Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

Kevin Olsen charged with rape


Ja  Rhule

Recommended Posts

26 minutes ago, Snake said:

Fact is a bunch of women that actually get raped dont report it. Its like domestic abuse. Faults clams are common when a family or man has a bunch of money because he will be forced to settle.

Agree all the way.  But IMO this one feels like it's not a money grab.  Dude has some problems.  I like Greg Olsen and feel for him too but my mind won't let me give his bro the pass on this one.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Mage said:

I never said charges = guilty.  What charges do show, however, is they have SOME evidence regardless of how strong it may be.  You aren't going to get a charge through, especially with the level of Olsen's charges, without any evidence.  If you think it's possible, then I'm not the moron here.  So like I said, this isn't a case of Olsen merely being arrested.  They had enough evidence, HOWEVER STRONG IT MAY BE, to charge him.  It's far more likely he's guilty of some wrongdoing (ie. cyberstalking, which I would imagine is fairly easy to prove/find out) than it is he's completely innocent.

That doesn't mean I'm saying it's a guarantee he raped her.  Just that we need to stop acting like the possibility he's completely innocent is a strong possibility.

And do your research.  False rape accusations, contrary to what you may have been told, are not a frequent occurrence.  They rarely happen and happen no more than any other false crime report.  I don't know why people think there are millions of women out there who want people to think they are raped (even if they WERE raped, which is why the majority of sexual assaults do not get reported).

http://www.stanford.edu/group/maan/cgi-bin/?page_id=297

http://www.nsvrc.org/sites/default/files/Publications_NSVRC_Overview_False-Reporting.pdf

https://www.rainn.org/statistics/criminal-justice-system

I say this with all due respect.  Please educate yourself. 

Your post brings up a couple points concerning our criminal justice system and sexual offenses. Let me first apologize for the length of this post, but I have to pipe in on this.

First, you insinuate he must be guilty of something based on the number and type of charges. That is exactly what police/prosecutors try to make people think based on charging. They add charges. They increase the severity of charges. They do these things to gain leverage over the accused, which is why many people continue to claim innocence even though they've pled guilty. They get scared of the piled on charges, the piled on length of confinement, etc, so they roll over. It is often the case when dealing with personal liberty and freedom, people are far less risk averse than they may be in other areas of life. Therefore, people take the surefire plea deal to lesser/fewer offenses for a guaranteed outcome than to face the unknown risk of challenging the charge(s).

So, the police/prosecutor obtains two goals. One, (s)he gets ordinary folks, who would make up the jury, to think the guy must be guilty of something. Two, (s)he gets the plea deal. 

The next point is this: evidence to charge is nowhere near evidence to prove someone committed a crime beyond a reasonable doubt. In reality, police/prosecutors often completely overlook exculpatory evidence when making a charging decision. They take the complaining witness's side of the story and run wth it, doing very little investigation to call the complaining witness's story into question. I guarantee if you were charged with a sexual offense, where only you and the complaining witness were present, you would want investigators to actually investigate the complaining witness and her story.

Many law enforcement agencies simply don't do that, and it is because people think things like, "why would a person make up rape." The presumption of innocence actually means we should ask, "why wouldn't a person make up rape, and until (s)he/the prosecutors prove to me beyond a reasonable doubt that she's not making it up, he's not guilty."

I am firmly of the belief that attorneys don't win cases, the evidence does. I say that to get to this: over the past 1.5 years, I've tried sexual assault cases involving about 15 complaining witnesses (some cases had multiple complaining witnesses alleging sexual assault against the same guy), and I have yet to have a client found guilty of any sexual assault offense. It is precisely because of what I just said. Police/prosecutors take only one side of the evidence and run with it. When the other side comes to light, things change tremendously. 

In a case last month, a young lady alleged my client controlled her, told her she had no friends, fed her alcohol to effectuate sexually assaulting her, and then threatened her to keep her quiet. That is the story law enforcement/prosecutors got from her, believed, and ran with. An important point is that she conveniently deleted her Facebook messages with my client prior to making the allegations. 

