slufan13 Posted September 28, 2017 Share Posted September 28, 2017 3 minutes ago, slufan13 said: I think the reason for Rich's post was that posting the UNews article without comment added no value to the thread. Although most of my posts add no value so I'm probably not one to talk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NH Posted September 28, 2017 Share Posted September 28, 2017 The percentage of posts that add value (mine included) is probably statistically insignificant. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old guy Posted September 28, 2017 Share Posted September 28, 2017 Sulfan and NH, it is a lot better to add no or little value to the discussion than to add negative value as the trolls do. Please continue writing your views. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billikenfan05 Posted September 28, 2017 Share Posted September 28, 2017 8 minutes ago, NH said: The percentage of posts that add value (mine included) is probably statistically insignificant. You should tell us your ACT score again Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NH Posted September 28, 2017 Share Posted September 28, 2017 12 minutes ago, billikenfan05 said: You should tell us your ACT score again Will dm you. Wouldn't want to post something embarrassing like that publicly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cgeldmacher Posted September 28, 2017 Share Posted September 28, 2017 So, if the message board speculation is correct, sexual assault may be off the table. We're now, maybe, dealing with the repercussions of secretly taping a sexual act or taping and distributing (showing to friends) a sex tape that was made consentually. Making the tape could be just on one guy, not all four. Since it is a criminal charge to tape sex without consent, the punishment could be severe. I'm talking severe from the university as in not ever playing a game. If the video shows that everyone seemed to be on board with the taping of the events, then we're dealing with the university's reaction to making a video depicting group sex and showing it to others. That could get fact specific as far as did all the guys know the video was happening, did they know it wasn't immediately erased, did they know it was later shown to others. Seems like it would be hard for the university to punish a student simply for having sex, although I can see a Catholic university saying that group sex goes a little further against its principles. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigMouthBilliken Posted September 28, 2017 Share Posted September 28, 2017 1 hour ago, billikenfan05 said: I don't think we should be mad at them for taking a day or two to digest this before reporting on it. This could have been a massive slip up with serious consequences for the SAs involved if they reported the story in the wrong way. 1 hour ago, Old guy said: If they have any brains at all they have already recognized the immense amount of liability they might have to deal with if they screw up with their information releases. They have to deal with this issue very carefully and this means they will take their time doing it. Isn't that the way journalism is transitioning this day and age? Reporting without all the facts or with "unnamed sources". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bobby Metzinger Posted September 28, 2017 Share Posted September 28, 2017 3 minutes ago, cgeldmacher said: So, if the message board speculation is correct, sexual assault may be off the table. We're now, maybe, dealing with the repercussions of secretly taping a sexual act or taping and distributing (showing to friends) a sex tape that was made consentually. Making the tape could be just on one guy, not all four. Since it is a criminal charge to tape sex without consent, the punishment could be severe. I'm talking severe from the university as in not ever playing a game. If the video shows that everyone seemed to be on board with the taping of the events, then we're dealing with the university's reaction to making a video depicting group sex and showing it to others. That could get fact specific as far as did all the guys know the video was happening, did they know it wasn't immediately erased, did they know it was later shown to others. Seems like it would be hard for the university to punish a student simply for having sex, although I can see a Catholic university saying that group sex goes a little further against its principles. As a point of reference here, I was kicked out of Grand Forest for having a kegger senior year (the kicker was 'underage' students) with no prior j-board appearances. This has the makings of a slaughterhouse. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dlarry Posted September 28, 2017 Share Posted September 28, 2017 3 hours ago, jimbofive said: This grinds my gears in so many ways. Everyone should be responsible for themselves. Yeah that is ridiculous in so many ways. 9 times out of 10 both parties have been drinking. If the girl used the alcohol excuse what is stopping the guy from turing around and saying the same thing? I'd love to see what would happen if a guy claimed he was sexually assaulted because he was drunk and couldn't give consent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheChosenOne Posted September 28, 2017 Share Posted September 28, 2017 17 minutes ago, cgeldmacher said: So, if the message board speculation is correct, sexual assault may be off the table. I don't think anything is off of the table when it comes to University punishment which has very different rules than the law of the land in these situations. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheChosenOne Posted September 28, 2017 Share Posted September 28, 2017 10 minutes ago, cgeldmacher said: Seems like it would be hard for the university to punish a student simply for having sex. You would think so, but look into the University's policy when it comes to consent. It is pretty absurd and essentially would characterize a rather large percentage of the sex that happens on campus as non-consensual if the female decided to cry foul so to say. