Started By
Message
re: Auburn Softball - WHAT THE ACTUAL SH*T?
Posted on 8/28/17 at 12:00 pm to MrAUTigers
Posted on 8/28/17 at 12:00 pm to MrAUTigers
quote:
You can't have it both ways
Can't have what both ways?
Unless I misunderstood you implied that sharing the texts they acquired (by means TBD) rose to the level of blackmail. It does nothing of the sort.
If they said to her "we've got these texts, you're going to pay up or we'll leak them", that's a different story but that doesn't appear to be what happened.
Turning them over to school authorities is no different than the guy at best buy finding kiddie images on the phone some guy just had him fix and calling the cops.
Edited to add - as with how the images were acquired, circumstances matter A LOT. What may be illegal in one situation is completely appropriate in another.
Regardless of the circumstances, the AD telling them to delete the images was a completely inappropriate course of action that I bet ends up costing her job.
This post was edited on 8/28/17 at 12:02 pm
1
Posted on 8/28/17 at 12:04 pm to JustGetItRight
quote:
Unless I misunderstood you implied that sharing the texts they acquired (by means TBD) rose to the level of blackmail. It does nothing of the sort.
It can be used as a form of blackmail. That is why it is against the law.
quote:
Turning them over to school authorities is no different than the guy at best buy finding kiddie images on the phone some guy just had him fix and calling the cops.
If he took it to Best Buy, he authorized them to fix his phone. I am not sure that could be used against him. That would be like a court ordered wire tap for drug dealing and they find out something else shady is going on. That can't be used against them....only the drug dealing. This girl did not give the other girls permission to be in her phone. Huge difference. I bet you get your arse handed to you in court.
Eta now if the texts were deleted to cover up the situation, and the coach kept his job because of that,.........yeah, that's a huge problem.
ETA to the ETA This happened months and months ago. Do you find it odd that this story breaks one week before football starts? I do.
This post was edited on 8/28/17 at 12:11 pm
Posted on 8/28/17 at 12:16 pm to MrAUTigers
This one is not actually clear. That quora link is not exactly rock solid source for legal basis. There are many examples of states where an unlocked cell phone has been held to offer no "reasonable expectation to privacy". As a result, police officers are able to look at the contents without need for a warrant. The same would likely (but not necessarily) hold true for private citizens accessing the content in those states as well.
Posted on 8/28/17 at 12:19 pm to MrAUTigers
I see now. You think this is just another hack job at Auburn. I guess that explains why you were in the other threads saying the story wasn't true.
It won't matter, but I'll give you a real world example for you to ponder.
Why isn't Dianne Bentley facing criminal charges? The text messages and phone calls she released proving the then-governor was involved in an illicit affair weren't acquired with his permission. She got the texts off his tablet, yet she was never charged and those items played prominent roles in his removal.
The answer is the simple one you won't acknowledge. Circumstances matter.
It won't matter, but I'll give you a real world example for you to ponder.
Why isn't Dianne Bentley facing criminal charges? The text messages and phone calls she released proving the then-governor was involved in an illicit affair weren't acquired with his permission. She got the texts off his tablet, yet she was never charged and those items played prominent roles in his removal.
The answer is the simple one you won't acknowledge. Circumstances matter.
Posted on 8/28/17 at 12:19 pm to fibonaccisquared
quote:
The same would likely (but not necessarily) hold true for private citizens accessing the content in those states as well.
I just find that so hard to believe. I don't see how, if a person left their cell phone on a table and it had financial documents on them, I could go through their phone, get said financials, and not be breaking the law. This is what this amounts to. Private information was taken, without consent, and used.
Posted on 8/28/17 at 12:20 pm to fibonaccisquared
quote:
There are many examples of states where an unlocked cell phone has been held to offer no "reasonable expectation to privacy". As a result, police officers are able to look at the contents without need for a warrant. The same would likely (but not necessarily) hold true for private citizens accessing the content in those states as well.
