After all this back and forth, while Briles may (or may not) be legally culpable for the actions of his players, he certainly is from a moral and ethical standpoint.Secondly, what does not really true mean ? I haven't look at the link your provided but I'm sure I could post just as many that contradict it. In the end, was there enough to rid Briles of his job yes. Courtrooms and jury's and judges are a tough place, depending on who is involved at the top. There's the place to start
I thought judges hated lawyers who couldn't speak in complete sentences.If you're in legal and prosecute based on gray areas, you won't be in business long. But thanks for the reply and opinion
You're stepping into the middle of another much longer conversation that actually goes back for months. Hmm, the criminal lawyers from my link don't exactly agree with you, but then again, we may be talking about separate issues because you presumptuously jumped into the middle of a conversation.
Yeah, you refused to answer again. What evidence is there that Briles covered up rape? Saying, "Uh, the victim made a statement." is not evidence that Briles covered up rape. You can't simply answer the question so you muddy the water with nonsense semantics.
If you were being sarcastic, I apologise. You are definitely correct in saying Baptist are not a protected class, nor should they be. Today's world news has me jumpy about what is happening to people of Christian faith. I am Christian and of the Baptist denomination.
Read the link provided by football follies. Briles knew something was going for an extended period of time, and he chose to look the other way. He brought in talented but troubled players who had caused problems elsewhere. As the HC, he was responsible for setting the tone of what will and won't be tolerated. He failed miserably in that regard.
4 figures, learn to read. I bet judges don't like lawyers with poor comprehensive skills either.I didn't step into anything man, your criminal lawyers like I said myself have different jurisprudence levels. Check your boy making five figures an hour
Stumbling? Nope. I wasn't exposed by anything. Our wanna be lawyer took things out of context and then bragged about his knowledge. I disagree with him and if he is a lawyer, his clients may want to save up their lunch money to afford someone who knows what he is talking about.
If your dude is at that level, who cares if it's four or five an hour. Don't be so sore on a message board man. ![[cheers]](https://ct.yimg.com/mr/uploads/891/5628.gif "Cheers [cheers]")
Really Deeeefense, are you starting up with me again? People post worse than that everyday on these forums. You're one of the reasons I rarely come to the football board.
Fine, I'm sure we can get along for once.
I'll get up with you at Athens if you buy the beers
99% on RaftersI wouldn't call over 7,000 posts rarely but hey it's all good
Another read the link, got it. I was wanting your reasoning since you called him morally and ethically wrong, not the the opinion of some writer.
I utilize my moral compass of knowing what's right and what's wrong to base my convictions of another person's actions. To use your reasoning, if I didn't personally witness what Briles said and did on a 24/7 basis, then I apparently have no right to make a judgment on his actions.
Nice strawman argument but i just asked you why you said he is morally and ethically wrong, then I said I wanted your reasoning, not some writers opinion. I didnt say or imply that you have no right to make a judement on his actions. Im asking, what actions are you talking about, what are you saying he did? If you can't answer, thats cool.
Sorry, I shouldn't have quoted that one, I didn't like it but understood your later clarification. My post to freetaxreturn was edited, rightfully so I guess, I just don't care for the arbitrary application of rules on these boards.
Ummm no it's not, evidence is defined in court as either two things. Physical or circumstantial. What you are saying is the victim(s) made a statement to the police or investigators and that's all it is, a statement. It's incumbent upon the investigators at this point to follow the lead(s). Whether that leads to physical (actual) evidence or if enough witnesses can corroborate a certain individual or party were there through individual testimony ( which would result in circumstantial evidence) would appease the the court from the prosecution as evidence.
In no way ever is a statement taken used as evidence, it's just a statement.
If your wife, girlfriend, partner said in court you came home and beat them or tied them up whatever then the prosecution has to prove it happened either by physical evidence or through circumstantial(meaning you have to place the perpetrator and victim at the same time although not witnessed or maybe witnessed because they were there at the same time and heard noises of a struggle or screaming or whatever). If you are following what I'm laying out then it's a textbook case for court depending on whether or not there is enough evidence to prosecute the case and bringnot to trial. That's really the bottom line and as far as the video link I watched I would advise the lady who from five years ago whit her claim find a new attorney. Now I'm just a tax attorney so take that for what it's worth but judges hate counsel that can't speak in complete sentences. My bet is Keysor is in the legal system somewhere and like me works on absolutes.
Cool story, now back to the original question that no one can seem to answer. What evidence is there that Art Briles covered up rape?
Exactly, taking responsibility for your unlawful actions. Anyone in authority over the rapist who turned their head or covered for the rapist should be severely punished as well.
I do as well. However, if there is an enabler, that person or persons has some responsibility as well. Since I can't get you to admit what evidence is I'll just cut to the chase. Within the legal documents from the Shillinglaw vs. Baylor and named Regents, there is more than enough EVIDENCE that Briles and his staff actively enabled and protected football players from offenses ranging from academic misconduct to sexual assault. Briles own texts clearly support his willingness to hide players from the appropriate departments within the University. He often did this with help from Waco PD. Please read the 54 page court filing. I only made it to page 20 before being so sick I didn't want to read any more. Briles shouldn't only be out of coaching, he should be in prison for aiding and abetting. There are many women who would never have been assaulted/raped had Briles not worked so hard to shield his players. The man is a disgusting pig. Interestingly enough, the day before this filing became public, Briles dropped his case against Baylor. Gee, I wonder why. The filing is embedded in the page. If you still support him after reading this, you, my friend, have serious issues.
To the point that Keyser is all alone now. He had a lot of support when this first started but I don't think there is a single poster other than Keyser who supports Briles in any way, any longer. The information is too clear, too prevalent and too damning. I have no idea why he insists on tilting at this windmill.
![[roll]](http://l.yimg.com/j/assets/img/emoticons/classic/roll.r191677.gif "roll [roll]")