Through investigation and speaking to my client, I was able to discover the entirety of their FB conversations. We had hundreds of messages throughout their three month relationship in which my client told her how awesome she was, told her about all the people who liked her, talked her out of depressive states, encouraged her, etc. When we presented that side of the story at trial, to contrast what the complaining witness said, her "story" became just that...a story. My client was quickly acquitted, as he should have been. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Gotta laugh at any suggestion this is being done to get at Kevin Olsen's money.

Kevin Olsen is still a college player, and not exactly a terribly successful one, nor a hot NFL prospect (or any kind of NFL prospect, honestly).

And no, I don't see Greg paying off his accuser.

If you wanna claim this is false, you're gonna need a better angle than "gold digger".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Mr. Scot said:

Gotta laugh at any suggestion this is being done to get at Kevin Olsen's money.

Kevin Olsen is still a college player, and not exactly a terribly successful one, nor a hot NFL prospect (or any kind of NFL prospect, honestly).

And no, I don't see Greg paying off his accuser.

If you wanna claim this is false, you're gonna need a better angle than "gold digger".

My God....people suggested those things?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Pejorative Miscreant said:

Agree all the way.  But IMO this one feels like it's not a money grab.  Dude has some problems.  I like Greg Olsen and feel for him too but my mind won't let me give his bro the pass on this one.  

The courts will decide. I honestly hope it's fake to be honest. If not that's terrible and I hope he gets what he deserves.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Mr. Scot said:

Gotta laugh at any suggestion this is being done to get at Kevin Olsen's money.

Kevin Olsen is still a college player, and not exactly a terribly successful one, nor a hot NFL prospect (or any kind of NFL prospect, honestly).

And no, I don't see Greg paying off his accuser.

If you wanna claim this is false, you're gonna need a better angle than "gold digger".

No one said that. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Bama Panther said:

Your post brings up a couple points concerning our criminal justice system and sexual offenses. Let me first apologize for the length of this post, but I have to pipe in on this.

First, you insinuate he must be guilty of something based on the number and type of charges. That is exactly what police/prosecutors try to make people think based on charging. They add charges. They increase the severity of charges. They do these things to gain leverage over the accused, which is why many people continue to claim innocence even though they've pled guilty. They get scared of the piled on charges, the piled on length of confinement, etc, so they roll over. It is often the case when dealing with personal liberty and freedom, people are far less risk averse than they may be in other areas of life. Therefore, people take the surefire plea deal to lesser/fewer offenses for a guaranteed outcome than to face the unknown risk of challenging the charge(s).

So, the police/prosecutor obtains two goals. One, (s)he gets ordinary folks, who would make up the jury, to think the guy must be guilty of something. Two, (s)he gets the plea deal. 

The next point is this: evidence to charge is nowhere near evidence to prove someone committed a crime beyond a reasonable doubt. In reality, police/prosecutors often completely overlook exculpatory evidence when making a charging decision. They take the complaining witness's side of the story and run wth it, doing very little investigation to call the complaining witness's story into question. I guarantee if you were charged with a sexual offense, where only you and the complaining witness were present, you would want investigators to actually investigate the complaining witness and her story.

Many law enforcement agencies simply don't do that, and it is because people think things like, "why would a person make up rape." The presumption of innocence actually means we should ask, "why wouldn't a person make up rape, and until (s)he/the prosecutors prove to me beyond a reasonable doubt that she's not making it up, he's not guilty."

I am firmly of the belief that attorneys don't win cases, the evidence does. I say that to get to this: over the past 1.5 years, I've tried sexual assault cases involving about 15 complaining witnesses (some cases had multiple complaining witnesses alleging sexual assault against the same guy), and I have yet to have a client found guilty of any sexual assault offense. It is precisely because of what I just said. Police/prosecutors take only one side of the evidence and run with it. When the other side comes to light, things change tremendously. 

