Corey Maggette rape allegations

[niveklaen]

In the case of an alleged rape, is it recommended or required that a party who hears about it from the alleged victim report it to law enforcement? Isn't it up to the victim to report the crime? Will LE even take a report from a third party who was not a witness to the crime?

This is why I mentioned my ignorance of NC Law. In Missouri, educators are mandatory reporters. The student does not have the option of keeping the case private once a teacher or other school official becomes aware of an allegation. In the Military, or at least the Air Force, all officers except chaplains, military defense counsel, and the sexual assault response coordinator (and I think the military mental health providers, though their status was unclear) are mandated reporters. once an officer other than those with confidentiality exceptions becomes aware, the alleged victim looses the right to decide whether to pursue the matter. Some members of congress* have been pushing to strip officers like chaplains, mental health providers, and defense attorneys of the confidentiality that they normally have with the people that they serve, but as of 2017 (when I left the service) those confidentialities were still honored by military regulations. if we have a NC attorney on the forum maybe they can provide insight to NC law on this issue.

*note that I am not expressing an opinion as to what the policy should be. There are reasonable arguments on both sides of the issue ...

[Devil in the Blue Dress]

that's probably what I saw. It's a lot longer to type out than aol.com

That might be why I passed at the time. I was an early aol adopter. I had aol email before my company even had email. I didn't want to give up my Duke related screen name/email address either.

A lifetime Duke email address is still available. When you set it up, you indicate what email address it should refer emails to thus you continue to use the one you're using.

[Utley]

i thought you could have alumni.duke.edu...but maybe they changed it. unsure.

I have one of these.

[proelitedota]

I have one of these.

Same.

[-jk]

A lifetime Duke email address is still available. When you set it up, you indicate what email address it should refer emails to thus you continue to use the one you're using.

And registering on DBR with one fast tracks your acct!

-jk

[uh_no]

And registering on DBR with one fast tracks your acct!

-jk

what i really want to know is when i can give out uh_no@dukebasketballreport.com as my email

[-jk]

what i really want to know is when i can give out uh_no@dukebasketballreport.com as my email

I'll have to look in that.

(Though I imagine it'll be rather expensive...)

-jk

[OldPhiKap]

I'll have to look in that.

(Though I imagine it'll be rather expensive...)

-jk

C’mon, man. With the rate y’all are charging for the premium chat subscription, it’s pocket change.

[cspan37421]

Somewhere along the line I think I saw that alumni can claim an @duke.edu address. Is that still the case? I never bothered, but it might be nice to have.

I hope others have had better experience than I have with the @alumni.duke.edu address. It's been a source of spam for me, to the point that I wish I never had signed up for it.

On the bright side, through that email I have apparently gained the trust of many Nigerian princes and their financial ministers.

[53n206]

Somewhere along the line I think I saw that alumni can claim an @duke.edu address. Is that still the case? I never bothered, but it might be nice to have.

I am class '57. Did not apply for address: an @duke.edu was somehow assigned to me. Never use it.

[Acymetric]

that's probably what I saw. It's a lot longer to type out than aol.com

That might be why I passed at the time. I was an early aol adopter. I had aol email before my company even had email. I didn't want to give up my Duke related screen name/email address either.

One advantage is that a lot of "student deals" online just require you to have a .edu address.

This is why I mentioned my ignorance of NC Law. In Missouri, educators are mandatory reporters. The student does not have the option of keeping the case private once a teacher or other school official becomes aware of an allegation. In the Military, or at least the Air Force, all officers except chaplains, military defense counsel, and the sexual assault response coordinator (and I think the military mental health providers, though their status was unclear) are mandated reporters. once an officer other than those with confidentiality exceptions becomes aware, the alleged victim looses the right to decide whether to pursue the matter. Some members of congress* have been pushing to strip officers like chaplains, mental health providers, and defense attorneys of the confidentiality that they normally have with the people that they serve, but as of 2017 (when I left the service) those confidentialities were still honored by military regulations. if we have a NC attorney on the forum maybe they can provide insight to NC law on this issue.

