GUILTY TN - MCET, 15, Abducted by Teacher, in Maury County, 13 March 2017 #19

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

Hoosgirl said:
It's ridiculous! The earlier article posted said he had a BED in his classroom for kids to take naps on. No one in school administration thought that was inappropriate?

Sorry ... meant this as a reply to irishboy's post. Hit the wrong reply button!
Click to expand...
Guess he only needed the closet

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I747 using Tapatalk
 
Hoosgirl said:
It's ridiculous! The earlier article posted said he had a BED in his classroom for kids to take naps on. No one in school administration thought that was inappropriate?

Sorry ... meant this as a reply to irishboy's post. Hit the wrong reply button!
Click to expand...
The bed was part of the class he taught.

Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk
 
Been gone awhile... What is all this about a closet?

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk
 
forthefreefood said:
Been gone awhile... What is all this about a closet?

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

I believe this recently came from the lawsuit that ET's father filed against the school:

“TC had an off class period during the school day,” the lawsuit says. “During this period and at other times, TC had ET visit him.”

″ET confessed to TC that she felt depressed and needed professional help, and TC dissuaded her from doing so,” the lawsuit says. “After some period of time in the fall semester 2016, TC kissed and fondled [her] and had her perform oral sex on him in his classroom closet. Thereafter, the classroom closet oral sex occurred regularly while school was in session until mid-January 2017.”

On a field trip to Columbia State Community College on Jan. 27, TC allegedly asked ET to have sex. “She refused for fear of being discovered by other students,” the lawsuit says.

http://www.columbiadailyherald.com/...-family-sues-maury-county-boe-and-tad-cummins
 
KaaBoom said:
This gets back to when the reporter talked to her. She has a First Amendment right to talk to whoever she wants. Reporters, lawyers, whoever. There is no law against people talking to minors.
Click to expand...

If you remember that the reporter had asked MCET to call the family lawyer and let him know that she had done the interview.

*BOOM*

We are going to have to agree to disagree on this. But thank you for the debate. I think I figured out what exactly happened. BH, TC''s lawyer, may have been talking to MCET this while time. I will post what I think happened a little later.
 
@KaaBoom, please do not take offense to my boom remark above. I just had an epithany will typing it. Lately, if I try to edit my posts, it ends up getting deleted.

Regards,
 
Hoosgirl said:
It's ridiculous! The earlier article posted said he had a BED in his classroom for kids to take naps on. No one in school administration thought that was inappropriate?

Sorry ... meant this as a reply to irishboy's post. Hit the wrong reply button!
Click to expand...

IIRC the rationale for the bed was to teach how to properly elevate a patient for the health sciences class.
Only reported that MCET would be allowed by TC to take naps in it.
 
Thanks Niner. I couldn't help but LMAO at the irony.
 
Rodnester said:
TC's lawyer may have just gotten himself dis-barred.

What did you do BH, try to intimidate MCET? Layers are not suppose to "interview" witnesses. They depose them. A big difference.

BH, you should watch the news more. Little girls are not scared anymore. They are an army.
Click to expand...

Rodnester said:
This is poor reporting.
TC's lawyer can talk to MCET through the deposition process. Basically, both lawyers meet, agree on what can be asked, and record the whole proceedure. In the article, the judge said as much.

"The order said any request to speak should be made through the girl's attorney."

Some members of Trump's cabinet are being deposed right now, in the news, Jeff sessions for example. Also think of Clinton''s "it depends on what the word 'is' means."

Regards,
Click to expand...

Respectfully, I disagree with the accuracy of that information. Depositions are regularly taken in civil matters, but are taken only in rare circumstances in criminal matters (usually involving the unavailability of a witness for trial). However, defense counsel is certainly free (and often required for purposes of effective representation) to request interviews with potential witnesses, including victims. In this case, the court issued an order placing parameters on defense counsel's contact with MCET. IMO, this issue has nothing to do with the difference between an interview and a deposition.

The different procedural requirements for depositions can be found in Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 15 ( Fed. R. Crim. P. 15 ) and in Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 30 ( Fed. R. Civ. P. 30 ). Also, the Advisory Committee Notes to Fed. R. Crim. P. 15 explains the difference in criminal cases:

Note to Subdivision (a). 1. This rule continues the existing law permitting defendants to take depositions in certain limited classes of cases [...] The rule continues the limitation of the statute that the taking of depositions is to be restricted to cases in which they are necessary “in order to prevent a failure of justice.”

