Please clarify any inaccurate statements that have been made.

 

I'm specifically talking about the younger brother. His situation has no business being discussed and has nothing to do with this thread. Leave him out of it and focus on the thread topic. Additionally, if you believe everything that is being alleged as being accurate, I have some oceanfront property in Arizona I will sell you.

I'm specifically talking about the younger brother. His situation has no business being discussed and has nothing to do with this thread. Leave him out of it and focus on the thread topic. Additionally, if you believe everything that is being alleged as being accurate, I have some oceanfront property in Arizona I will sell you.

 

It would be nice for someone to blow up a couple of the allegations.

 

Remember everyone, the plaintiffs can allege anything they want in a suit. Kind of like throwing a bunch of mud against the wall to see what sticks.

I'm specifically talking about the younger brother. His situation has no business being discussed and has nothing to do with this thread. Leave him out of it and focus on the thread topic. Additionally, if you believe everything that is being alleged as being accurate, I have some oceanfront property in Arizona I will sell you.

So what is the story?

So what is the story?

 

This isn't the place to talk about something like this and that is my story and I'm sticking to it!

I'm specifically talking about the younger brother. His situation has no business being discussed and has nothing to do with this thread. Leave him out of it and focus on the thread topic. Additionally, if you believe everything that is being alleged as being accurate, I have some oceanfront property in Arizona I will sell you.

 

Let's set a record straight. It was not me that began a conversation regarding the younger brother. I was simply asking if it were true, and if it was, how egregious the allegations were IF true. You seem to use sarcasm to diffuse and deflect the truth. Myself and others on this thread are simply wanting someone like yourself (who seems to know alot about this case) to set us straight and tell us what is not factual and blow up some of these allegations. If true, I don't think it's in the best interest of a high ranking administrator to be involved in these type of situations. Do you? I do believe it is relevant to the thread since the father is named in the lawsuit.

Let's set a record straight. It was not me that began a conversation regarding the younger brother. I was simply asking if it were true, and if it was, how egregious the allegations were IF true. You seem to use sarcasm to diffuse and deflect the truth. Myself and others on this thread are simply wanting someone like yourself (who seems to know alot about this case) to set us straight and tell us what is not factual and blow up some of these allegations. If true, I don't think it's in the best interest of a high ranking administrator to be involved in these type of situations. Do you? I do believe it is relevant to the thread since the father is named in the lawsuit.

 

Do you think I'm stupid? If you do, that's okay (just some more sarcasm). What I know or don't know will not be shared in an open forum for the whole world to read. It's not my job to blow up some of these allegations and we will see if Family X has the proof to back them up.

Do you think I'm stupid? If you do, that's okay (just some more sarcasm). What I know or don't know will not be shared in an open forum for the whole world to read. It's not my job to blow up some of these allegations and we will see if Family X has the proof to back them up.

 

Let's assume they cannot back up some of the claims (lie to the KHSAA/showed up to intimidate their girl at AAU).

 

Isn't there enough that's already known as factual to seal the deal? What serious allegations are still in dispute?

 

What's not in dispute:

 

Something happened in the car that caused the 18 yr old to admit to guilt and be convicted.

 

18 yr old was texting a 13 yr old girl.

 

Someone alerted the family as to the police involvement? Unless the detective was blabbing to every Tom, Dick, and Harry in Walton that came from inside the school.

 

The 18 yr old was punished for another act involving another girl.

 

The 18 yr old showed up at the girl's school game after being told to stay away. AD either forgot or chose to ignore it and the dad had to remind the AD at which point the kid was removed.

 

Another girl claimed she was assaulted (not Family X).

 

18 yr old went to Florida with basketball team after being charged with a serious crime.

 

School delayed in reporting anything to the family.

 

Those are just off the top of my head. Are any of these serious issues in dispute?

Do you think I'm stupid? If you do, that's okay (just some more sarcasm). What I know or don't know will not be shared in an open forum for the whole world to read. It's not my job to blow up some of these allegations and we will see if Family X has the proof to back them up.

 

I respect your position but with all that said I don't see any reason for you to post further in this thread.

