Von Pearson Update

[PowerWookie]

i interned at a DA's office in one of the biggest cities in the US last summer. Most of the time, defendants go free due to the impossibility of proving rape. It's pretty much he said she said unless the defendant has been convicted before. As much as I love UT Football, I can't be happy knowing that Von is free because usually victims never recover and rape usually did happen.

Yes send all the the usuallys to jail they are a horrible family always gulity

 

[drylo]

Most of the time, defendants go free due to the impossibility of proving rape.

Maybe next time you should intern with the public defender. It's a feature, not a bug, of our legal system that when it is "impossible" to prove that someone committed a crime, that someone goes free.

(I use "impossible" because that was your language, but it is worth noting that it is decidedly NOT impossible to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that a rape occurred--in general, that is. It may well be impossible to prove that Von raped anybody, in which case... well, as discussed below, he should go to prison anyway.)

I can't be happy knowing that Von is free because usually victims never recover and rape usually did happen.

And you know that "rape usually did happen"... how, exactly? Because you are omnipresent and omniscient?

At any rate, you're totally right. Regardless of whether there is any evidence that he committed a crime, Von Pearson should be in prison because usually rape victims are irreparably traumatized.

 

[kyoon2]

Maybe next time you should intern with the public defender. It's a feature, not a bug, of our legal system that when it is "impossible" to prove that someone committed a crime, that someone goes free.

(I use "impossible" because that was your language, but it is worth noting that it is decidedly NOT impossible to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that a rape occurred--in general, that is. It may well be impossible to prove that Von raped anybody, in which case... well, as discussed below, he should go to prison anyway.)



And you know that "rape usually did happen"... how, exactly? Because you are omnipresent and omniscient?

At any rate, you're totally right. Regardless of whether there is any evidence that he committed a crime, Von Pearson should be in prison because usually rape victims are irreparably traumatized.

obviously you do not understand anything about the criminal system. beyond reasonable doubt is almost impossible to prove when it comes to he said she said without any witnesses or incriminating statements. even then, it's very difficult. That is why in sexual assault cases, evidence law allows previous convictions to prove propensity (which is generally forbidden in almost all cases.) But what do I know compared to some forum member? I just happen to go to one of top 20 law schools in the nation who worked in domestic violence and sexual assault last summer.

 

[SkidsisVFL]

obviously you do not understand anything about the criminal system. beyond reasonable doubt is almost impossible to prove when it comes to he said she said without any witnesses or incriminating statements. even then, it's very difficult. That is why in sexual assault cases, evidence law allows previous convictions to prove propensity (which is generally forbidden in almost all cases.) But what do I know compared to some forum member? I just happen to go to one of top 20 law schools in the nation who worked in domestic violence and sexual assault last summer.

So, what's the solution? Do like Indonesia proposed and move to an inquisitorial system where accused rapists must PROVE consent?

 

[drylo]

obviously you do not understand anything about the criminal system.

LOL. "Obviously."

But what do I know compared to some forum member? I just happen to go to one of top 20 law schools in the nation who worked in domestic violence and sexual assault last summer.

LOL. Good thing you know my credentials. No, but seriously, I'm sooo impressed that you're a 2L at a top-20 law school. LOL. Please tell me more about how you know that a rape has occurred despite having no proof. Maybe when you graduate, we can make you the sole arbiter of all sex crime cases--being as how you don't need evidence in order to know what actually happened. Plus, you go to a top-20 law school... Who could be more qualified for such a task than you?

 

[NashVOL93]

So our suspended players work out in Georgia's facilities?

Came for the Georgia joke. Was not disappointed. GBO.

 

[pismonque]

This thread is like one of those old slasher movie villains - you think it's dead but then it suddenly sits up and whoooaa sh**! here comes some more gaaaaahhhhh!

I freakin love it. I don't even read them and I freakin love it.

