Maurice Washington Faces Charges

Saunders said:
Correct me if I'm wrong, but my understanding is that the two boys in the video were never charged with assault, and that all three of them were expelled after the incident. Then, one of the boys was charged for distributing the video? It seems like it was never being view through the lens of sexual assault until after Washington was involved? So, does that mean they go back and prosecute the two boys now?
Click to expand...
It wasn't being viewed as an assault in 2016 because the girl said she was ashamed

Fast forward to 2018 when she receives the video from Washington, she wants the record to show that it was non-consensual.  Or asasult

 
knapplc said:
It's an interesting question. As we're all learning about California law, anyone underage engaging in sex is doing something unlawful. This video was circulated years ago at their school. That being the case, why weren't all three charged with unlawful sex at the time? 

Have you seen the video?
Click to expand...
@Dewiz  DON'T ANSWER THAT!  IT'S A TRAP

 
knapplc said:
Although the numbers of false accusations are small, they are still damaging to those falsely accused.  The Duke Lacrosse case is only one very public example.

First bold - Yes.

Second bold - Yes, based on a preponderance of evidence, but asking if their freedom should be stripped is far different than asking if they should be publicly named. A person can be incarcerated pending trial based on evidence without telling the world what they're charged with. 
Click to expand...


That makes sense to me. I think it's a tricky situation, especially with celebrities or psuedo celebrities like Mo. This information gets leaked and people have to be named in lawsuits. The only time I've ever seen this really been done well is when secrets are essential to the case (like clearing a whole court floor in the Mueller report). 

Any thoughts on how to navigate this skillfully for other situations? I don't disagree with you but I do think that false accusations are super rare (based on scientific findings shared before) and that we need to take all claims seriously and not dismiss them apriori as a person regretting an act which I feel like is being done in this thread at times. 

Again, I see your concerns, I agree with them, but I don't think I know how to navigate the (horrible) collateral damage. 

 
Folks, let's be tactful in this discussion.

Edit: I cleaned up a few recent comments. Let's be smart about this conversation.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Huskerzoo said:
You're only partially correct. 

Mo - Being charged with (not found guilty of yet) revenge porn and child porn. That is to say he's distributing the video. He's not charged with sexual assault. 

The three students in the video were all expelled is my understanding. Mo's ex only recently stated that it was a rape rather than consensual. However, this issue is separate from Mo. 
Click to expand...
I get that it's a separate charge, it just seems like there's a lot of inconsistency in the whole thing.

 
Saunders said:
I get that it's a separate charge, it just seems like there's a lot of inconsistency in the whole thing.
Click to expand...


My impression is that it's because of the numerous legal things that are being brought up by the woman in the video. It's all kind of getting mushed together. I haven't seen anything that has linked Mo to being in the video in any way. I think a lot of people are having similar conversations to what we're seeing here. 

 
BoKnowsD said:
The real crime here is Nick's show.  I've always heard that he just takes people's ideas and throws his little spin on it.  I actually prefer the guy who has stood in for him recently.  

I don't toss these allegations around lightly until Nick, blatantly, stole a talking point DB and I were chatting about.  

On 8/10 at 856am, when the story broke that Ohio State was going to suspend Urban I asked DB if this is actually a smart move being that we live in a world that if they do so, by the time the suspension is up the world would have moved on the "next big story".

THAT MORNING on Nick's show, within an HOUR he is spewing my exact thoughts.  lol -  he's just a joke
Click to expand...
Are you under the impression people can't use and/or steal each other's ideas? Because that's most of human history. If he heard what you'd said and then expanded on it, so what? That's pretty much what talk shows do.

 
Huskerzoo said:
My impression is that it's because of the numerous legal things that are being brought up by the woman in the video. It's all kind of getting mushed together. I haven't seen anything that has linked Mo to being in the video in any way. I think a lot of people are having similar conversations to what we're seeing here. 
Click to expand...
True, and I think that it's causing some lines to be blurred, and alot of misinformation.

 
giphy.gif


 
Back
Top