THANK YOU.
Your LE examples are spot on and private citizens have a far lower burden to meet than LE.
Posted on 8/28/17 at 12:21 pm to JustGetItRight
quote:
Why isn't Dianne Bentley facing criminal charges? The text messages and phone calls she released proving the then-governor was involved in an illicit affair weren't acquired with his permission. She got the texts off his tablet, yet she was never charged and those items played prominent roles in his removal.
psssstttttt The coach was removed. There was no cover-up. Things weren't deleted so said coach could keep his job. Nothing was swept under the rug. University policy was followed. Again, said coach broke no laws or NCAA rules. He broke University policy.
Posted on 8/28/17 at 12:23 pm to MrAUTigers
quote:
I don't see how, if a person left their cell phone on a table and it had financial documents on them, I could go through their phone, get said financials, and not be breaking the law.
Once again, circumstances matter.
The table in your house? You've got a very reasonable expectation of privacy. The table in the company break room? Not so much.
How something is "used" also matters. Used your information to get a credit card? Jail time. Used the information to report wrongdoing? Getting praised.
Posted on 8/28/17 at 12:24 pm to JustGetItRight
quote:
How something is "used" also matters. Used your information to get a credit card? Jail time. Used the information to report wrongdoing? Getting praised.
Tell that to Edward Snowden.
Posted on 8/28/17 at 12:24 pm to MrAUTigers
quote:
psssstttttt The coach was removed. There was no cover-up
If the university didn't think there was wrongdoing, the head coach wouldn't have been fired before he could sign the contract extension.
Posted on 8/28/17 at 12:26 pm to JustGetItRight
quote:
If the university didn't think there was wrongdoing, the head coach wouldn't have been fired before he could sign the contract extension.
It wasn't the HC. The coach we are talking about was fired very early during last season. Posted on 8/28/17 at 12:27 pm to MrAUTigers
quote:
ell that to Edward Snowden.
Link to where he got his information off an unlocked phone?
I'm pretty sure the NSA could articulate an expectation of privacy.
If you go back to the start of our little back and forth, you'll note that my entire point has been that how the information was acquired is incredibly important.
Posted on 8/28/17 at 12:28 pm to Vols&Shaft83
I prefer to stick to what appear to be the facts.
1. An assistant coach had an affair with a student athlete. That is sick and its an abuse of power and he/she should be fired and never work in that role again.
2. The head coach resigned. That means he MOST LIKELY knew something about the affair and did not do anything about it. HE should be fired if he did not already resign. He should not work in college athletics again either.
3. Womenz be crazy. Leave it up to girls to go sneaking around and cracking into someones cell phone to get the dirt on others.
Other that that, all we know is that an attorney is throwing as much dirt on the wall to try and win as much money as possible for himself and his client. He will assume everyone is guilty, even Coach Malzahn, if it has a possibility of helping his case.
I know two people are guilty and they are no longer with the University. If Jenkins or Jacobs had knowledge - fire them too. I don't defend perverts or people who cover up for perverts.
But for those of you who are hoping Auburn will "burn down" over this - don't hold your breath. Our compliance department is not like Ole Miss.
1. An assistant coach had an affair with a student athlete. That is sick and its an abuse of power and he/she should be fired and never work in that role again.
2. The head coach resigned. That means he MOST LIKELY knew something about the affair and did not do anything about it. HE should be fired if he did not already resign. He should not work in college athletics again either.
3. Womenz be crazy. Leave it up to girls to go sneaking around and cracking into someones cell phone to get the dirt on others.
Other that that, all we know is that an attorney is throwing as much dirt on the wall to try and win as much money as possible for himself and his client. He will assume everyone is guilty, even Coach Malzahn, if it has a possibility of helping his case.
I know two people are guilty and they are no longer with the University. If Jenkins or Jacobs had knowledge - fire them too. I don't defend perverts or people who cover up for perverts.