 

[Falcons02]

This thread is like one of those old slasher movie villains - you think it's dead but then it suddenly sits up and whoooaa sh**! here comes some more gaaaaahhhhh!

I freakin love it. I don't even read them and I freakin love it.

It's more like the clown car at the circus. Just when you think this thread contains as much stupid as it can possibly hold, we squeeze another clown into the car.

 

[BookVol]

LOL. "Obviously."



LOL. Good thing you know my credentials. No, but seriously, I'm sooo impressed that you're a 2L at a top-20 law school. LOL. Please tell me more about how you know that a rape has occurred despite having no proof. Maybe when you graduate, we can make you the sole arbiter of all sex crime cases--being as how you don't need evidence in order to know what actually happened. Plus, you go to a top-20 law school... Who could be more qualified for such a task than you?

You don't have to be quite so condescending, but I agree with you. There's a reason why the burden of proof is "beyond all reasonable doubt" and apparently in this situation, the police and DA think it is pointless to charge or indict indicating that there is a lack of evidence to even show the probable cause standard that is necessary for a preliminary hearing.

 

[golfballs]

obviously you do not understand anything about the criminal system. beyond reasonable doubt is almost impossible to prove when it comes to he said she said without any witnesses or incriminating statements. even then, it's very difficult. That is why in sexual assault cases, evidence law allows previous convictions to prove propensity (which is generally forbidden in almost all cases.) But what do I know compared to some forum member? I just happen to go to one of top 20 law schools in the nation who worked in domestic violence and sexual assault last summer.

:whatever:

 

[kyoon2]

LOL. "Obviously."



LOL. Good thing you know my credentials. No, but seriously, I'm sooo impressed that you're a 2L at a top-20 law school. LOL. Please tell me more about how you know that a rape has occurred despite having no proof. Maybe when you graduate, we can make you the sole arbiter of all sex crime cases--being as how you don't need evidence in order to know what actually happened. Plus, you go to a top-20 law school... Who could be more qualified for such a task than you?

certainly more qualified than you.

 

[Jnunn]

obviously you do not understand anything about the criminal system. beyond reasonable doubt is almost impossible to prove when it comes to he said she said without any witnesses or incriminating statements. even then, it's very difficult. That is why in sexual assault cases, evidence law allows previous convictions to prove propensity (which is generally forbidden in almost all cases.) But what do I know compared to some forum member? I just happen to go to one of top 20 law schools in the nation who worked in domestic violence and sexual assault last summer.

This guy is right. I just took evidence and criminal procedure this year at UT law. You don't have to like it but he knows what he is talking about.

 

[KBVol]

You don't have to be quite so condescending, but I agree with you. There's a reason why the burden of proof is "beyond all reasonable doubt" and apparently in this situation, the police and DA think it is pointless to charge or indict indicating that there is a lack of evidence to even show the probable cause standard that is necessary for a preliminary hearing.

For the crap he's taken in this thread while offering a number of rational, common sense posts, I think he's been more than patient and don't blame him for the bit of condescension at this point. I'd have cracked a couple weeks ago.

 

[drylo]

certainly more qualified than you.

Haha OK. I'm sure you know this the same way that you know Von Pearson is a rapist...

 

[vol81]

Please allow me to introduce myself I'm a man of wealth and fame been around a long long time ..........

Reminds me of the legal beagles and legal eagles on here

 

[JohnMarxism]

Someone here has watched too many episodes of Law and Order SVU

 

[drylo]

This guy is right. I just took evidence and criminal procedure this year at UT law. You don't have to like it but he knows what he is talking about.

He's certainly right to the extent his point is that it is nearly impossible to convict someone of rape if the only evidence the prosecution can put on is testimony from a single accuser, countered by similarly credible testimony from the accused. I have no problem with him saying that. (And incidentally, that is how it SHOULD be.)