*note that I am not expressing an opinion as to what the policy should be. There are reasonable arguments on both sides of the issue ...

Was that the case in 1999? It seems like the concept of mandatory reporters is somewhat newer than that, but maybe some places adopted earlier than others.

[Nugget]

Not that you're insinuating as such, but to prevent anyone from taking this the wrong way, as far as I am aware, there was never any definitive connection made (publicly) between the allegations against Rasheed and his dismissal from the team, and it's my understanding that the dismissal was solely due to other incidents.

Correct. I did not mean to imply otherwise.

Rather, my point about "reading between the lines" was that it appeared (without going into too much detail) the message Duke was trying to convey about how the allegation of sexual misconduct had been handled in that situation was:

(1) yes we had been aware of the allegation against him;
(2) the basketball program referred matters to the University's Title IX/disciplinary authorities [e.g., did was it was supposed to do];
(3) those authorities handled the matters appropriately in accordance with federal law;
(4) we can't tell you what the conclusion of their investigation was (privacy), but (a) no action was taken against Sulaimon, and (b) "see item 3, above."

[Nugget]

As a non-lawyer, I'm curious about this part. Her attorneys made a point of mentioning the Facebook and e-mail messages she sent. At least in the Fairfax case, they would seem to be useful in proving her allegations and description of the event precede the more recent one, but in the Maggette case, what value would they serve?

In a he-said/she-said case without physical evidence, especially one this stale, the existence of contemporaneous (or, at least, earlier than now) recitations by the accuser to third parties would tend to be viewed as enhancing the credibility of her accusation - in short, "she's less likely to be making this up now, if she told 3 people the same thing in 2000."

[1991 duke law]

In a he-said/she-said case without physical evidence, especially one this stale, the existence of contemporaneous (or, at least, earlier than now) recitations by the accuser to third parties would tend to be viewed as enhancing the credibility of her accusation - in short, "she's less likely to be making this up now, if she told 3 people the same thing in 2000."

Is that the state of the law in North Carolina?

So if I told 10 people in 1991 that I played pick up with Jay Bilas and Quinn Snyder and schooled them when we were in law school (to confirm, we did play but I did not school them) - is it more likely that people will believe it now if there are so many people who can corroborate that I said it in 1991?

[weezie]

Can we tone down the title of this thread?

[Bluedog]

Can we tone down the title of this thread?

Yeah it is a bit ironic that perhaps the most incendiary thing on this thread
(that's still here at least) is the title. Certainly it's factual but comes across very strongly for those coming to the site.

[BandAlum83]

Who still uses AOL?

(Ducks, covers...)

-jk

I don’t, but back in 94 or whenever it was offered I did.

[CameronBornAndBred]

I don’t, but back in 94 or whenever it was offered I did.

You're probably still waiting for the connection...

aol-dial-up-resized-600.png

[Dukehky]

K addressed it in postgame. Said again, with conviction that he didn't know about it and that all investigations were being handled at the university level.

As it pertains to the basketball program, that's really all there is to it unless it comes out that K lied, twice, to the media (doubtful). As it stands, there is nothing left to be said. Either the accuser made it up (statistically unlikely), the person who said it was a Duke player (which has not been alleged by the victim) lied or misremembered, all accusations are true and the school tried to silence her, or the school tried to silence her and the team knew about it.

[SavDukeGrad]

In a he-said/she-said case without physical evidence, especially one this stale, the existence of contemporaneous (or, at least, earlier than now) recitations by the accuser to third parties would tend to be viewed as enhancing the credibility of her accusation - in short, "she's less likely to be making this up now, if she told 3 people the same thing in 2000."

Concerning contemporaneous recitations: can Facebook messages be considered contemporaneous recitations? I believe Facebook started in 2004, so any Facebook messages were at least 5 years after the alleged incident.