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnnyJumpUp Posted September 28, 2017 Share Posted September 28, 2017 13 minutes ago, cgeldmacher said: Since it COULD BE a criminal charge to tape sex without consent Fixed it for you. Recording a sex act without consent is not necessarily a crime. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billikenfan05 Posted September 28, 2017 Share Posted September 28, 2017 14 minutes ago, dlarry said: Yeah that is ridiculous in so many ways. 9 times out of 10 both parties have been drinking. If the girl used the alcohol excuse what is stopping the guy from turing around and saying the same thing? I'd love to see what would happen if a guy claimed he was sexually assaulted because he was drunk and couldn't give consent. Welcome back Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Box and Won Posted September 28, 2017 Share Posted September 28, 2017 23 minutes ago, BigMouthBilliken said: Isn't that the way journalism is transitioning this day and age? Reporting without all the facts or with "unnamed sources". Yeah, unnamed sources are a new thing. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deep_Throat_(Watergate) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billikenfan05 Posted September 28, 2017 Share Posted September 28, 2017 4 minutes ago, Box and Won said: Yeah, unnamed sources are a new thing. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deep_Throat_(Watergate) This is true. I think the more correct way to put it is that with the rise of instant information, everyone is rushing to be the first report on a story and take liberties with the term "credible source" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LindellWest Posted September 28, 2017 Share Posted September 28, 2017 37 minutes ago, Bobby Metzinger said: As a point of reference here, I was kicked out of Grand Forest for having a kegger senior year (the kicker was 'underage' students) with no prior j-board appearances. This has the makings of a slaughterhouse. Haha, I remember that party. If my memory is correct, the kid jumping off the balcony didn't help anyone's cause. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bonwich Posted September 28, 2017 Share Posted September 28, 2017 6 minutes ago, billikenfan05 said: This is true. I think the more correct way to put it is that with the rise of instant information, everyone is rushing to be the first report on a story and take liberties with the term "credible source" Or you could be a public official and use the fact that you read it on the Internet as validation something's veracity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cgeldmacher Posted September 28, 2017 Share Posted September 28, 2017 25 minutes ago, JohnnyJumpUp said: Fixed it for you. Recording a sex act without consent is not necessarily a crime. Then allow me to turn it right back around and fix your error. This was cited before, but comes right out of Missouri statutes (RSMo. 565.252): A person commits the offense of invasion of privacy if he or she knowingly: (1) Photographs, films, videotapes, produces, or otherwise creates an image of another person, without the person’s consent, while the person is in a state of full or partial nudity and is in a place where one would have a reasonable expectation of privacy Just making the tape is a Class A misdemeanor. Once you start showing it to other people, it goes to a felony Invasion of privacy is a class A misdemeanor unless: (1) A person who creates an image in violation of this section distributes the image to another or transmits the image in a manner that allows access to that image via computer; (2) A person disseminates or permits the dissemination by any means, to another person, of a videotape, photograph, or film obtained in violation of this section; (3) More than one person is viewed, photographed, filmed or videotaped during the same course of conduct; or (4) The offense was committed by a person who has previously been found guilty of invasion of privacy in which case invasion of privacy is a class E felony. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
615Billiken Posted September 28, 2017 Share Posted September 28, 2017 New Story from PD: http://www.stltoday.com/news/local/crime-and-courts/slu-basketball-players-at-center-of-sexual-assault-allegations-lawyers/article_3bef0814-9907-5a2a-b1f1-2e5c8311b103.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Box and Won Posted September 28, 2017 Share Posted September 28, 2017 New stuff from the Post, including quotes from the players' attorneys: http://www.stltoday.com/news/local/crime-and-courts/slu-basketball-players-at-center-of-sexual-assault-allegations-lawyers/article_3bef0814-9907-5a2a-b1f1-2e5c8311b103.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheChosenOne Posted September 28, 2017 Share Posted September 28, 2017 Thanks for passing along @615Billiken, be a little faster next time @Box and Won! Rosenblum is the attorney for 3 of the players, so they aren't messing around. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Box and Won Posted September 28, 2017 Share Posted September 28, 2017 Just now, TheChosenOne said: Thanks for passing along @615Billiken, be a little faster next time @Box and Won! I'm on AOL dialup. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kshoe Posted September 28, 2017 Share Posted September 28, 2017 Well, they definitely lawyered up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spoon-Balls Posted September 28, 2017 Share Posted September 28, 2017 Wonder why three of the players are represented by one lawyer and the other player is represented by a separate lawyer? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bobby Metzinger Posted September 28, 2017 Share Posted September 28, 2017 11 minutes ago, LindellWest said: Haha, I remember that party. If my memory is correct, the kid jumping off the balcony didn't help anyone's cause. No, and the fact that SLU was temp housing an assistant provost with a wife and 6-mo old child in Grand Forest until he could find permanent housing didn't either... LOL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts