OT - former girls basketball coach pleads not guilty

[Mark Padgett]

What is it about HS basketball coaches around Portland?

Ex-Reynolds High School girls basketball coach pleads not guilty to sex-abuse | OregonLive.com

[Judtech]

This is unfortunately a too familiar story.

[Adam]

Without knowing the details of this particular case, let me just say this; I wish they'd refrain from broadcasting these suspects until they're found guilty. Merely being charged with this crime, when publicized like this, comes with societal punishments that are irreversible.
Now, even if a jury comes back and says he's not guilty, those in the community will forever think he's guilty.
This guy may well be as guilty as sin, but my problem is it won't actually matter.
Rhetorical question: How many of us had him convicted and sentenced in our opinions based simply on the headline Mark posted?

[Anchor]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

Without knowing the details of this particular case, let me just say this; I wish they'd refrain from broadcasting these suspects until they're found guilty. Merely being charged with this crime, when publicized like this, comes with societal punishments that are irreversible.
Now, even if a jury comes back and says he's not guilty, those in the community will forever think he's guilty.
This guy may well be as guilty as sin, but my problem is it won't actually matter.
Rhetorical question: How many of us had him convicted and sentenced in our opinions based simply on the headline Mark posted?

A very sensible perspective. Thanks for "venting."

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by Anchor

A very sensible perspective. Thanks for "venting."

I see that point, yet, the publication of the accusations in these types of cases often leads to more victims coming forward....without which the accused just might be found not guilty due to a lack of proof and go free and appear not guilty.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

I see that point, yet, the publication of the accusations in these types of cases often leads to more victims coming forward....without which the accused just might be found not guilty due to a lack of proof and go free and appear not guilty.

Camron, I hadn't considered that angle, thanks. There's a trade off regardless, however. How many ruined innocent lives are worth a single conviction that would be aided by such publication? As long as innocent verdicts are ignored by the public, I still think we should refrain from publicizing those accused of these crimes.

I'm not aware of other types of crimes where we publicize an accused person with the hopes of getting other victims to come forward in the hopes of more evidence for a conviction.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

Camron, I hadn't considered that angle, thanks. There's a trade off regardless, however. How many ruined innocent lives are worth a single conviction that would be aided by such publication? As long as innocent verdicts are ignored by the public, I still think we should refrain from publicizing those accused of these crimes.

I'm not aware of other types of crimes where we publicize an accused person with the hopes of getting other victims to come forward in the hopes of more evidence for a conviction.

All charges are public, regardless of the crime. Which ones the media, or Mark, chooses to spotlight vary.

I don't think they are necessarily publicized with that goal in mind....just that it makes good ratings for the news outlets.

And I fully agree that a ruined innocent life is not worth a few convictions. And that is the basis of our system. The odds are strongly stacked in favor of the alleged criminal....and many get off (or are back on the streets too early) because we value protecting the innocent over punishing the guilty.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

All charges are public, regardless of the crime. Which ones the media, or Mark, chooses to spotlight vary.

I don't think they are necessarily publicized with that goal in mind....just that it makes good ratings for the news outlets.

And I fully agree that a ruined innocent life is not worth a few convictions. And that is the basis of our system. The odds are strongly stacked in favor of the alleged criminal....and many get off (or are back on the streets too early) because we value protecting the innocent over punishing the guilty.

You're right, they're all public, but you never really see front page newspaper articles and nightly news stories about a factory line worker getting charged with check kiting

I have to admit if a coach at my daughter's school was charged with this sort of crime, I'd want to know about it. But aside from the coach/player aspect of this, I don't find it particularly abhorrent for a 22 year old man to have a relationship with a 17 year old.

In a year, if he'd been her coach or boss, it would have simply been an inappropriate work relationship and not a crime. I certainly find it less reprehensible than, say, a 50-something CEO having a relationship with a college-aged intern.

While I certainly think what this guy is alleged to have done is wrong, I do have a problem with calling it a sex-crime.

[Mark Padgett]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

But aside from the coach/player aspect of this, I don't find it particularly abhorrent for a 22 year old man to have a relationship with a 17 year old.

As a father of two daughters who were both once 17, to me this is more than just abhorrent - it's criminal. I also know that if any guy that age even comes close to doing something with either of my two granddaughters (who are now both 13) before they are each 18, my sons-in-law will take care of it - and I wouldn't hesitate to help them.

[Mark Padgett]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

While I certainly think what this guy is alleged to have done is wrong, I do have a problem with calling it a sex-crime.

Then what the hell kind of crime is it? Are you nuts or just an idiot?

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Mark Padgett

Then what the hell kind of crime is it? Are you nuts or just an idiot?

Mark, if it makes you feel better to think I'm an idiot, go right ahead. If you actually want to discuss it, good. Either way, I don't really give a sh1t what you think of me.

Let me put it this way, I don't think it should be the kind of crime that puts a 22 year old man on the sex registry for the rest of his life. Hell, I'm not intimately familiar with the relevant laws in every state, but I'd be guess 22-17 wouldn't be a crime at all in at least a few states.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Mark Padgett

As a father of two daughters who were both once 17, to me this is more than just abhorrent - it's criminal. I also know that if any guy that age even comes close to doing something with either of my two granddaughters (who are now both 13) before they are each 18, my sons-in-law will take care of it - and I wouldn't hesitate to help them.

As the father of a daughter who will be 17 sooner than I'd like to think, I don't disagree that I would take care of it. As always, it's different if it happens to my daughter. Then again, it wouldn't make a difference if my daughter was 17, 18, or 20; if an adult in a position of power were to take advantage of her like that I'd be furious. I wouldn't need the law, either.

Again, I wouldn't want him tagged as a sex-offender, listed next to the guy giving candy to little kids out of his white panel van.

[PaREF]

I just read the article and it said he is 26. I think that at 26 he shouldn't be chasing high school girls, no matter how close they are to 18.

[JRutledge]

I happen to agree with Snaq on this. I think putting everyone on a sex offender's list is not the answer. And the age of 22 and 17 is not that far apart if there was some level of a mutual relationship. Now you can make the case this is not a mutual relationship, but a 17 year old is only a year away from 18 and can drive and soon vote. I guess I have a problem if an 18 year old were to get involved with a 17 year old and somehow they were accused of an inappropriate relationship and then accused of a crime.

I think a lot of parents do not want to face that your 17 year old is not like a 17 year old was when you were a kid. This is certainly not always a black and white situation that is for sure.

Peace

[Adam]

Originally Posted by PaREF

I just read the article and it said he is 26. I think that at 26 he shouldn't be chasing high school girls, no matter how close they are to 18.

You're right, he shouldn't. But I still don't think he should be tagged as a sex offender. Take away his coaching license, but let's not brand him with a big red "M" on his forehead.

Again, I have a bigger problem with a 50 y/o CEO using a 22 y/o secretary.