In a case last month, a young lady alleged my client controlled her, told her she had no friends, fed her alcohol to effectuate sexually assaulting her, and then threatened her to keep her quiet. That is the story law enforcement/prosecutors got from her, believed, and ran with. An important point is that she conveniently deleted her Facebook messages with my client prior to making the allegations. 

Through investigation and speaking to my client, I was able to discover the entirety of their FB conversations. We had hundreds of messages throughout their three month relationship in which my client told her how awesome she was, told her about all the people who liked her, talked her out of depressive states, encouraged her, etc. When we presented that side of the story at trial, to contrast what the complaining witness said, her "story" became just that...a story. My client was quickly acquitted, as he should have been. 

On the flip,side there are a bunch of bad men who use lawyers to drag a vics name though the mud and make them vics once again. Our justice system is truly set up for the bad people.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, Snake said:

No one said that. 

 

3 hours ago, Snake said:

Fact is a bunch of women that actually get raped dont report it. Its like domestic abuse. Faults clams are common when a family or man has a bunch of money because he will be forced to settle.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, RickyManningJr said:

First I think how much money did Hardy's girl end up with? Think maybe she is chasing cash.

Then you think about him getting kicked off of four football teams and the cyber stalking charges and think WTF.

Then I think about Greg's U 7th floor  crew song when I think about this guy ruining Greg's image.

