Hot Stove: UNC Basketball

[NOVAHEEL13]

And he was punished for it.

We have to remember these kids' backgrounds. How the fuck is a kid supposed to know that videoing someone without their knowledge is really bad, when they see it happening all around them? Hell, how many celebrity sex tapes are out there? Kids probably don't know that Paris Hilton actually released her sex tape herself -- they just know that it was circulating. Hulk Hogan? Was that video consensual?

Are we teaching the kids in school not to do this? We should be. Are we? I have a feeling that it's not being done, because to talk about it is to admit that kids are having sex and that's OK. Which we know that the religious right refuses to do.

I didn't know where he was from, so I looked it up. Texas. Well, of course. Who in Texas was telling Zayden High that's it's wrong to make sex tapes without someone's consent?

Dude....

super did you get hit in the head? Are you really arguing that a 18-19 yr old doesn't, or in this case, didn't know or couldn't have known videoing someone engaging in a sex act without their consent to video them is illegal?

Yes, a 18yr old, in today's world, knows or should know that it's illegal to video someone engaging in a sexual act when it's not consented to prior to said act. And it's reasonable to have this standard because the consent to fuck doesn't extend to consenting to video the act. A 18-19 yr old doesn't need ANYONE telling them this... especially with the "me too" and "time's up"

 

[Icky Mettle]

I don't disagree with you... but in a lot of cases where women come forward they are just "slut shamed" and told their behavior was "asking for it." So at least he was put in a penalty box for a year.

That seemed to be an all-too-common accusation on the IC basketball boards. It was a small minority of posters, but still….

 

[SnoopRob]

I don't disagree with you... but in a lot of cases where women come forward they are just "slut shamed" and told their behavior was "asking for it." So at least he was put in a penalty box for a year.

I am glad we now have processes and the societal will to take these cases seriously in ways that we didn’t in the past.

I am deeply troubled that we apparently also did not actually carry out the full disciplinary action and instead continued to provide High perks associated with being a Carolina Basketball player while he was supposed to be away from the team.

 

[SnoopRob]

That seemed to be an all-too-common accusation on the IC basketball boards. It was a small minority of posters, but still….

Yeah, every time some situation like this comes up, there are a healthy number of IC posters who show they're not only shitty posters, but shitty fucking humans.

But I guess that's to be expected with a board as large and diverse as the IC boards.

 

[Centerpiece]

I have no idea what went through the kid's head... or what he did "exactly", but if I were thrown off the team (suspended whatever) for an entire season, I would hope I could make amends with the offended party and pay the legal price for my offenses - and then transfer out. I don't think I'd want to hang around anymore. Make peace. Pay the price. Leave the premises. Try to re-start my life elsewhere.

That said, he didn't leave. He stuck around and stuck it out, and now's he's back on the team. If he paid the price, paid his dues, made amends with the offended party... Coaches and team welcomed him back... I think it's a done deal and we as fans can leave it be and move on. Obviously he has, and so has all other relevant parties.

 

[UNCatTech]

Not sure if this is a hot take but I think how the program handled the Zayden High situation was pretty sketchy in hindsight. Understand that some of the details need to be kept under wraps for the sake of the victim when something like this happens, but even with that in mind I feel like the reporting was unusually vague. A lot of the speculation I saw is that this was maybe related to academics but in the back of my mind I was always wondering if it was something more than that.

Seriously, this isn’t the first time a player from a high profile team has gotten into trouble for sexual assault, but I can’t remember many instances where the reason for the suspension was kept under wraps for so long.

Is it considered sexual assault if the sex was consensual but the filming wasn't?

I believe if it were sexual assault he would not be on the team now. But maybe I read it wrong.

 

[NOVAHEEL13]

Is it considered sexual assault if the sex was consensual but the filming wasn't?

I believe if it were sexual assault he would not be on the team now. But maybe I read it wrong.

Depends on the jurisdiction but it's not SA in NC. In NC it would probably violate § 14-190.5A. Disclosure of private images. It provides for criminal and civil liability.

For an offense by a person who is 18 years of age or older at the time of the offense, the violation is a Class H felony.

