drsmitty74
- Rochester
Sounds like the perfect acronym for when someone asks a question that has been answered 100 times earlier in the thread.
YSTR = You Should Try Reading before you ask.
TSJ Thread
- Status
YSTR = You Should Try Reading before you ask.
Big Jack
- Decatur
I agree with everything you have said here and I will add to it..
Why is the accused parties name always made public but yet the accuser gets to hide behind curtain number 1.. It is okay to ruin the accused persons life over possibly a false report? But if the charges are dismissed the accuser suffers no consequences? This part of our legal system is not right in my opinion. If one gets to keep their name out of the press and off of the internet then both parties should.
Big Jack
- Decatur
"it is better 100 guilty Persons should escape than that one innocent Person should suffer".
- Benjamin Franklin
illinifan31
Former Krush Cow
- South Bend, IN
Damn that's wild. And here I am, won't sequence anything under 90ng input material lol. So you can understand why I doubted haha.
I'm a firm believer that the accused and accuser should remain confidential until the accused is incarcerated or actually going to trial. A very dear friend of mine is a male PE teacher (28 years in the school system). About three years ago, a parent (single mother, low-income, uneducated, 3 children in special education for behavior disorders) blasted him on Facebook for being inappropriate around children. It was on a community forum, and while there was no merit to her accusations, a large number of people commented sharing similar experiences with different teachers all over the country.
While the accuser eventually changed her story (it turned out her son overheard the teacher say a swear word while joking with another teacher), his reputation was shot. People didn't look at him the same way. He ended up resigning, moving away, and now works for a consulting company. I asked him why he didn't stick it out after it came out that everything was BS, and he said, his daughter used to have friends over every weekend. Now the parents won't let them come over unless there's an extra adult. It's just too much to walk through a grocery store and see people he's known for decades look at him differently because of a swear word---which turned into stories about (other) teachers molesting children.
That's not to say he didn't have his supporters- he mostly definitely did. But it wasn't enough for him to stay. I kind of wonder if the same will hold true for TSJ- people tend to only read the negative.
While the accuser eventually changed her story (it turned out her son overheard the teacher say a swear word while joking with another teacher), his reputation was shot. People didn't look at him the same way. He ended up resigning, moving away, and now works for a consulting company. I asked him why he didn't stick it out after it came out that everything was BS, and he said, his daughter used to have friends over every weekend. Now the parents won't let them come over unless there's an extra adult. It's just too much to walk through a grocery store and see people he's known for decades look at him differently because of a swear word---which turned into stories about (other) teachers molesting children.
That's not to say he didn't have his supporters- he mostly definitely did. But it wasn't enough for him to stay. I kind of wonder if the same will hold true for TSJ- people tend to only read the negative.
But….do THEY go to 11?
Last edited:
texillwek
🔶🔹🔸🔷
Why, yes, I do enjoy an Arby's® roast beef from time to time.
skyIdub
Winged Warrior
i know i saw that her friends testimony was literally that she didn't see anything, only what the alleged victim told her happened.
bdutts
- Houston, Texas
I did a search on it. Short tandem repeat on the Y chromosome.
1m4tr
Cliffmas
My reference to it being the 5th was because I had set the O/U at 3.5 more TSJ threads last week when there was more optimism of him returning earlier.Starting with the original "TSJ suspended" thread, which has subsequently been named simply "TSJ Thread", this is the 11th in the series.
Each one has it's own flavor. They tend to open with a new train of thought which follows through to the inevitable "lock" icon. This one appears to be all about DNA.
I get what you are saying, but just wanting to clarify some things. "Due process" is a legal term in this sense. Due process is not legally required in every situation. TSJ is guaranteed due process by the Constitution in criminal proceedings, and while people may disagree with how it's going, he is getting due process, including the presumption of innocence in the criminal proceedings.
However, one of the big arguments regarding the TRO is whether TSJ is entitled to due process by the University. If he isn't, then the University can pretty much make whatever decision it wants, with whatever process it wants. For an example, in most cases, a person is not entitled to due process in regards to being let go from their job. Therefore, an employer can generally fire a person for any non-discriminatory reason.
I am not experienced or informed enough in this specific area of law to say whether he has a good argument for being entitled to due process from the University or not. But just wanted to point out that he may not be.
He is without a doubt entitled to due process in the criminal case (which he is getting), including being presumed innocent. But again, that does not extend to the court of public opinion, for better or worse.
She said she didn't see the incident occur because she was talking to other people at the bar at that time, but she did see "the male" (and later ID'd him as TSJ from pictures) and did observe the people around him (including a KU basketball player she recognized at the time) as the accuser moved towards him.
Here is the problem, and it's a problem created by the legal system.
Due process is only NOT extended in all situations involving goverment-supported institutions because judges have decided it doesn't apply. Constitutional rights, which pre-exist and sit above the law, have systemically been ignored or gutted to favor exercise of government power over individual rights.
So you are correct to say due process only applies to areas where the law states it applies, but that's a political phenomenon of 20th century politics.
Ah, I was not as informed on this info. Could be possible to pick him up on the underwear that way. We routinely swab wristbands, cuffs, elastic, etc for touch DNA in these scenarios.
Sorry yes. Correct.
Our normal DNA testing is STR testing. Which is testing regions of the dna that repeat a certain amount of times and that amount of times differs between individuals. YSTR is the same thing but only on the Y Chromosome so males only.
Unfortunately, the public is lacking some key testimony here, and here is my issue with the whole thing. The accuser stated the assault occurred behind her so she could not know the assailant in a dark crowded bar. If the witness didn't see anything other than that TSJ was on the other side of the room that she was walking towards all she would really be able to testify to was that he was in the vicinity (and perhaps waved her over) riggt before it allegedly happened and the demeanor of her friend afterwards. Just because a person could be identified as being in the vicinity of a victim isn't proof they did it.
I mean there really has to be more here, because even when taking the accuser at their word as to what happened, all you have in this case is nobody including the victim seeing who committed the assault and TSJ was a memorable person in close proximity. That'd be the case. And granted, the US has a pretty long history of arresting people for being at the scene of the crime with no other evidence, especially when they're black, but that's not actually indicative they committed the crime. In fact, if it's indicative of anything it's of a much higher chance of the police making a wrongful arrest.
A similar example of this is you and a friend went to a Taylor Swift concert and your friend was given a backstage pass. Near the end of the concert you saw your friend backstage from the crowd, and Taylor walking offstage in that direction. While you can place Taylor in the vicinity of your friend, that isn't quite proof that she gave your friend the hand job he claims she did when you meet up with him 2 minutes later. Could it have happened? It's possible- she was in the vicinity. But so was her bodyguard and her stage crew but they're a lot less memorable. It wouldn't be proof of anything other than her being there at the time of the alleged incident.
RichardKeenesCousin
Richard Keene's Cousin
I like GIFs threads more than DNA threads.Starting with the original "TSJ suspended" thread, which has subsequently been named simply "TSJ Thread", this is the 11th in the series.
Each one has it's own flavor. They tend to open with a new train of thought which follows through to the inevitable "lock" icon. This one appears to be all about DNA.
sacraig
- The desert
Kendrick implied some other males DNA was found on the underwear. One scenario that hasn’t got much traction is this is a tragic case of misidentification. Neither side is lying. I do find it hard to believe the DA would not be acting quickly though if the DNA wasn’t TJs.
1.)Wtf?
2.) Channel 7 doesnt know how to edit?
3.) Look at me Ma, I’ve gone pre-viral?
4.) Just some dude off his meds?
I gotta admit that’s pretty entertaining tho.
- Status