• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

2023 College Football Coaching Carousel

wfu22fan said:
I’m skeptical of her claims. Why pile on the guy before he has a hearing and eventually a civil suit vs MSU to get ALL of the facts out? If he is telling the truth, it’s nothing more than consensual phone sex with a lady who spoke with him extensively over the phone (late at night) 27 times and wanted a rich sugar daddy. She knew he was married. It was improper for her to be talking that often to a married man. He’s exercised horrible judgment and has betrayed his wife, hurt his family and embarrassed MSU. I’m just not convinced that she’s telling the truth based on the USA Today article, and that’s all the information available at present.
Click to expand...

If she's not telling the truth, as you allege, then how do we know this to be true as well? I'm not sure how a statement of fact can be made and the very next sentence question that statement of fact.
 
wfu22fan said:
I’m skeptical of her claims. Why pile on the guy before he has a hearing and eventually a civil suit vs MSU to get ALL of the facts out? If he is telling the truth, it’s nothing more than consensual phone sex with a lady who spoke with him extensively over the phone (late at night) 27 times and wanted a rich sugar daddy. She knew he was married. It was improper for her to be talking that often to a married man. He’s exercised horrible judgment and has betrayed his wife, hurt his family and embarrassed MSU. I’m just not convinced that she’s telling the truth based on the USA Today article, and that’s all the information available at present.
Click to expand...

What do you mean by “pile on the guy?”
 
wfu22fan said:
I’m skeptical of her claims. Why pile on the guy before he has a hearing and eventually a civil suit vs MSU to get ALL of the facts out? If he is telling the truth, it’s nothing more than consensual phone sex with a lady who spoke with him extensively over the phone (late at night) 27 times and wanted a rich sugar daddy. She knew he was married. It was improper for her to be talking that often to a married man. He’s exercised horrible judgment and has betrayed his wife, hurt his family and embarrassed MSU. I’m just not convinced that she’s telling the truth based on the USA Today article, and that’s all the information available at present.
Click to expand...
Seriously? A) She is a single woman. If there is any impropriety, it is by the married man. B) There is not necessarily improper content to those calls. In this case, it seems likely, but people are allowed to talk on the phone, regardless of their marriage status. Especially since you claim that we don't know the content of those calls. Are you a member of the Mike Pence school of morals? Is it also improper for a married man to have dinner with a woman, and is it that woman's fault for "tempting" the married man because she should know better?
 
Last edited:
TheAbster said:
If she's not telling the truth, as you allege, then how do we know this to be true as well? I'm not sure how a statement of fact can be made and the very next sentence question that statement of fact.
Click to expand...
I’m not saying that she isn’t telling the truth. I’m saying that I’m skeptical of her claim. At this point, she has made ALLEGATIONS. These are not facts. He has filed a response through his lawyer and appeared to answer questions by MSU. Those are not facts. At the hearing, there will be a finder of fact. And if a lawsuit is filed, a jury will find the facts.
 
wfu22fan said:
I’m not saying that she isn’t telling the truth. I’m saying that I’m skeptical of her claim. At this point, she has made ALLEGATIONS. These are not facts. He has filed a response through his lawyer and appeared to answer questions by MSU. Those are not facts. At the hearing, there will be a finder of fact. And if a lawsuit is filed, a jury will find the facts.
Click to expand...

I don't disagree with any of this. I was just curious how he "exercised horrible judgment" when "she has made ALLEGATIONS" and .... "These are not facts".
 
redwing42 said:
Are you a member of the Mike Pence school of morals? Is it also improper for a married man to have dinner with a woman, and is it that woman's fault for "tempting" the married man because she should know better?
Click to expand...
It is only inappropriate if you have SINS. I really feel like he's been set-up by an opportunistic hood rat.
 
