bonwich Posted September 28, 2017 Share Posted September 28, 2017 Just now, kshoe said: Well, they definitely lawyered up. And if Willie and Kwamain had retained Scott Rosenblum this early on in the process, we would have been an Elite Eight team. BillsCPA and NH like this Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dlarry Posted September 28, 2017 Share Posted September 28, 2017 26 minutes ago, billikenfan05 said: Welcome back Thanks I was hoping to come back during a conflict free winning season but that may never happen. 1 minute ago, kshoe said: Well, they definitely lawyered up. You can't do much better than that in the lawyer department. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheChosenOne Posted September 28, 2017 Share Posted September 28, 2017 1 minute ago, kshoe said: Well, they definitely lawyered up. Correct me if I am wrong, didn't Majerus complain about that concerning the Mitchell/Reed situation. I thought I remember hearing something about the accuser having some high powered attorney at the disciplinary meeting while the players had some student representing them. Maybe I made this up in my head, but I thought there was something that led me to believe the players were given poor guidance by the school. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Box and Won Posted September 28, 2017 Share Posted September 28, 2017 Just now, Spoon-Balls said: Wonder why three of the players are represented by one lawyer and the other player is represented by a separate lawyer? Perhaps one player's involvement in the incident differed from that of the other three... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Box and Won Posted September 28, 2017 Share Posted September 28, 2017 nm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnnyJumpUp Posted September 28, 2017 Share Posted September 28, 2017 9 minutes ago, cgeldmacher said: 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. Just making the tape is not a misdemeanor, there are other elements that need to be met. Look up the definition of the bold/underlined, that would be a tough one to meet in this situation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Box and Won Posted September 28, 2017 Share Posted September 28, 2017 1 minute ago, TheChosenOne said: Correct me if I am wrong, didn't Majerus complain about that concerning the Mitchell/Reed situation. I thought I remember hearing something about the accuser having some high powered attorney at the disciplinary meeting while the players had some student representing them. Maybe I made this up in my head, but I thought there was something that led me to believe the players were given poor guidance by the school. A law student, IIRC. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billikenfan05 Posted September 28, 2017 Share Posted September 28, 2017 3 minutes ago, kshoe said: Well, they definitely lawyered up. Here’s what I’ve learned watching that show, okay? Lawyer up. You can’t handle that sh!t. Everybody’s like, “I’m gonna talk to the cops and straighten this whole thing out.” You’re gonna do 25 to life. Have fun with that, man." - Tom Segura Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cgeldmacher Posted September 28, 2017 Share Posted September 28, 2017 Just now, JohnnyJumpUp said: Just making the tape is not a misdemeanor, there are other elements that need to be met. Look up the definition of the bold/underlined, that's would be a tough one to meet in this situation. In an apartment and not knowing you're being taped is an expectation of privacy. That language is for when someone is doing something in public. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsCPA Posted September 28, 2017 Share Posted September 28, 2017 Wow i am hyped after reading that article. This seems to be best case scenario so far. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeSmetBilliken Posted September 28, 2017 Share Posted September 28, 2017 2 minutes ago, Box and Won said: Perhaps one player's involvement in the incident differed from that of the other three... Bingo. My guess is that Rogers' client is the alleged cameraman. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slufan13 Posted September 28, 2017 Share Posted September 28, 2017 2 minutes ago, cgeldmacher said: In an apartment and not knowing you're being taped is an expectation of privacy. That language is for when someone is doing something in public. We do not know if the victims didn't know they were taped. I am going with innocent until proven guilty. If they truly didn't know, I agree it's going to be a major issue and it should be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FromDaEastSide Posted September 28, 2017 Share Posted September 28, 2017 4 minutes ago, TheChosenOne said: Correct me if I am wrong, didn't Majerus complain about that concerning the Mitchell/Reed situation. I thought I remember hearing something about the accuser having some high powered attorney at the disciplinary meeting while the players had some student representing them. Maybe I made this up in my head, but I thought there was something that led me to believe the players were given poor guidance by the school. 3 minutes ago, Box and Won said: A law student, IIRC. TheChosenOne - I think you are correct and I think it was a Law Student that assisted in the University Hearing and IIRC they only had met right before the hearing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheChosenOne Posted September 28, 2017 Share Posted September 28, 2017 1 minute ago, FromDaEastSide said: TheChosenOne - I think you are correct and I think it was a Law Student that assisted in the University Hearing and IIRC they only had met right before the hearing. Thanks for the response, that is in line with what I remembered hearing, but I couldn't remember where I heard it or what exactly the deal was beyond the players being underrepresented in comparison to the accuser. Rather frustrating to hear. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RiseAndGrind Posted September 28, 2017 Share Posted September 28, 2017 Well, they couldn't have much better legal representation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
almaman Posted September 28, 2017 Share Posted September 28, 2017 If they are indeed involved in a consensual hanky-panky with 4 on 3 activity in full view of all involved and anyone gets in trouble for using a camera with or without consent it would be so ludicrous. Kids most so out of all of us our aware that there are cameras everywhere. Getting busted for that would be akin to the handful; of people prosecuted during Napster's heyday Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kshoe Posted September 28, 2017 Share Posted September 28, 2017 Interesting that Rogers specifically referenced the Title IX investigation. Its clear they have been hired to make sure there isn't another kangaroo court situation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billikenfan05 Posted September 28, 2017 Share Posted September 28, 2017 Can anyone provide cliff notes of Rogers and Rosenblum's reputation in the law community? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GBL_Bills Posted September 28, 2017 Share Posted September 28, 2017 Just now, billikenfan05 said: Can anyone provide cliff notes of Rogers and Rosenblum's reputation in the law community? +1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JMM28 Posted September 28, 2017 Share Posted September 28, 2017 Some part of me is excited that SLU is trying to be a big time program because these guys have some of the better attorneys they could. Does that make me a bad person? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
615Billiken Posted September 28, 2017 Share Posted September 28, 2017 Well at the very least this new story has softened the blow on the recruiting side. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RiseAndGrind Posted September 28, 2017 Share Posted September 28, 2017 2 minutes ago, billikenfan05 said: Can anyone provide cliff notes of Rogers and Rosenblum's reputation in the law community? You hire rosenblum if you can afford him or your case is hire profile enough. rogers used to be rosenblum partner. They split up the firm earlier this year. All still friendly. Rogers no slouch either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
615Billiken Posted September 28, 2017 Share Posted September 28, 2017 Just now, JMM28 said: Some part of me is excited that SLU is trying to be a big time program because these guys have some of the better attorneys they could. Does that make me a bad person? No. Makes you a winner. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spoon-Balls Posted September 28, 2017 Share Posted September 28, 2017 8 minutes ago, DeSmetBilliken said: Bingo. My guess is that Rogers' client is the alleged cameraman. So my presumption would be that if the other three did not play a part in the recording (or were not aware of it), the cameraman will get the suspension here? Who knows how this will all resolve, but it's sounding more like we're all going to breathe a collective sigh of relief when this is over. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillIkenFan_Dan Posted September 28, 2017 Share Posted September 28, 2017 "The complaining witnesses have given law enforcement and St. Louis University inconsistent statements, and their credibility needs to be called into question during the Title IX investigation," Rogers said. "I have every belief this student athlete will be exonerated at the conclusion of the Title IX investigation." seems like the boys might be ok Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts