Maurice Washington Faces Charges

[30-50 Feral Hogs]

1 minute ago, BlitzFirst said:

 

Not unless it's unpaid leave.

Not all businesses do things the same way.

[30-50 Feral Hogs]

2 minutes ago, funhusker said:

One of the boys who was actually in the video and distributed it to the entire school only got probation.

 

Why would a kid who wasn't in the video, and only sent it to a single person (who was in the video) be held to a more harsh sentence?

 

Not condoning his actions, just asking for the sake of punishments...

It has been discussed a couple pages ago.  The person that received probation was due to the fact that he was a minor at the time of filming and distribution.  Washington was not a minor 3 years later when he sent the girl the video.

[Nebfanatic]

3 minutes ago, 30-50 Feral Hogs said:

I get the feeling from some in this discussion that they don't really care that Washington did what he did.  Legalities aside.  Because even if it is negotiated down from a felony to a misdemeanor, he still did what he did.  It doesn't make it less awful from a human standpoint. 

 

 

There is a difference between not caring and wanting to see appropriate punishment.

[RedDenver]

3 minutes ago, knapplc said:

 

I said no such thing.

Maybe you meant something different, but that's what it seemed like you were saying. Here's the sequence of posts:

26 minutes ago, RedDenver said:

Or the coaches/university could decide on a punishment based on Mo sending a sex video to humiliate someone regardless of the legal ramifications. And then the coaches/university make a clear statement about the punishment.

 

24 minutes ago, knapplc said:

 

How do you know they haven't?

 

22 minutes ago, RedDenver said:

Maybe I missed it. Can you point me to the press release about Mo's punishment?

 

16 minutes ago, knapplc said:

 

You know they don't announce all punishments with a press release. C'mon.

 

[30-50 Feral Hogs]

Just now, Nebfanatic said:

There is a difference between not caring and wanting to see appropriate punishment.

Do you think what he did was awful?  What is the appropriate punishment, outside of anything from the courts?

[knapplc]

Just now, RedDenver said:

Maybe you meant something different, but that's what it seemed like you were saying. Here's the sequence of posts:

 

 

I see. You made a couple of statements in that post.

 

I was responding to: "Or the coaches/university could decide on a punishment based on Mo sending a sex video to humiliate someone regardless of the legal ramifications."

 

[RedDenver]

2 minutes ago, BlitzFirst said:

 

We don't know what the suspension was for.  It could have nothing to do with CA.  In this instance, the only logic flaw is applying the suspension as a result of what we think is the CA case.

No, the flaw is that there's no explanation for the punishment, which means it's fair game to make educated guesses about what it was for. Considering that no other players were suspended for drug-related incidents and there are no other incidents involving Mo, the only logical conclusion is that Mo's suspension was for the CA case.

[30-50 Feral Hogs]

Just now, RedDenver said:

No, the flaw is that there's no explanation for the punishment, which means it's fair game to make educated guesses about what it was for. Considering that no other players were suspended for drug-related incidents and there are no other incidents involving Mo, the only logical conclusion is that Mo's suspension was for the CA case.

 

Didn't all of the citations for weed get tossed for all of the players?

[CapoValley]

3 minutes ago, 30-50 Feral Hogs said:

Do you think what he did was awful?  What is the appropriate punishment, outside of anything from the courts?

Interested in hearing what a few people say to this. 

[Nebfanatic]

Just now, 30-50 Feral Hogs said:

Do you think what he did was awful?  What is the appropriate punishment, outside of anything from the courts?

I think it was awful but there are levels to this. It was immature and hurtful but it was not heinous. It was out of spite. This is a person he knew intimately. There is a strong chance Mo wasn't aware it was assualt in the video. That doesn't make it ok, but it is nowhere in the same ballpark as groping someone or beyond. Its not in the same universe as a 30+ year old person looking at 15 year olds. I think an appropriate punishment would be a 3 or 4 game suspension. 

[BigRedBuster]

5 minutes ago, 30-50 Feral Hogs said:

Do you think what he did was awful?  What is the appropriate punishment, outside of anything from the courts?

 

Yes it was awful.

 

I do not have enough information to answer the rest.

[Nebfanatic]

2 minutes ago, 30-50 Feral Hogs said:

 

Didn't all of the citations for weed get tossed for all of the players?

Yes along with pretty much anyone else being charged with small time possesion due to the Farm Bill

[30-50 Feral Hogs]

4 minutes ago, CapoValley said:

Interested in hearing what a few people say to this. 

I think those who believe what he did wasn't awful will remain mostly silent.

[CapoValley]

Just now, 30-50 Feral Hogs said:

I think those who believe what he did wasn't awful will remain mostly silent.

And that’s saying something as well. 

[knapplc]

7 minutes ago, RedDenver said:

No, the flaw is that there's no explanation for the punishment, which means it's fair game to make educated guesses about what it was for. Considering that no other players were suspended for drug-related incidents and there are no other incidents involving Mo, the only logical conclusion is that Mo's suspension was for the CA case.

 

While I agree that they should have better explained the reason for the suspension, Mo's situation is not the same as the others busted for weed/paraphernalia. Mo is under scrutiny for a possible felony conviction, while the other guys were just dumb about weed.

 

Different scenarios, different punishment. It's not logical to presume the suspension was for the CA situation, just like we can't rule it out.