TheAbster said:
I don't disagree with any of this. I was just curious how he "exercised horrible judgment" when "she has made ALLEGATIONS" and .... "These are not facts".
Click to expand...
His admission that he had a relationship and phone sex with her. My bad. His admissions are facts.
 
wfu22fan said:
His admission that he had a relationship and phone sex with her. My bad. His admissions are facts.
Click to expand...
He says he had phone sex with her. She says he made sexual comments about her and jacked off. I’m not sure you understand what facts are.
I’m also curious why her deleting text messages is something you’ve leaned on to say she has credibility issues when he did the same exact thing (and has about 70+ million reasons to lie).
 
redwing42 said:
Seriously? A) She is a single woman. If there is any impropriety, it is by the married man. B) There is not necessarily improper content to those calls. In this case, it seems likely, but people are allowed to talk on the phone, regardless of their marriage status. Especially since you claim that we don't know the content of those calls. Are you a member of the Mike Pence school of morals? Is it also improper for a married man to have dinner with a woman, and is it that woman's fault for "tempting" the married man because she should know better?
Click to expand...
I understand your point and I’m certainly not a Mike Pence fan. In the circumstances as reported by USA Today (27 late night calls lasting 30 plus minutes), yes I think that was inappropriate for both of them. She didn’t have to take the calls and she knew he was married. That’s one reason I’m skeptical of her claim that the phone sex wasn’t consensual. Yes, a married man could have dinner with a single women if they were long time friends, it was business related, etc. His wife would be the judge in that case, since I assume she would know about it.
 
Wakelaw2006 said:
He says he had phone sex with her. She says he made sexual comments about her and jacked off. I’m not sure you understand what facts are.
I’m also curious why her deleting text messages is something you’ve leaned on to say she has credibility issues when he did the same exact thing (and has about 70+ million reasons to lie).
Click to expand...
Yes, Tucker admitted to the phone sex. He denies that it wasn’t consensual. Regarding the text messages, she says she deleted them after the last phone call in August. IIRC, the article says she contacted an attorney shortly after the call because she felt threatened. She thereafter filed the complaint with MSU in December. She had to know that the texts would be relevant to her claim. Tucker was cheating on his wife. He likely would have been deleting the texts on a daily basis unless they were work related.
 
I read the entire USA Today article. A typical he-said/she-said and the timeline does not favor her. The one thing she might have going for her was her therapist notes....which were 3 months after the whack-a-mole game on the phone.

Have to use some common sense here too. Who the hell complains about nonconsensual phone sex? Who doesn't hang up if it's so revolting? Is this complaint made if it isn't Mel Tucker or Michigan State University? Her status as a victim's right advocate and victim herself should not get her special deference with this, nor should it get her the "she's a crazy chick traumatized by sexual assault" treatment. An arbitrary look at this based on what we know in the USA Today article (I'm open to the fact that more could be disclosed later) says this is a 50/50 case at best. It doesn't even meet a preponderance of the evidence standard. Of course, let's not act like it needs to meet that standard for a Title IX investigation. Tucker is fucked and will be out of a job. He'll still get paid, though.
 
EatLeadCommie said:
I read the entire USA Today article. A typical he-said/she-said and the timeline does not favor her. The one thing she might have going for her was her therapist notes....which were 3 months after the whack-a-mole game on the phone.

Have to use some common sense here too. Who the hell complains about nonconsensual phone sex? Who doesn't hang up if it's so revolting? Is this complaint made if it isn't Mel Tucker or Michigan State University? Her status as a victim's right advocate and victim herself should not get her special deference with this, nor should it get her the "she's a crazy chick traumatized by sexual assault" treatment. An arbitrary look at this based on what we know in the USA Today article (I'm open to the fact that more could be disclosed later) says this is a 50/50 case at best. It doesn't even meet a preponderance of the evidence standard. Of course, let's not act like it needs to meet that standard for a Title IX investigation. Tucker is fucked and will be out of a job. He'll still get paid, though.
Click to expand...
Finally, someone who agrees with me. Let’s let Tucker have his day in court.
 
BarcaDeac said:
TAMU lawyers reaching out to every woman Jimbo’s spoken to since stepping on campus. Maybe easier to do with Petrino there now too.
Click to expand...
That would require Jimbo Fisher to be remotely successful at something. Unless Jameis was his wingman, they are out of luck here.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top