Terrence Shannon Jr. suspended

Status
Not open for further replies.
#552      
After reading everything that’s out there so far, I think there are a couple scenarios that may play out here. One, the charges may be dismissed or dropped but I think this scenario is unlikely, or second the charges will be downgraded and most likely because of some possible misrepresentation involved but more evidence has to come out before I feel more confident that’s the case.
 
Last edited:
#553      

Goillinikobd

Southeastern US
A mess

According to AP, the University knew about an accusation/investigation since September. How was this kept out of the press and social media.

Given the Kansas legal definition of sexual intercourse, it appears that the second charge requires no DNA or rape kit derived evidence. It seems like we are back to the “she said, he said“ dilemma.

Ifi there have been negotiations since September involving a financial settlement, I assume TSJ’s primary financial assets are his NIL funds. Uncomfortable situation. Do NIL contracts have a morals clause?

As with everyone else, I have more questions than answers. It will be interesting to see the press conference and whether there will be a Q and A segment or will it be just a written statement, I suspect the latter.
 
#555      

F5ilskeXIAAqA69
 
#556      
I went googling last night and thought the same thing. He's licensed to practice in Illinois. Didn't see anything about Kansas which has me scratching my head
I distantly know him socially but not professionally. Former prosecutor. Good attorney. I'm assuming if it ever did go to trial in Kansas, they would get an attorney who is licensed to practice in Kansas.
 
#557      
They were probably most likely trying to work out a financial settlement to avoid this reaching the press but that obviously failed so here we are now.
 
#559      
I distantly know him socially but not professionally. Former prosecutor. Good attorney. I'm assuming if it ever did go to trial in Kansas, they would get an attorney who is licensed to practice in Kansas.
Yes, almost certainly they have one on board already. I imagine that someone from our side reached out to the Kansas athletic department to see what top local attorney they use when one of their student-athletes is facing criminal charges.
 
#560      
So, umm … anyone here familiar with TSJ’s lawyer Mark P. Sutter? Just based on my review of his website and what little else I could find via Google, he seems a curious choice to defend a high-profile rape charge in Kansas. 🤔
Mark Sutter is a former prosecutor who’s handled thousands of Criminal Defense & Personal Injury cases in Chicago & DuPage County. As a top DuPage Criminal Defense Attorney & DuPage Personal Injury Attorney, he’s represented clients from all walks of life. From routine DUI charges and complicated criminal cases to car accidents and medical malpractice cases, Sutter Law Group is among the highest rated attorneys in Illinois.

Clients and colleagues hire Mark for his criminal defense expertise and ability to receive the highest compensation settlements on personal injury cases. Additionally, he is routinely recognized as one of the Nation’s Top One Percent of Distinguished Counsel.

Nothing here seems any bit odd.
 
#561      
Ifi there have been negotiations since September involving a financial settlement, I assume TSJ’s primary financial assets are his NIL funds. Uncomfortable situation. Do NIL contracts have a morals clause?
This is a very good question to which I have no answer.
 
#563      
In case any other boomers out there had the same question that I did (is third base considered "sexual intercourse"?), the answer, under Kansas law, is yes:

21-5501. Definitions. The following definitions shall apply when the words and phrases defined are used in article 55 of chapter 21 of the Kansas Statutes Annotated, and K.S.A. 2012 Supp. 21-6419 through 21-6421, and amendments thereto, except when a particular context clearly requires a different meaning:
(a) "Sexual intercourse" means any penetration of the female sex organ by a finger, the male sex organ or any object. Any penetration, however slight, is sufficient to constitute sexual intercourse....
If the bar scenario is correct it makes it sort of unlikely that could happen. Or am I naive?
 
#567      
So even if he’s proven innocent during the season he still shouldn’t play?
What does "proven innocent" mean? In the trail, he can be found not guilty. Basically 0% chance that happens before March. The charges could be dropped, at which point he should clearly be allowed to play. I'm not sure what else you could mean by "proven innocent".
 
#570      
all going to come down to one word: Consent.
IF that bar story is true and presuming Terence is innocent until proven guilty, you’d think literally ANYONE close by who believed that the two looked consensual would carry weight as a witness? Again, not a lawyer … but we’re not gonna have video and audio evidence here.
 
#571      
I really want to hear some facts on this capper. Hopefully they have good investigators working pulling every video that might exist from anywhere they were, Bar/Club/apartment complex/stadium. I also hope someone is doing a deep dive on the accuser's social media account. I am guessing there will be some favorable things there for TSJ and perhaps BU and JW are already aware of these things. You would be amazed how much you can see on security cams.
 
#573      
IF that bar story is true and presuming Terence is innocent until proven guilty, you’d think literally ANYONE close by who believed that the two looked consensual would carry weight as a witness? Again, not a lawyer … but we’re not gonna have video and audio evidence here.
That type of subjective witness evidence would be relevant, but not determinative, as the case proceeds to trial. Dark bar, everyone drinking, the parties likely hidden away somewhere and others not sitting there staring at them. What "looks consensual" might not be, and vice versa. Even if several witnesses came forward honestly testifying that they thought the sexual activity was consensual, I'm not sure that the charges would be dropped at this point, or even that they should be unless the accuser recanted either to the authorities or to friends.

Of course, as the case goes on, the prosecutor might realize that the weight of the defense witnesses would make a conviction very unlikely. This could lead to a dismissal or the offer of a favorable plea agreement. But that would likely be on a timeframe much longer than the three months relevant to Illinois Basketball.
 
#574      
That type of subjective witness evidence would be relevant, but not determinative, as the case proceeds to trial. Dark bar, everyone drinking, the parties likely hidden away somewhere and others not sitting there staring at them. What "looks consensual" might not be, and vice versa. Even if several witnesses came forward honestly testifying that they thought the sexual activity was consensual, I'm not sure that the charges would be dropped at this point, or even that they should be unless the accuser recanted either to the authorities or to friends.

Of course, as the case goes on, the prosecutor might realize that the weight of the defense witnesses would make a conviction very unlikely. This could lead to a dismissal or the offer of a favorable plea agreement. But that would likely be on a timeframe much longer than the three months relevant to Illinois Basketball.

So we think this girl was forcibly restrained, fingered, non-consensually and she didn't raise any concern with even one of the likely hundreds of people there that could have intervened in some way, called the police, etcetera? Idk, I'm having a real hard time with it being non-consensual, particularly with use of force as is indicated in the charge, and not one person noticing nor the accuser saying anything to any one of the (again) hundreds of people that would've been there. There's something more to this, because what we know, doesn't make sense to me at all.
 
#575      
So we think this girl was forcibly restrained, fingered, non-consensually and she didn't raise any concern with even one of the likely hundreds of people there that could have intervened in some way, called the police, etcetera? Idk, I'm having a real hard time with it being non-consensual, particularly with use of force as is indicated in the charge, and not one person noticing nor the accuser saying anything to any one of the (again) hundreds of people that would've been there. There's something more to this, because what we know, doesn't make sense to me at all.
Didn't this story come from a random reply on twitter? I'm just trying to keep up.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.