(Big edit: Attempts are being made to clarify now that Busick was the only one arrested. Apologies for the preliminary confusion. I am water.)

(Big update: Mr. Busick has been dismissed from the program for violating team rules. One wonders if there’s a rule, or a subsection of a rule, that states “Do not be arrested and charged with armed robery.”)

With regard to his arrest Monday evening, it’s important to note West Virginia linebacker Branko Busick was the only person arrested and charged with armed robbery. Initially, there was some uncertainty, but from what I now gather, the sophomore linebacker was one of three males and a female attached to the incident — and by “attached,” it seems to mean inside the apartment police searched — but the only one who was booked.

The alleged victim identified Busick, apparently as the person who pointed a gun, demanded money and then hit the person with his weapon.

That’s bad. That’s actionable. I don’t need to tell you that. I also don’t need to tell you there’s a difference between being the guy who apparently pistol whipped the victim and in being there to demand money.

If he’s the guy who allegedly hit the victim again and again, that’s very different from, say, being involved or even being in the wrong place at the wrong time when a situation escalates. Time, of course, will tell.

The intent is what gets me. I don’t think anyone cares about my thoughts on crime, but there are things that will be considered here: Was this random? If so, is this the kind of guy you want around? Someone who just goes around robbing people? Or was it planned? Premeditated is a strong word. Had he done reconnaissance? Was there a specific target? Incentive? Was Busick a party to something that went well beyond what was expected?

It gets dicey. I just read a whole bunch on the topic of libel last night, so I’ll stop, but it does go without saying that a lot is yet unsaid on this matter and it could work for or against Busick.

What’s also clear is that this is Dana Holgorsen’s first player problem. No one has said anything yet, though Bill Stewart’s standard line was this: “I have been made aware of the situation and am gathering the facts at this time. I will take appropriate action when all the facts are in.” I’d imagine Holgorsen, if he says anything before announcing a punishment, will simply change the words, though not the meaning.

But what of the punishment? Let’s address the obvious: Holgorsen was in his own trouble not long ago. This is, at the least, an awkward, albeit inevitable, occasion. It’s the first time he’s had to do something since he was in the news. Doesn’t necessarily mean he’ll be more or less severe, but it means people will be looking and judging. Remember, Holgorsen wasn’t punished at all after the casino incident.

And is this first occasion to punish, regardless of Holgorsen’s personal experiences to precede it, also an occasion to send a message or set a standard? Does he leave no doubt about where he stands on the legal misdeeds of his players? Is he even concerned with establishing precedent? Again, time will tell.