 

[stankeylegjones]

Kid made a mistake at age 18. You don't know what happened. Is there any allegation that he touched her in any way that was non-consensual?

I mean, this videotaping stuff is everywhere. Revenge porn is worse and it has been so prolific that both the states and the federal government have been frantically trying to get it under control with various statutes. To me, it's wrong to mete out such punishment to an 18 year old that doesn't get visited upon adults or elected officials.

I mean, we don't know all the details. If he did it as revenge porn, that's one thing. But maybe he was showing off to his friends having a big dick, or maybe his prowess in bed -- which, as a practical matter might have the same effect, but is far different when it comes to intent. HD presumably knows the details.

I find it really hard to reconcile the consensus that "HD is a really good man," with "HD allows a sexual deviant to play for the team." My guess is that he is satisfied that the kid has learned his lesson.

Somehow liberals got so stuck in the "punish wrongdoers" phase that they've forgotten the other important phase: reward those who improve. Especially with an 18 or 19 year old, the goal should be to rehabilitate, not just stigmatize and exile.

Super, seriously? (I meant to include all of your posts on this issue.)

 

[superrific]

Depends on the jurisdiction but it's not SA in NC. In NC it would probably violate § 14-190.5A. Disclosure of private images. It provides for criminal and civil liability.

That requires:

Offense. – A person is guilty of disclosure of private images if all of the following apply:
(1) The person knowingly discloses an image of another person with the intent to do either of the following
a. Coerce, harass, intimidate, demean, humiliate, or cause financial loss to the depicted person.
b. Cause others to coerce, harass, intimidate, demean, humiliate, or cause financial loss to the depicted person.
(2) The depicted person is identifiable from the disclosed image itself or information offered in connection with the image.
(3) The depicted person's intimate parts are or are realistically depicted to be exposed or the depicted person is or is realistically depicted to be engaged in sexual conduct in the disclosed image.
(4) The person discloses the image without the affirmative consent of the depicted person.
(5) The person obtained, created, adapted, or modified the image without consent of the depicted person or under circumstances such that the person knew or should have known that the depicted person expected the images to remain private

Disclose is defined in the statute as "Transfer, publish, distribute, or reproduce."

Based on the narrative that he videoed her without consent and showed it to some friends, he doesn't meet the elements.

 

[superrific]

Is it considered sexual assault if the sex was consensual but the filming wasn't?

Not that I know of.

 

[NOVAHEEL13]

That requires:

Offense. – A person is guilty of disclosure of private images if all of the following apply:
(1) The person knowingly discloses an image of another person with the intent to do either of the following
a. Coerce, harass, intimidate, demean, humiliate, or cause financial loss to the depicted person.
b. Cause others to coerce, harass, intimidate, demean, humiliate, or cause financial loss to the depicted person.
(2) The depicted person is identifiable from the disclosed image itself or information offered in connection with the image.
(3) The depicted person's intimate parts are or are realistically depicted to be exposed or the depicted person is or is realistically depicted to be engaged in sexual conduct in the disclosed image.
(4) The person discloses the image without the affirmative consent of the depicted person.
(5) The person obtained, created, adapted, or modified the image without consent of the depicted person or under circumstances such that the person knew or should have known that the depicted person expected the images to remain private

Disclose is defined in the statute as "Transfer, publish, distribute, or reproduce."

Based on the narrative that he videoed her without consent and showed it to some friends, he doesn't meet the elements.

I know what's required which is why I said probably not did.

it's certainly not SA based on any NC statue

 

[superrific]

Dude....

super did you get hit in the head? Are you really arguing that a 18-19 yr old doesn't, or in this case, didn't know or couldn't have known videoing someone engaging in a sex act without their consent to video them is illegal?

Yes, a 18yr old, in today's world, knows or should know that it's illegal to video someone engaging in a sexual act when it's not consented to prior to said act. And it's reasonable to have this standard because the consent to fuck doesn't extend to consenting to video the act. A 18-19 yr old doesn't need ANYONE telling them this... especially with the "me too" and "time's up"

I did not get hit in the head. I do have a 19 year old son. His friends in high school wouldn't have known that. At least one loved to record messing around with girls and I very much doubt he had permission. My son, of course, knew because I taught him, and he became ex-friends with the most toxic members of his friend group.