But for those of you who are hoping Auburn will "burn down" over this - don't hold your breath. Our compliance department is not like Ole Miss.
Posted on 8/28/17 at 12:28 pm to MrAUTigers
quote:
It wasn't the HC.
So you believe daddy just up and decided to retire a couple of days before the story broke.
Right. I thought you were being serious. Nice troll.
Posted on 8/28/17 at 12:30 pm to Evolved Simian
quote:
They were using them against Corey, not the player. And blackmail involves keeping the affair secret in exchange for monetary or other consideration. They were attempting to expose the affair. If they distributed the images they took, then yes, they might possibly have broken a law, but it wasn't blackmail.
Then why did the girls demand that the girl not get on the bus? She was the one upset that her teammates took her phone. The AAD asked the girls to remove it from their phone. Jane Doe could have filed charges against the players.
Posted on 8/28/17 at 12:31 pm to JustGetItRight
He was the one that was supposedly offered the contract extension you referred to.........
Your words, not mine.
ETA The University knew there was wrongdoing. That's why a coach was fired early last season. AGAIN......no laws or NCAA rules were broken by the coach. University policy was broken.
ETA using your logic....saban should have been fired because his assistant strength and conditioning coach was giving out "loans".,,,,,,I am sure that is against university policy and NCAA rules.
quote:
If the university didn't think there was wrongdoing, the head coach wouldn't have been fired before he could sign the contract extension.
Your words, not mine.
ETA The University knew there was wrongdoing. That's why a coach was fired early last season. AGAIN......no laws or NCAA rules were broken by the coach. University policy was broken.
ETA using your logic....saban should have been fired because his assistant strength and conditioning coach was giving out "loans".,,,,,,I am sure that is against university policy and NCAA rules.
This post was edited on 8/28/17 at 12:36 pm
Posted on 8/28/17 at 1:01 pm to JustGetItRight
quote:
So you believe daddy just up and decided to retire a couple of days before the story broke.
No he believes the assistant coach was the one sleeping with the player since that's what the player claimed.
This post was edited on 8/28/17 at 1:02 pm
Posted on 8/28/17 at 1:08 pm to MrAUTigers
There are ways they could have been in possession of screenshots of those text and it be legal. A person can gather info on other persons as long as it is reasonably obtainable. Since we really don't know how they got those screenshots we don't know if they broke the law.
Posted on 8/28/17 at 1:11 pm to Tigerman97
SO the conclusion we've come to is that everybody involved in this is shady and this whole thing is a giant ugly mess?
word
word
Posted on 8/28/17 at 1:19 pm to Wallacewade04
quote:
SO the conclusion we've come to is that everybody involved in this is shady and this whole thing is a giant ugly mess?
I haven't seen anyone saying it isn't ugly. Most Auburn fans seem to want to use it as a way to topple JJ from the AD.
In the end, the ESPN article doesn't mean it is as bad as the writing suggests. At the end of the day, with sexual harassment institutions have to be extremely careful for both sides.
Letting Cory back in September on the surface looks bad, but girls admitted to going back to the AD and recanting original statements. Not letting him back could have been problematic. It has been stated Clint requested the girls do that...in my mind that is on him and the AD isn't responsible for that misinformation he created.
A coach sleeping with a player is shady. Though not illegal.
A coach harassing girls sexually is shady. Depending one the depth of the accusations it is potentially illegal.
A coach covering up another coaches shady dealings is wrong and should be let go in that circumstance. It appears when the AD began asking more intrusive questions concerning the issues of last summer and early spring Clint simply retired. My guess is if he'd answered honestly he would have been fired.
If the AD willing ignored info and let the coach return as some like to read into the situation my guess is we will see changes in the AD.
There is no good excuse as to why the AAD suggested the girls delete photos of messages, but it is unclear if she was protecting the girls with the evidence or trying to protect the coach and player caught in the affair.
Page 3 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News