Husker03

7 minutes ago, Hedley Lamarr said:

I hope the pictures you have been looking at include only those 18 and older 

 

Good to know that having pause about believing this new assault allegation automatically means I probably look at child porn pics. I’ll try to do better to model  my character after you.

39 minutes ago, Stumpy1 said:

 

 

There is no doubt that it could have been forced but I dont think that is how it went down.  

Buh duh bum! 

7 minutes ago, Moiraine said:

 

 

None of that makes your comment on blow jobs making you think it's not sexual assault make sense.

I think there are reasons to doubt her claim, but that isn't one of them.

I never said a blow job couldn’t be assault and I’ve been looking at the whole picture the entire time, and the many reasons to doubt her claim are so substantial that I am confident saying that labeling this as an assault is disingenuous.  

7 minutes ago, Moiraine said:

 

 

You literally have no idea what happened before the video. Someone can be coerced into sex and that is defined as sexual assault. Same goes for threats.

 

 

 

https://definitions.uslegal.com/s/sexual-assault/

 

Or it could be one fifteen year old enjoying giving a blowie to another, which, good for her.  My contention isn’t that it’s impossible that she was coerced in some way, my contention that I would have assumed that would have been the first thing she brought up when it went viral in her religious school and got her expelled and left having to deal with her parents. Two years out and she hasn’t thought of explaining to her parents, her school, the police that they threatened to TP her locker or that they slipped her a roofie? Doesn’t add up is all. 

2 minutes ago, Cdog923 said:

 

I was waiting for @Husker03 to respond, but since King's Academy is a private christian school, they could have been expelled for almost any reason, including participating in premarital sex. 

Absolutely, which is why I’m sure they were expelled. But in 2017 if you expel a victim of sexual assault in a very public case I would expect a high degree of backlash. And yes, could be assault by definition if she was too young to consent, but if that was the only qualifier then I would guess she’d be on the hook for adsaulting the boys in the video as well. I consider myself a pretty sting advocate for sexual victims and the me too movement.  At the same time, accusations that don’t make sense or add up or are outright false are unacceptable. So rarely is there  a public video of the event.  In this case there is, and it wasn’t considered an assault until it made a better headline. 

1 minute ago, Moiraine said:

 

Yes.

 

 

Then you are very ignorant about the subject.

If you say so. 

Just now, Moiraine said:

 

 

You have to be f***ing kidding me with this s#!t.

I’m not. I can’t see how this is assault when it hasn’t been brought up for 2-3 years as such. Unless it’s a situation where the boys are older or something, but again, I would have thought that would have been a major point of contention over the past 24-36 months. 

2 minutes ago, Moiraine said:

 

 

And also to say that you don't think that because it was a blow job it doesn't seem like assault to you.

It’s not assault in this case. Schools can’t expel assault victims with video evidence and get away with it, just like boys don’t escape charges for 2 years if they are video themselves assaulting a girl. There’s no assault here. 

52 minutes ago, JJ Husker said:

 

As an aside, you seem to get a lot of tail. 20 year olds when you’re 14, coworkers shoving you into closets  ...what’s your secret? Axe body spray? 

And they all happen to be named Rosie. 

1 minute ago, Lonestar_Husker said:

I don't need a court to tell me what is or what isn't an assault. If you're not a female assault victim, you don't understand the emotional barriers involved in reporting an assault. Just because she hasn't reported it, yet, doesn't mean it didn't happen. PTSD isn't just for war veterans. 

 

It should be easy to confirm whether Maurice sent her the video or not. If he sent it, I don't want to hear another word about "high character". Legally guilty or not, sending that to anyone is not what I consider "high character".

She did report it.  3 years ago. Only how is she considering if she should pursue it as an assault. 

1 minute ago, 10_point_buck said:

 

As a parent myself, I agree with your post.  It is amazing to read some of the responses.  By the tone of many of them, you can pretty much tell who has kids of their own or a sister that they would not want to see in this situation.  My God people, a 15 year old girl was sexually assaulted and we are worrying about a man/child who can run the football?  I am not going to judge anyone's moral compass, but there are many on this board that need to have their's reset.

The problem is that the sexual assault has not been defined or prosecuted even while a video of it has existed in public hands for almost 3 years.  You have to ask yourself how THAT could ever happen.  And one of the answers is, it’s not a sexual assault at all.  If the video isn’t clear enough for the legal system to make a case after 3 years, why would we assume it was clear enough for Maurice to draw that conclusion?

5 minutes ago, Moiraine said:

 

 

I was under the impression we were similar ages. Did smart phones exist when you were 18?

 

I am 100% sure I would have received dick pics from my 18 year old boyfriend when I was 16 if smartphones had existed back then.

I didn’t have a smartphone but I did have a digital camera, computer, and internet and was willing to put some work in to attain 8.8/10 rating on ratemyrack.com. As I’ve said above, my 18-24 years would have been much worse had I come of age in 2010+.  

13 minutes ago, Hunter94 said:

in context, out of context, your brother and sister did it too.......you did it.......doesn't matter.

all this is about him sending the video....everything else is irrelevant. he sent it, period. there is a law against what he did.

