a girl he is dating & they got into it. They left separately & the warrant wasn't even issued until today from what I understand. Wonder who talked the other guy into that? Maybe Smith should have gone & filed simple assault charges on the other guy.

And, you're throwing some pretty heavy stones saying "if he actually touched HER".

Halls3 writes:

in response to VolWoman:

Maybe you should wait until the facts come out. Dooley just said it was a "puppy love" type thing & will be handled internally.

Some guy was dancing with a girl he is dating & they got into it. They left separately & the warrant wasn't even issued until today from what I understand. Wonder who talked the other guy into that? Maybe Smith should have gone & filed simple assault charges on the other guy.

And, you're throwing some pretty heavy stones saying "if he actually touched HER".

Ok so your theory goes like this. If a UT player is involved we need to wait, if a UF player is involved kick him off immediately. Fair I guess in your eyes. Again if he assualted this woman he needs to be kicked off the team, unless verbal then he can sit the season. If he assualted a guy then he needs to sit a few games.

TommyJack writes:

A reliable source says the other guy was Naffy.

tennesseebee writes:

As shallow as we are @DT, maybe Dooley should handcuff them to the goal post and turn 'em loose for games only.

Bogus writes:

in response to TommyJack:

A reliable source says the other guy was Naffy.

And ZZ is his mommy.

tenndave writes:

Why are people not liable for saying things about a person without evidence. So far I have read he was drunk (not proven) he touched her, insinuating he hit a girl, (not proven) it was an argument they left seperately. I think I will add, It was not Jaques fault. It was George Bush's fault.

crimsonviper writes:

in response to TommyJack:

A reliable source says the other guy was Naffy.

My source says naffy was the girl...

VolWoman writes:

in response to Halls3:

Ok so your theory goes like this. If a UT player is involved we need to wait, if a UF player is involved kick him off immediately. Fair I guess in your eyes. Again if he assualted this woman he needs to be kicked off the team, unless verbal then he can sit the season. If he assualted a guy then he needs to sit a few games.

It's not between Smith & a girl Halls3. And I've never said kick any player off a team without investigating it first & finding out exactly what the player did. You must be mistaking me for someone else because I've never left a comment on a story involving any player from another team.

Vol_in_GA writes:

So in this situation, would Jacques Smith represent the Germans or the invading Americans? Or would a Vietnam analogy be more appropriate here?

volcycle writes:

in response to tenndave:

Why are people not liable for saying things about a person without evidence. So far I have read he was drunk (not proven) he touched her, insinuating he hit a girl, (not proven) it was an argument they left seperately. I think I will add, It was not Jaques fault. It was George Bush's fault.

Am I missing something, it says the altercation was with a guy, not a girl.

TKO writes:

Self Defense

Halls3 writes:

in response to jrod:

(This comment was removed by the site staff.)

I was mistaken. Wes Rucker posted about it as though as it was between he & the girl. Still the fact remains he needs to be suspended for assaulting someone. As for being an idiot, I would put my education against yours anyday of the week.

shulessjo writes:

This is nothing... move on...Would NOT have been reported if VOLS had won or had a winning record.......This stuff happens every Saturday night in every college town... sad but true.... Stupid to be aggravating Jacques at this point, anyway..... IMO.

chrisw2967 writes:

in response to volcycle:

Am I missing something, it says the altercation was with a guy, not a girl.

Well last night was Halloween and the freaks come out on Halloween. so the investigation continues,the police is trying to figure out if Naffy was dressed up as a man or was he being himself dressed up as a woman.

TommyJack writes:

in response to KingFulmer:

(This comment was removed by the site staff.)

Sheesh. Another KNS plant.

dvols writes:

he took the south carolina loss pretty hard....

and how does the mother press charges...?

NYvolFan writes:

I'm trying to get this straight. When I was at UT, the drinking age was 18...it's NOT now.

So...are players allowed to rush home after a loss in Columbia, hit the strip and party? Given that the drinking age is 21 now, where was he? Was he drinking, etc.?

Please chime in all...I like beer, but doesn't the coaching staff establish rules for Frosh and the Strip? Clearly, they should NOT be there...underage.

GerryOP writes:

in response to KingFulmer:

(This comment was removed by the site staff.)

Do you always over react like this? Is exaggeration a normal part of your persona? You probably need to get some help.

psychovol2 writes:

in response to KingFulmer:

(This comment was removed by the site staff.)

