Maurice Washington Faces Charges

Back to Maurice, it's not that I don't think he should be punished, it is just complicated. First, I don't think he should catch a felony and be a registered sex offender over this. Misdeminor, sure. Pay a fine, take some classes, serve probation or whatever. That seems appropriate. As far as suspension and stuff goes, it would make things a heck of alot easier if the courts could just make a decision on this. That is what its all based on. I wish we could sit him in the non con and call it good. That would be appropriate in my view, but my worry is if dates get pushed and he gets convicted down the line if people will have amnesia that he sat already. The timing of everything complicates what should be pretty straightforward.

 
I'll go to bat for @Huskers93-97 - terrible optics of the way he phrased that but nobody is trying to see the point he is trying to make, I think.

For two people to have sex there needs to be some level of effort involved. Like you have to want to and you have to try and you have to make sure the other person is on board. Coercion is a bad word, but not actually an inaccurate one. Sometimes you're in the mood and you do the chores, or give a massage, or get some fancy underwear, or ____________ whatever the thing is and those are all forms of trying to convince and 'manipulate' your partner. Nothing wrong with it.

 
I think they’re being noncommittal just so the opponents and future ones have to plan. I’d bet we don’t see a lot of him on Saturday. If things go south past his court date that play might get harder. It’s just wait and see at this point. 

 
Landlord said:
I'll go to bat for @Huskers93-97 - terrible optics of the way he phrased that but nobody is trying to see the point he is trying to make, I think.

For two people to have sex there needs to be some level of effort involved. Like you have to want to and you have to try and you have to make sure the other person is on board. Coercion is a bad word, but not actually an inaccurate one. Sometimes you're in the mood and you do the chores, or give a massage, or get some fancy underwear, or ____________ whatever the thing is and those are all forms of trying to convince and 'manipulate' your partner. Nothing wrong with it.
Click to expand...
I understood what he was saying and you're right. 

 
Moiraine said:
No one wears fancy underwear for me unless I buy it for them. 
Click to expand...
giphy.gif


Would this work in the same context then?

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Landlord said:
For two people to have sex there needs to be some level of effort involved. Like you have to want to and you have to try and you have to make sure the other person is on board. Coercion is a bad word, but not actually an inaccurate one. Sometimes you're in the mood and you do the chores, or give a massage, or get some fancy underwear, or ____________ whatever the thing is and those are all forms of trying to convince and 'manipulate' your partner. Nothing wrong with it.
Click to expand...


It would take a lot of convincing for me to think that this definition of "coercion" is the one that Washington's former girlfriend claims occurred on that car ride with the two girls.

As we've discussed probably way too much already, nobody really knows whether she's telling the truth as to how she later conveyed that level of "coercion" (rape), but I'm not seeing the parallels to the point Huskers93-97 made to that situation with those three kids.

 
Undone said:
It would take a lot of convincing for me to think that this definition of "coercion" is the one that Washington's former girlfriend claims occurred on that car ride with the two girls.

As we've discussed probably way too much already, nobody really knows whether she's telling the truth as to how she later conveyed that level of "coercion" (rape), but I'm not seeing the parallels to the point Huskers93-97 made to that situation with those three kids.
Click to expand...


None of us know what happened in the car. I'm not sure why you are so confident in your first sentence.

 
BigRedBuster said:
None of us know what happened in the car. I'm not sure why you are so confident in your first sentence.
Click to expand...


You have definitely misunderstood.

I am not confident at all in what really transpired during that car ride in regards to intentions/willingness/etc. But what we do know is what the girl's story became after it happened. 

So the point is, in some vacuum what Landlord is saying is broadly and demonstrably true, no doubt. But it doesn't necessarily mean that it has any parallels to this situation and without any clarification, the original comment from the first poster absolutely came off cavalier - as if he acted sure that there was plenty of room to just say that the original situation wasn't rape for the reasons he went on to list.

But as we've also stated so many times...and not to sound at all calloused towards anything related to the original situation...but as far as the hot water Mo might be in, the original intentions of those three kids doesn't actually matter to the charges he's facing anyway.

 
BigRedBuster said:
None of us know what happened in the car. I'm not sure why you are so confident in your first sentence.
Click to expand...




He’s confident because he’s merely talking about the claim, not what actually happened. If she’s saying something bad happened, it’s highly probable the bad thing isn’t what Landlord described or Huskers93-97 is talking about. The claim must be worse than that otherwise there’s no reason to make the claim, whether it’s a lie or not. 

That said I don’t think he meant the comment in the way people are taking it. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Back
Top