Started By
Message
re: AU RB Jarquez Hunter+others suspended for filming & distributing sex acts without consent
Posted on 5/19/23 at 8:45 am to StopRobot
Posted on 5/19/23 at 8:45 am to StopRobot
quote:
"OK the videos may be real but...."
I don’t think anyone questioned them being real. If so, that’s dumb. It does look like the person that exposed the videos was after some kind of vengeance. I don’t believe the people in the videos/pictures were the ones that came forth. But they might not have known videos of them were being shared. An investigation has to be done in this case.
I hope the identities of the females are not revealed. And I think the faces were not revealed in the videos.
Posted on 5/19/23 at 8:45 am to RealDawg
quote:
Don’t think we need to call her a bitch for wanting some BBC.
I didn't call her a bitch for wanting BBC. I called her a bitch for being a skank arse slut.
Posted on 5/19/23 at 8:45 am to LSU Grad Alabama Fan
quote:
Did Jarquez help make any videos without consent from other parties?
Did Jarquez share any of these videos without consent from others?
Not illegal to do either of those... No one will care, but lets look at the law... (HE SHOULD BE SUSPENDED FOR BEING AN IDIOT)
Lets look at the actual law. (The person posting on Twitter could be in legal trouble because they were harassing Jarquez.
LINK (Revenge Porn Law)
The defendant is charged with distributing a private image.
A person commits the crime of distributing a private image if he/she knowingly posts, emails, texts, transmits, or otherwise distributes a private image with the intent to harass, threaten, coerce, or intimidate the person depicted when the depicted person has not consented to the transmission and the depicted person has a reasonable expectation of privacy against transmission of the private image.
To convict, the State must prove beyond a reasonable doubt each of the following elements:
(1) The defendant posted, emailed, texted, transmitted, or otherwise distributed a private image of [insert name of person depicted];
(2) The defendant did so with the intent to harass, threaten, coerce, or intimidate the person depicted;
(3) The depicted person had not consented to the transmission of the private image;
(4) The depicted person had a reasonable expectation of privacy against transmission of the private image; (AND)
(5) The defendant did so knowingly.
So, the girl in the video could sue multiple folks for a privacy violation, but not criminal.
This post was edited on 5/19/23 at 8:48 am
Posted on 5/19/23 at 8:46 am to LSU Grad Alabama Fan
quote:
I didn't call her a bitch for wanting BBC. I called her a bitch for being a skank arse slut.
Fair.
Posted on 5/19/23 at 8:46 am to RealDawg
He will be reinstated half time of game one
Posted on 5/19/23 at 8:47 am to dstone12
quote:
Please, please let this be true. Please.
Tuscaloosa is a man of the people!
Posted on 5/19/23 at 8:47 am to RealDawg
quote:
The more publicity it gets the more likely he will have to
So you're saying Tuscaloosa is, in fact, doing work?

Posted on 5/19/23 at 8:49 am to allin2010
quote:
Not illegal to do either of those... No one will care, but lets look at the law...
What is the law on voyeurism? Because there were multiple pictures disseminated of his male teammates in the shower, and at least one sex video was taken from behind a door.
This post was edited on 5/19/23 at 8:51 am
Posted on 5/19/23 at 8:52 am to Tuscaloosa
Holy shite. Go look at his Twitter. Guy is a nut case
Posted on 5/19/23 at 8:52 am to allin2010
quote:
Not illegal to do either of those... No one will care, but lets look at the law...
Does this mean in Alabama that I can put a camera up in the bathroom at my house and film guests?
This post was edited on 5/19/23 at 8:54 am
Posted on 5/19/23 at 8:57 am to HailToTheChiz
quote:
Holy shite. Go look at his Twitter. Guy is a nut case
Brian Stultz? Nah, he’s a writer for Rivals. Seems like an okay dude to me.
Posted on 5/19/23 at 9:02 am to LSU Grad Alabama Fan
quote:
Does this mean in Alabama that I can put a camera up in the bathroom at my house and film guests?
That is still illegal.
Posted on 5/19/23 at 9:04 am to HailToTheChiz
quote:
Holy shite. Go look at his Twitter. Guy is a future Pulitzer Prize winner in online journalism.
Posted on 5/19/23 at 9:07 am to paperwasp
Thank you, internet legend paperwasp. You will be the first person I invite on my podcast.
Posted on 5/19/23 at 9:08 am to Tuscaloosa
quote:
Thank you, internet legend paperwasp. You will be the first person I invite on my podcast.
Posted on 5/19/23 at 9:15 am to Tornado Alley
Don’t you do that! This is the very thread you called me out for being afraid of Hugh Freeze.
I’ve got a brand to protect, sir.
I’ve got a brand to protect, sir.
Posted on 5/19/23 at 9:19 am to Beachbum87
quote:
That is still illegal.
So what's the difference with putting up a camera in the bathroom versus filming someone without their consent while they're getting banged from behind?
This post was edited on 5/19/23 at 9:20 am
Posted on 5/19/23 at 9:20 am to Tuscaloosa
I reported Tuscaloosa to Federal Aviation Administration this morning. I don’t think it’s safe he flies the skies for public.
Posted on 5/19/23 at 9:22 am to allin2010
quote:Eh... filming someone in a public place without consent is one thing, putting a hidden camera in your bedroom or place of work and creating nonconsensual pornography is another matter.
Not illegal to do either of those... No one will care, but lets look at the law... (HE SHOULD BE SUSPENDED FOR BEING AN IDIOT)
Not a lawyer, but from a legal perspective could this not also bring into play Criminal Surveillance and Dissemination of Obscene Material?
Beyond that, Title IX doesn't require a crime to be committed.
And beyond both of those, a civil case doesn't require a crime to be committed or a Title IX investigation.
We'll see how this all shakes out.
Posted on 5/19/23 at 9:24 am to ALhunter
Is a cell phone video he had in his hand really a concealed video? Seems extremely hard for her to prove she didn’t know it was being filmed
Popular
Back to top



0








