The teen’s parents are calling for charges against the now-former coach.

  • FuglyDuck@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 months ago

    what the fuck is with all the double speak in this article? “allegedly”. “the aleged “Assault”…” Like. Dude. the coach is on camera. Choking out a student. You can argue that maybe it was some how consensual, maybe? At which point you need to ask can a minor actually consent to that? (Nope.)

    also. No charges filed? are you fucking kidding me?

    • CTDummy@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      Any news article reporting on such an event must use the qualifier “allegedly” until the perpetrator is convicted of a crime. This is just literally correct as until they’re convicted they’re only alleged to have committed a crime. Media complies with this because even if they have a video maybe the case goes south and the guy in the video ducks the charge. Then he could bring legal action against anyone who definitively said he did something as opposed to using allegedly.

      The article is scarce on details but it sounds like police and public prosecutors have woken up to the case and are investigating avenues of prosecution. Definitely not a lawyer, don’t believe anything I say at face value.

      • FuglyDuck@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 months ago

        That covers half of it. Read the article. They really are couching it in media-speak.

        Almost as if they like the guy.

        Watch the video. It’s pretty clear an assault took place, yet that too is “alleged”. The implication there is that the attack never happened- when it very clearly did.

        • catloaf@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          3 months ago

          If they can’t verify the authenticity of the video, it too is alleged.

          • FuglyDuck@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            3 months ago

            They have an interview with the victims mother.

            They know the coach got fired immediately.

            They have the video and a statement from the school acknowledging that an assault took place.

            The video is just icing on the evidentiary cake.

            • NoIWontPickAName@kbin.earth
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              3 months ago

              And all of that can be presented as evidence to obtain a conviction, but until he’s convicted it’s all just allegations

              • FuglyDuck@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                edit-2
                3 months ago

                The presumption of innocence is a very important part of protecting civil liberties of the accused

                It is not a statement of fact. You don’t get convicted and suddenly become guilty. The jury finds that you have always been guilty, based on the evidence shown at trial. And that doesn’t even necessarily mean you’re truly guilty or not.

                And while I get they’re trying to avoid lawsuits, but they’re taking it to pedantic extremes. The school found sufficient evidence to immediately terminate his employment, they throw the “allegedly” qualifier on there and scare quotes on “assault” at least once even though it’s patently obvious that an assault did happen.

                No, no. You’re right maybe it was staged. Maybe the kid that got choked out asked for it…