There’s a law against smoking pot too, let’s string everybody up!

26 minutes ago, NM11046 said:

I find it interesting that many comments/commenters are referring to the normalcy of teens videoing and the typical behavior including sharing pics, videos etc.  Normal doesn't make it right.  It's normal to sometimes have too many beers and then drive.  Still shouldn't do it - it puts you and others at risk and there are ramifications when you are caught.  There are many things considered typical but that doesn't make them right, nor does it mean that it shouldn't be punished.

 

If this wasn't our top RB and was a kid at your kid's school, if he had sent a video to your son what would you expect your son to do?  If the video was of your daughter what would you think was appropriate?  If you were a teacher and this involved your students how would you handle it and what would you feel is right?

Here’s the fallacy of your entire post.  You bring in adults and use them to draw your comparisons. Drinking and driving is illegal, but children that do it under 18 are handled completely differently. My children get sent videos of kids having sex with each other and you ask how I, an adult, would handle it. My daughter is in the video and you ask if I, and adult, would think it’s appropriate. If I, an adult teacher, knew about this, how would I handle it? We aren’t dealing with rational adults in any of the scenarios listed here. My heart was broken when I was 19. For a long time I can remember wanting to do crazy, borderline insane irrational things to try to get my ex back. I knew these things were not logical but I still thought about them. Seriously, if I would have had a smartphone at that time I may have ruined a lot, and I certainly wouldn’t have left that phase with even a shred of dignity. Instead I am lucky to only be embarrassed by the internal memories of these thoughts. I can’t believe what a fool I was at 16-20 and I’m not about to pull a holier than thou approach when considering those that still are. 

16 minutes ago, Big Red 40 said:

From what i've read so far i don't think and serious criminal charges are going to stick on Mo, but i think he may be suspended or cut from the team. I hope not. because i don't want to lose our top running back . i don't pretend to know the players as humans and i'm in no position to judge them, sad truth is i'm mostly interested in them as ball players.There i said it.  

I don’t think so. I think this is may be he was really held up last spring/summer and was a risk to get here. I’d bet it had not as much to do with grades and everything to do  trying to figure out how to handle this mess. With everything we know about Frost and his attention to detail, his focus on character kids, his meticulous planning, etc, I’d put money that he and the U have been up and back and up again analyzing this inside and out to the best of their abilities. They haven’t acted, nor because he’s the only kid that can run with a football in his hand, but because there’s not enough here to act on.  That’s also likely the reason not much else legally is going on here. Many women don’t press charges in sexual assault situations due to the he said she said aspect and difficulty going through the process trying to prove everything.  In this case, there is a video. The fact that 3 years have passed, the video has been seen by many and yet no charges have been brought gives me pause. Nothing adds up here. 

16 minutes ago, Toe said:

 

You 'member when Sipple was arrested for indecent exposure? I 'member.

 

http://www.dailynebraskan.com/law-order/article_0ab27e5b-f549-5814-a55c-e0b6e616a2fc.html

I can’t stop giggling. 

2 hours ago, Pedro G said:

Then he may not be the same player if he no longer has that explosiveness. Tyson Lindsay was not the same. 

That’s because Tyjon didn’t need to get any better, he was already all American, just ask him. 

110/season. So around 5/game. 

18 minutes ago, SouthLincoln Husker said:

Sounds like he wants to be N, but wants them to show more LOVE.

Wonder if the three taxi's can head south?!?!

3 minutes ago, Cdog923 said:

 

 

The main problem with this is he's waited until the end of January to try and get his bench more involved. We all know how reliant on the starters that the team is, but they're all averaging over 28 minutes a game, and it's starting to show. Miles should have tried to find solid bench rotations in November and December, rather than throwing his hands in the air and riding with the starting 5 the entire time. 

Ya, I totally agree. I need no convincing that Miles is in over his head, I just think the entire team is a lost cause at this point.  JPJ has been lackluster all season, Roby has taken zero steps forward and Cope is a role player at best being forced to try to be something that he’s not due to the inadequacies of the others. Watson and Brochardt are the bright spots on this team this season, and when your bright spots are a point guard and an oak tree off the bench, you’re dead in the water. 

17 minutes ago, B.B. Hemingway said:

 

 

Wichita, KS isn't exactly an oasis during the winter months. They get snow, and it's regularly below freezing during the winter.

Ya but it is quite a difference. More like a 45 day winter instead of the 120 day version.  

16 minutes ago, Mavric said:

Glad miles was insistent the the bench needed more minutes....

 

 

In fairness, the starters weren’t much better through the first 30 minutes. 

As long as he sobers up long enough to fire Miles he will be fine. 

How are we doing when it comes to talking about Jordan?

1 minute ago, Blackshirt316 said:

 

I'm perfectly aware of this spin.

 

I'm also aware of how our AD treats Darrin Erstad.

 

So excuse me while I laugh.

The same Darin Erstad that also needs a new job? If Bill isn’t falling a overhimself to keep sub par coaches flush, I’m not sure I see the problem.