JoPoy88

I mean I definitely believe it, who in his position wouldn’t be. But that also begs the question - the HC is blindsided by this? When the team’s PR claims today that they knew about this and investigated it already? But they didn’t tell coach? Hmmm

this is all one side’s story - conjecture at this point. It also doesn’t explain her injuries.

so based on the clip of the statute someone posted up thread, mistake of age is a standard not an affirmative defense in CA, meaning he has no burden of proof to support it, the burden still remains on the prosecution. So he doesn’t have to provide any evidence in support of it.

it’s a very fuzzy defense but in CA it does apparently work from time to time. It doesn’t require direct evidence like a fake ID - setting and circumstance can be used as well.

par for the course for ol’ T

yes. I can kinda see how Araiza’s going to approach this - there was sex, it was “consensual” (in the non-legal sense) and non-violent. Also, he reasonably believed she was of age at the time so the statutory charge is beat.

he’s not wrong -he’s addressing the consent defense -there is none in statutory rape cases. there is the reasonable and honest belief defense in statutory cases, which is entirely another thing

that’s exactly why his lawyer is making those statements - he’s setting up that defense.

I’d assume they definitely have to bring a few guys in for a look-see at least.

very well could be true - just going off the plaintiff’s complaint as that’s the only thing down on paper at this point.

it was some room in his residence. I assume he had housemates so who knows.

not a problem it’s already a massive thread I get it

one more time for the peeps in the back: “Law enforcement personnel are allowed to legally record conversations that they are not a party to. Police officers may then legally use this evidence for criminal prosecutions. Private citizens are also allowed to utilize these exceptions in a much more limited capacity. In order to use this exception 2 circumstances must be met: The person recording must be a part of the conversation, this essentially changes California law from an all-party consent state into a single-party consent state, [and,] They must be recording conversations in order to gather evidence that the other party committed one of the following crime: Extortion, kidnapping, bribery, harassing phone calls, or any felony involving violence against another person. This allows you to record conversations in most instances where you feel threatened.” exceptions to every law…

1. there is no consent in “consensual” sex if the victim is too intoxicated. 2. There is no consent defense in cases of statutory rape.

that’s right. There’s also this: “Private citizens are also allowed to utilize these exceptions in a much more limited capacity. In order to use this exception 2 circumstances must be met: The person recording must be a part of the conversation, this essentially changes California law from an all-party consent state into a single-party consent state. They must be recording conversations in order to gather evidence that the other party committed one of the following crime: Extortion, kidnapping, bribery, harassing phone calls, or any felony involving violence against another person. This allows you to record conversations in most instances where you feel threatened.”

there are exceptions to 2-party consent. Guess what one of them is?

It says that act happened outside and she was then brought inside to a room everything else happened and she claims she lost consciousness.

possibly. It’s also possible (and suggested in the LA Times article) that the SDPD waited quite a while before giving the school the okay to thoroughly investigate, lest they interfere with the criminal investigation.

there was an the findings were recently submitted to the DA. Might want to read the article.

Should absolutely be suspended, probably won’t be.

I think it’s going to look pretty similar to one of those yes.

the wasteland that is reality TV has something for just about anyone looking to shed a few IQ points.

because they’re badly managed, from the owner on down. Grier and McDaniel either not on the same page, or McDaniel thought he could just show up off the plane and mold guys to the roles he expected them to play without considering that they’d be very bad at those roles.

Ross is cheap?

Rex heard race and assumed it had something to do with feet