You're the pot calling the kettle black.

psychovol2 writes:

That's pathetic that the guy needed to be shored up by his Mother to press charges.

volinvegas writes:

My mommy said I had to call the police!

jrobi124 writes:

what I do like about this is his team mates stepped in to stop the fight. Where the other poor choice would be to gang up on the momma boy and kick his butt. Ya I said momma's boy, because he went home to cry to his mommy before he decided to press charges. grow up !!

AHoffman writes:

Another one for Dooley to sweep under the rug.

Halls3 writes:

in response to jrod:

(This comment was removed by the site staff.)

The original article had no info except he was in a fight. Did not say man or woman when I posted that but Wes Rucker acted as though it was a woman.

shulessjo writes:

in response to KingFulmer:

(This comment was removed by the site staff.)

You were just waiting for this... did you respond to my other post?

tdvol1989 writes:

in response to KingFulmer:

(This comment was removed by the site staff.)

Actually, this was a Kiffin recruit. But, it could be much worse. At least the other players "diffused" the situation and an all-out brawl did not break out.

No mention of emergency rooms, injuries, guns, or disorderly (drunken) conduct. Consider this improvement in our behavioral issues.

lomas98 writes:

in response to NYvolFan:

I'm trying to get this straight. When I was at UT, the drinking age was 18...it's NOT now.

So...are players allowed to rush home after a loss in Columbia, hit the strip and party? Given that the drinking age is 21 now, where was he? Was he drinking, etc.?

Please chime in all...I like beer, but doesn't the coaching staff establish rules for Frosh and the Strip? Clearly, they should NOT be there...underage.

When I was a freshman drinking age was 21. I hung out more on the stip under 21 than when I was. I also was in a couple of fights after being out. This is normal. This happens to everyone. A football player needs to be more careful but Dooley can't babysit and tell them to stay in their dorms all night. Have you never fought over a girl? If the UT administrition established rules for the entire student body, the strip would shut down. He didn't appear to hurt anybody and didn't resist any arrest, I think Dooley handles this internally and moves on as the facts are as of now.

boonhower writes:

in response to Bogus:

I may be wrong, but isn't simple assault the equivalent of a verbal threat where the victim feels threatened, and nothing physical actually happens?

Not necessarily. There are different scenarios that could represent simple assault, some of which be just verbal and some could involve actual physical contact. I could look up the statute to be more precise, but I'm just too lazy to do it.

BillsBrother writes:

in response to Halls3:

I was mistaken. Wes Rucker posted about it as though as it was between he & the girl. Still the fact remains he needs to be suspended for assaulting someone. As for being an idiot, I would put my education against yours anyday of the week.

It appears that you fit Horace Porter's definition of a mugwump.
http://www.great-quotes.com/quote/934198

ULTIMATEVOLUNTEER writes:

The girl at the bar was Vickie Valencourt. I heard the guy tell Jacques that his mu mu mu momma says she's da debil !

wildmed writes:

I don't know what's worse: getting punked by a beefy football player, or your mommie making you go to the police to whine about it. The only way Smith's name would have come out if he were an ordinary student would have been if he were a Muslim. Non-news, KNS...

abnermc writes:

Maybe he'll come back & catch a TD pass like Rainey...wait he didn't even threaten to kill anyone.

Halls3 writes:

in response to jrod:

(This comment was removed by the site staff.)

(This comment was removed by the site staff.)

trat writes:

"Dooley indicated he would handle punishment for Smith "internally," which would appear to be unlikely to him missing any playing time at this point."

Guess he must be a starter since Doolittle is not going to punish him.

abnerPeabody writes:

in response to Halls3:

I was mistaken. Wes Rucker posted about it as though as it was between he & the girl. Still the fact remains he needs to be suspended for assaulting someone. As for being an idiot, I would put my education against yours anyday of the week.

Neither of you are the brightet bulb in the socket.

Halls3 writes:

in response to abnermc:

Maybe he'll come back & catch a TD pass like Rainey...wait he didn't even threaten to kill anyone.

You are right he didn't threaten anyone like Rainey did. However, he did assault someone unlike Rainey. We will see how stiff Dooley is on punishment. He isn't a starter so I would say he will suspended for at least Memphis b/c UT could beat Memphis with their walk-ons.

Want to participate in the conversation? Become a subscriber today. Subscribers can read and comment on any story, anytime. Non-subscribers will only be able to view comments on select stories.

Features