Yeah, OP kind of buried the lead. Apparently he isn't facing criminal charges for the alleged assault which he claims was consensual but is getting suspended for 7 games for having pre-marital sex.......I get the whole religious school angle but wow that seems way over the top. Gotta think that honor code makes it much tougher to get non Mormons to transfer in.
Given it’s only come up a few times in decades, I’d envision they do an awful lot of looking the other way
I would assume it is made very clear to players to keep their extra curricular activities private
Correct. I took the headline off the net but messed up the paraphrasing.
I'm (obviously) not a lawyer, and I probably failed social studies class.
yes, you are obviously not a lawyer....google it.
Legal Gopher here to help. The "victim" (only in quotations for the sake of a label, I am not doubting the claims made here) can file in civil court, criminal court, or both. If the V had wanted to file for criminal charges in additional charges as well, but Utah's statute of limitations for the charge can limit when V wants to charge it. If V wants criminal charges for r*pe, then it could be charged whenever but in Utah for SA, it needs to be reported within 4 years and charged within 8. If the civil lawsuit goes through and she is successful, then V can also ask for charging documents to be filed for criminal charges. If V was worried that criminal charges may be unsuccessful (idk what Utah law looks like for civil charges for this happening or what their SA charge looks like), V may have wanted to wait to see if civil charge was a win before charging criminally
You are obviously a dick.
This isn't correct. The state (or county), not the victim, brings a criminal action. That's why criminal cases are captioned "State of Minnesota vs. Accused Person." I don't know why there are no criminal charges here, but there are circumstances where the victim of an alleged sexual assault would like the matter pursued but the state declines to do so. This can be based on all sorts of reasons like not believing that a crime occurred, lack of evidence, a belief that a conviction is unlikely, etc. While less common, there are also instances where the state pursues a criminal action over the objections (or without the cooperation) of the alleged victim.
believe LegalGopher's just saying they can file, not that this was an automatic that charges would be brought and that there are numerous reasons why there may be no criminal charges pending but someone could have a civil claim still open. think you guys are in agreement, just saying different parts of the process.
No. not at all. LegalGopher clearly stated - and I'll remove what he/she put in parenthesis for brevity:
Yes, my apologies, thanks for calling me out on this. Monday morning, brain wasn't screwed on correctly yet. I worded it poorly. What I meant to say was that victim would have to go to police or have law enforcement involved somehow. In Utah, there is a requirement that LEO has some sort of involvement in order for a criminal charge to exist, and by file, I meant to say involve LEOs to have a report or complaint of some sort. I took out the middle man and that was a lazy explanation from me.
Re: The state bringing an action, I meant that victim would seek a police report on the criminal matter (hence the discussion on the SoL in Utah). But I worded it terribly and apologize for the confusion that my lazy explanation caused. If victim or ppl close to her never report the matter to police, there would be no criminal case because Utah requires an LEO report or investigation for a charge
yeah i guess i was taking that as you can seek charges (file) but the prosecutor decides if that has merit and yes i agree leaves out that middle part as i think (hope) we all know you can't just automatically file criminal charges against everyone without merit and see Legal has addressed to make more clear what was meant.
What is this, a mild-mannered conversation where people (me) admit their mistakes? On GopherHole? in 2025? lol. apologies to everyone for my poor answer but thanks for trying to back me up
DIet Coke is allowed... Just no tea or coffee.
Gotta give ya credit, some posters would have doubled-down and tried to explain things away without admitting they made a mistake.
You serious Clark? Man. I mean, I don't even drink coffee, but if I was out with people who love it, I'll try some. How can any grown adult wanna abide by such silliness???
Wouldn't get anything done in a legal setting if every silly mistake I made turned into a full blown conflict where I'm not able to take accountability. Nobody will ever be right 100% of the time, so it's important to admit it when you're wrong and make sure you aren't the next time.
Victim doesn't file anything. Victim can report a crime to law enforcement, who investigates and delivers the results of the investigation to the prosecutor who decides whether to charge.
Further- The prosecutor may have decided that the state cannot meet its burden of evidence to convict the QB of a crime. The burden of proof in a civil matter is much lower. Think of OJ. He was acquitted of the crimes of killing Nicole and the other dude, but found liable for their death in civil court.