This isn't the place to talk about something like this and that is my story and I'm sticking to it!

We're not asking for the sleazy details. We're asking which of the allegations are false.

Let's assume they cannot back up some of the claims (lie to the KHSAA/showed up to intimidate their girl at AAU).

 

Isn't there enough that's already known as factual to seal the deal? What serious allegations are still in dispute?

 

What's not in dispute:

 

Something happened in the car that caused the 18 yr old to admit to guilt and be convicted.

 

18 yr old was texting a 13 yr old girl.

 

Someone alerted the family as to the police involvement? Unless the detective was blabbing to every Tom, Dick, and Harry in Walton that came from inside the school.

 

The 18 yr old was punished for another act involving another girl.

 

The 18 yr old showed up at the girl's school game after being told to stay away. AD either forgot or chose to ignore it and the dad had to remind the AD at which point the kid was removed.

 

Another girl claimed she was assaulted (not Family X).

 

18 yr old went to Florida with basketball team after being charged with a serious crime.

 

School delayed in reporting anything to the family.

 

Those are just off the top of my head. Are any of these serious issues in dispute?

 

Sounds like you have this case solved. I'm not going to debate each point because who knows what's true or what's not and why certain decisions were made. Let the court decide.

Sounds like you have this case solved. I'm not going to debate each point because who knows what's true or what's not and why certain decisions were made. Let the court decide.

 

Yet you still have not pointed out anything that is in question. Technically, you could say the tipping off the family is in dispute but then logic would seem to say otherwise.

 

The rest of it does not seem to be in question but , again, I'll ask you to point out where I've misread it.

Let's assume they cannot back up some of the claims (lie to the KHSAA/showed up to intimidate their girl at AAU).

 

Isn't there enough that's already known as factual to seal the deal? What serious allegations are still in dispute?

 

What's not in dispute:

 

Something happened in the car that caused the 18 yr old to admit to guilt and be convicted.

 

18 yr old was texting a 13 yr old girl.

 

Someone alerted the family as to the police involvement? Unless the detective was blabbing to every Tom, Dick, and Harry in Walton that came from inside the school.

 

The 18 yr old was punished for another act involving another girl.

 

The 18 yr old showed up at the girl's school game after being told to stay away. AD either forgot or chose to ignore it and the dad had to remind the AD at which point the kid was removed.

 

Another girl claimed she was assaulted (not Family X).

 

18 yr old went to Florida with basketball team after being charged with a serious crime.

 

School delayed in reporting anything to the family.

 

Those are just off the top of my head. Are any of these serious issues in dispute?

 

Not sure the bold would be technically true, would it? I believe his guilty plea had to do with harassing actions after the incident took place and did not specifically include his actions during the "incident". I would guess that is why the plea was more than acceptable to him, as it was not a conviction of any sexual crime, which would not only have made it likely he might have to register as a sexual predator, but also could not be expunged.

Not sure the bold would be technically true, would it? I believe his guilty plea had to do with harassing actions after the incident took place and did not specifically include his actions during the "incident". I would guess that is why the plea was more than acceptable to him, as it was not a conviction of any sexual crime, which would not only have made it likely he might have to register as a sexual predator, but also could not be expunged.

 

If that's correct then I owe an apology the young man. I will have to go back and re-read it. My apologies.

 

Let me re-phrase. Something happened to have the kid admit to a crime.

Not sure the bold would be technically true, would it? I believe his guilty plea had to do with harassing actions after the incident took place and did not specifically include his actions during the "incident". I would guess that is why the plea was more than acceptable to him, as it was not a conviction of any sexual crime, which would not only have made it likely he might have to register as a sexual predator, but also could not be expunged.

This is from the courthousenews.com link.

 

Vance admitted to the assault during a phone conversation recorded by the Sheriff's Department, the complaint states. Vance was arrested and charged with 2nd degree sex abuse, and was released on bail, according to the complaint.

I am not taking a position one way or the other but if I was the plaintiffs I would work the entire school (WV) hard to look for possible additional victims. I think the article referenced two additional "incidents" and if there were three total my gut says there are probably a lot more.

I couldn't agree more.