Then I think F this B she is probably lying.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Scott Fowler from observer   An excerpt  from larger article gotta say, i am not sure what Canales or Young were  thinking in the final 2 mins  they both looked like they have never a 2 mon drill in their lives    Unprepared   Let’s just throw and hope was the strategy  Add to it,why leggett, the most unreliable receiver, was targeted so much during that drive is beyond me      With a chance to be unforgettable, Panthers’ final drive was one to forget BY SCOTT FOWLER [email protected] 4 hrs ago The Carolina Panthers lost again Sunday, 27-22 to Arizona, but let’s at least give them some credit for their heartbreaking creativity. This, at least, was not a rout like Week 1. Yes, the Panthers (0-2) did a whole lot of nothing through the beginning of the third quarter against Arizona (2-0), falling behind, 27-3. Then they did a whole lot of something, scoring 19 unanswered points under the direction of quarterback Bryce Young. Then the special teams recovered an onside kick by punter Sam Martin to, quite remarkably, get the ball back, down only 27-22 with 1:55 and 51 yards left to snag the win. And one timeout, too. After finishing three straight possessions with touchdowns, the Panthers would need to do it a fourth time to pull off what statistically would have been the largest comeback in franchise history. But while there was no quit in this team Sunday, there was no comeback either, and nothing but nonsense in that last “march,” which ended 46 yards away from the goal line. Let’s go through a little of that final drive for the Panthers, shall we? Young, who had played a horrible first quarter and then a terrific second half, reverted to first-quarter form. He was 0-for-6 on the drive. He only targeted Tetairoa McMillan, the rookie that is clearly the team’s best receiver, one time. When all else was failing, the option of throwing a jump ball to T-Mac — drafted No. 8 overall for exactly this sort of situation — should have been utilized. It wasn’t. Head coach Dave Canales suggested that the Cardinals started shifting their coverage toward McMillan. Said the rookie afterward to reporters when asked what the Cardinals did to limit him on the last drive: “I’m not too sure. It looked like regular defense to me. That last drive only lasted as long as it did because of three defensive penalties on Arizona, which kept Carolina in the game (defensive holding to negate what would have been a Young turnover; roughing the passer; offsides).   Now it is true that the Panthers’ offensive line was threadbare by then, with two starters out. This made the degree of difficulty harder for Young and everyone else. But the Cardinals defense was also banged up, as their defensive backs had been going down like dominoes. So how do you solve Arizona’s suddenly fearsome pass rush? Screens. Quick hitters. Chuba Hubbard in the flat. Maybe even a shovel pass to a tight end. There was plenty of time — what there wasn’t was plenty of yardage, nor enough flexibility from Canales. One of Young’s six incompletions was a pass to Xavier Legette, who to me at that point shouldn’t have been in the game. That pass went incomplete of course, because Legette — the Panthers’ first-round draft pick in 2024 — had what was undoubtedly the worst statistical lines in Carolina history. Young targeted Legette eight times. Eight! I have no idea why. Legette caught one. One! And it went for minus-2 yards, meaning Legette entered the game with 10 yards receiving this season and left it with eight. Now to be fair, Young (35-55-328 yards, with three TDs) had gotten Carolina back into the thing. Hunter Renfrow had a breakout game at slot receiver, scoring twice. McMillan didn’t score, but had his first 100-yard receiving game. Tight end Ja’Tavion Sanders and wide receiver Brycen Tremayne were also very good. And the comeback happened after Young about lost the game for the Panthers in the first quarter, fumbling the ball away on a strip-sack that led directly to a return touchdown and then throwing an ill-advised pass under pressure that resulted in a wounded-duck interception and three more points. Said Canales after the game about Young: “Sometimes it ain’t the worst thing, if you’re in that situation, to take a sack. I also know he makes some magical plays.” We saw both on Sunday. Young held the ball too long sometimes, including on Carolina’s final offensive play (a fourth-down sack). He also made some magic, sometimes throwing between three guys at once, sometimes escaping a sack attempt and keeping his eyes downfield for a touchdown. So there were some things that were better Sunday. Carolina only scored 10 points in Week 1; this time the Panthers had 22. The run defense improved. Young, after playing the first five quarters of the season as if he didn’t belong in the NFL, finally looked like he did again for those three consecutive TD marches. But that final drive?! Listen, Arizona was ripe to be beaten at that point. NFL onside kicks didn’t succeed about 94% of the time in 2024, yet this one did after a Cardinal misplayed it. Arizona had lost 19 points of its 24-point lead at that point. The Panthers, who had never successfully come back from more than 17 points down before, were close to a signature win for both Canales and Young. And then… total letdown. Again, let’s emphasize, the clock was very little factor. Carolina didn’t have 15 seconds left to score; the Panthers had 115 seconds left. And a timeout. And only 51 yards to navigate. Momentum was firmly on the Panthers’ side. These were the moments where Drew Brees killed the Panthers, time and again, when he played for New Orleans. Three-step drops. Eight yards here. Twelve yards there. Right down the field. But for the Panthers, every play looked the same — Young on a deep drop. Scanning, scanning. The pocket breaking down. Then, either a heave, or some scurrying around and then a heave. Or a sack. All the blitz-killing plays that the Panthers have at their disposal — they didn’t run any of them, it seemed like, except a Hubbard run that netted 3 yards. The Panthers’ best plays were Arizona penalties. Other than that, it all went south. Carolina couldn’t adjust to the Arizona adjustments. Needing a touchdown, the Panthers never got closer than the Arizona 33. And so that was that.   At least there was some hope. At least the game was exciting in the final two minutes. But, as has happened so often in the past eight seasons, when it was winning time for Carolina, it turned into losing time.
    • Ditching XL is addition by subtraction. I 100% believe Thielen would tell him where to line up  every snap and explain his route. Through 2 games he has shown 0 comprehension of the play book. I’m not absolving Young at all but XL is  supposed to be his second read, but dude runs the wrong routes and gets boxed out by guys who are 4” shorter.  At least Coker has shown aptitude to be a real NFL receiver. 
    • I'm trying to be as pragmatic and as un reactionary as possible. And once again multiple things can be true  His draft last year was disastrously terrible. X looks like an absolute bust. Brooks hasn't played. Wallace looks like a miss. But demani needs more pt, cws is solid and Coker has shown promise This draft cannot be judged after 2 games esp with a dc who doesn't want to play them. But tmac looks legit. Princely has promise. The rest is a ?  Has he made mistakes? Undoubtedly.  Is the roster better than it was 2 years ago? I'd say yes. I'd say our biggest problems are still the ones we had 2 years ago - Bryce and evero.  And as I've said before, at least he hasn't traded any future picks. Yet.  So IMHO Morgan is a mixed bag but not a total bust. Yet.
×
×
  • Create New...