But he went off the rails when he:

(1) suggested that, the evidence (or lack thereof) in his case notwithstanding, Von is a rapist and shouldn't "go free" because... well, because, kyoon (in his omniscience) knows that rape accusations are "usually" well-founded, and rape victims "usually never recover";

(2) said it was impossible to prove that a rape has occurred;

(3) said I "obviously" know nothing about the criminal system (without knowing any of my professional and/or personal background, mind you); and

(4) started trying to bolster his credibility by bragging about going to a top-20 law school.

The first two are troubling and incorrect, respectively; the latter two are just LOL-worthy--so that's what I gave him.

 

[titansvolsfaninga]

Please?

 

[UT Hill Man]

Not many people know what's going on in the rape investigation.

"The latest update we have on Pearson’s off-the-field situation is simple. He has not been charged with anything at this point, but he hasn’t been exonerated, either. The investigation remains open, and there are at least a couple more witnesses the KPD would like to speak with before making any final decision. Pearson has retained the services of a legal defense team, but that doesn’t mean he’ll be charged with anything."

So Von has Lawyered up, which is the right move.

If all Von did was expose himself to the young girl do you think Butch would reinstate him to the roster?

 

[titansvolsfaninga]

How long does it take KPD to interview witnesses? It appears that they are dragging their feet. If all he did was expose himself, why did the princess accuse him of forcible rape?

 

[DaddyChad]

Not many people know what's going on in the rape investigation.

"The latest update we have on Pearson’s off-the-field situation is simple. He has not been charged with anything at this point, but he hasn’t been exonerated, either. The investigation remains open, and there are at least a couple more witnesses the KPD would like to speak with before making any final decision. Pearson has retained the services of a legal defense team, but that doesn’t mean he’ll be charged with anything."

So Von has Lawyered up, which is the right move.

If all Von did was expose himself to the young girl do you think Butch would reinstate him to the roster?

Yes. IF that's all that happened, I don't see why not. I figure he gets some form of punishment maybe a few games suspended but if that's all that occurred or at least all that is suggested by the evidence I would guess he would be back with the team.

 

[soda23]

Please allow me to introduce myself I'm a man of wealth and fame been around a long long time ..........

Reminds me of the legal beagles and legal eagles on here

Great song , one of my Stones favorites

 

[WilliamDuVOL]

obviously you do not understand anything about the criminal system. beyond reasonable doubt is almost impossible to prove when it comes to he said she said without any witnesses or incriminating statements. even then, it's very difficult. That is why in sexual assault cases, evidence law allows previous convictions to prove propensity (which is generally forbidden in almost all cases.) But what do I know compared to some forum member? I just happen to go to one of top 20 law schools in the nation who worked in domestic violence and sexual assault last summer.

Experience within the system doesn't make you right. A law degree doesn't make you right. From what I gather, it sounds like because you believe most claims of rape to be true, that automatically does. Am I correct? I'm not here to argue the number of false versus real claims, but you can't just blindly say they did it, because, you know, you said so. That is not how the justice system works.

I wish there were an easier way to prove or disprove allegations of such a heinous crime, but until that moment arrives, "a rape almost always" occurs won't cut it.

P.S. Don't take this as argumentative, I'm aiming for constructive conversation.

 

[KBVol]

How long does it take KPD to interview witnesses? It appears that they are dragging their feet. If all he did was expose himself, why did the princess accuse him of forcible rape?

I think that "latest update" is from early last week. Could be wrong. But even then I was thinking wth?....what's taking so long to interview everybody? For crying out loud, get on with it so that all parties involved get the justice they deserve.

 

[DaddyChad]

i interned at a DA's office in one of the biggest cities in the US last summer. Most of the time, defendants go free due to the impossibility of proving rape. It's pretty much he said she said unless the defendant has been convicted before. As much as I love UT Football, I can't be happy knowing that Von is free because usually victims never recover and rape usually did happen.

So you're just assuming guilt? Should we just change the standard of proof in all of these rape cases since false claims "usually" never happen? Let's just ride those percentages and hope that a false accusation never happens.