Look, I don't know what they do or don't teach in Texas, but the idea that 18 year olds are well versed in the legality or morality of sex videos seems doubtful to me.

 

[superrific]

I know what's required which is why I said probably not did.

it's certainly not SA based on any NC statue

The "not" was omitted from your post unless I misunderstood something. And if you meant he probably would not be liable under that statute, I think we agree.

 

[NOVAHEEL13]

I did not get hit in the head. I do have a 19 year old son. His friends in high school wouldn't have known that. At least one loved to record messing around with girls and I very much doubt he had permission. My son, of course, knew because I taught him, and he became ex-friends with the most toxic members of his friend group.

Look, I don't know what they do or don't teach in Texas, but the idea that 18 year olds are well versed in the legality or morality of sex videos seems doubtful to me.

I also have a 19yr old son and I can tell you he, for a fucking fact, knows it's a felony to vid a sexual act with someone without their consent. I've never once discussed it with him. I once asked him when he first got his phone if he knew taking nekkid pictures of others without their consent is wrong. His response was "well no shit, dad" but then again he's pretty black and white when it comes to right/wrong.

 

[superrific]

I also have a 19yr old son and I can tell you he, for a fucking fact, knows it's a felony to vid a sexual act with someone without their consent. I've never once discussed it with him. I once asked him when he first got his phone if he knew taking nekkid pictures of others without their consent is wrong. His response was "well no shit, dad" but then again he's pretty black and white when it comes to right/wrong.

Probably for the same reason that my son knows it's wrong. The parents have something to do with that, no?

I'm just not willing to jump on someone's back without knowing what they have gone through unless it's quite obvious. Like it would be for rape. But photos or videos is still a gray area, in my opinion, in terms of public knowledge.

 

[stankeylegjones]

Probably for the same reason that my son knows it's wrong. The parents have something to do with that, no?

I'm just not willing to jump on someone's back without knowing what they have gone through unless it's quite obvious. Like it would be for rape. But photos or videos is still a gray area, in my opinion, in terms of public knowledge.

I don't think anyone is saying to jump on his back or to disown him. He can be provided the support he needs, without being given the incredible opportunities of representing the university as a basketball player. No?

 

[superrific]

I don't think anyone is saying to jump on his back or to disown him. He can be provided the support he needs, without being given the incredible opportunities of representing the university as a basketball player. No?

Telling a basketball player he can't play basketball is pretty much disowning him. I can't imagine what support he needs, if he just made a mistake. Again, I trust HD on this.

 

[stankeylegjones]

Telling a basketball player he can't play basketball is pretty much disowning him. I can't imagine what support he needs, if he just made a mistake. Again, I trust HD on this.

I completely disagree. HD can definitely give support, to the level that ZH feels it, without also keeping him on the team, and allowing ZH all of the benefits and privileges of a UNC basketball player. And, I think you not understanding the severity of his actions is clouding your thoughts on this.

 

[Calheel]

Probably for the same reason that my son knows it's wrong. The parents have something to do with that, no?

I'm just not willing to jump on someone's back without knowing what they have gone through unless it's quite obvious. Like it would be for rape. But photos or videos is still a gray area, in my opinion, in terms of public knowledge.

The amount of nudes that are voluntarily exchanged on the internet by kids -- both boys and girls -- is pretty scary. Given how prevalent this kind of stuff is, I can understand where a 19 year old might not fully appreciate the criminal nature of what he was doing. I am sure he knew it was "wrong" but exactly how wrong may not have been fully appreciated by him. It is a completely different world than when we were that age.

 

[Icky Mettle]

Depends on the jurisdiction but it's not SA in NC. In NC it would probably violate § 14-190.5A. Disclosure of private images. It provides for criminal and civil liability.

For an offense by a person who is 18 years of age or older at the time of the offense, the violation is a Class H felony.

Based on my understanding of what happened, that statute would not apply, but it seems that NCGS 14-202(f) would.