2. Unlike the practice in civil cases in which depositions may be taken as a matter of right by notice without permission of the court [...] this rule permits depositions to be taken only by order of the court, made in the exercise of discretion and on notice to all parties. It was contemplated that in criminal cases depositions would be used only in exceptional situations, as has been the practice heretofore.
Click to expand...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
jns207 said:
Respectfully, I disagree with the accuracy of that information. Depositions are regularly taken in civil matters, but are taken only in rare circumstances in criminal matters (usually involving the unavailability of a witness for trial). However, defense counsel is certainly free (and often required for purposes of effective representation) to request interviews with potential witnesses, including victims. In this case, the court issued an order placing parameters on defense counsel's contact with MCET. IMO, this issue has nothing to do with the difference between an interview and a deposition.

The different procedural requirements for depositions can be found in Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 15 ( Fed. R. Crim. P. 15 ) and in Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 30 ( Fed. R. Civ. P. 30 ). Also, the Advisory Committee Notes to Fed. R. Crim. P. 15 explains the difference in criminal cases:




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

You are correct, I was wrong. In fact, I see evidence that BH has been speaking to MCET since the day she got back from rehab. I have been blinded to the fact that
she has been an active participant for TC''s defense, until recently IMO. In fact, what happened, is that his grand plan to get TC out of jail, completely and uterly backfired. It all started when BH arranged for MCET to meet a reporter at a local fast food joint.

I am putting my tinfoil theory together right now. But if I am correct, BH is running away from this case.
 
I will just go ahead and get this off of my chest. MCET was in love with TC when she came back from rehab. I would even say that she still hoped to marry him IMO. I believe that TC's attorney BH had been contacting her for help and that she was an active participant in TC's defense team. But what made her change her mind? There is a new lawsuit that was filed in which MCET (aka Jane Doe) and her father AT is suing TC and her former school.

Well last month BH filed a motion to suppress TC's confession. He probably called her to warn her that this was going to make the news and not to talk to any media about the case. But being the curious girl that she is, she probably began to search on the web of what TC said in his confession. To her horror she found out

http://www.insideedition.com/headli...he-left-before-running-off-with-student-im-so

Can you imagine that the man you loved and supported actually cried like a baby and begged his wife to take him back? How would you feel?

I believe that MCET called the family attorney JW to verify what she saw on the internet. I would imagine JW let her hear the recording of that confession. MCET then broke down and revealed everything. JW then immediately filed the lawsuit and had the Judge immediately require that if BH wanted to talk to MCET he would need permission. BH did not realize that there was a new lawsuit pending. He did not know that MCET was no longer the "girl who went willingly". She was now the victim.

Meanwhile the Plea bargaining was still ongoing. Now BH was blindsided with new details that TC had assaulted MCET in the closet of his classroom and had propositioned her for sex on a school field trip. He need to talk to MCET to confirm the new accusations and called her. Why not, she was the "girl who went willingly" and was on his side of the case. There was no valid reason in his mind that he could not speak to her. MCET reported the calls she received from BH to JW.

They immediately began and investigation into BH. Why???

BH just made a mistake. He was not privy to the new lawsuit and had a valid argument against the no contact order. In the end, all he had to do would be to apologize to the court for the infringement and continue on. But He left the case. Why? Lack of funds? I don't buy that. The notoriety of defending TC would be payment enough. If he could get any kind of reduced sentence from what the Feds were asking, he would be the go-to-guy for defending anyone and would be able to charge a premium. Well now the Feds are investigating his contact records with MCET. He only made the one contact after the order was made, but what about the previous contacts?

This is just my opinion, but could he have possibly called or texted MCET from the federal prison from which TC was being held? Did he allow TC to contact MCET in order to get her help?
 
Rodnester said:
I will just go ahead and get this off of my chest. MCET was in love with TC when she came back from rehab. I would even say that she still hoped to marry him IMO. I believe that TC's attorney BH had been contacting her for help and that she was an active participant in TC's defense team. But what made her change her mind? There is a new lawsuit that was filed in which MCET (aka Jane Doe) and her father AT is suing TC and her former school.

Well last month BH filed a motion to suppress TC's confession. He probably called her to warn her that this was going to make the news and not to talk to any media about the case. But being the curious girl that she is, she probably began to search on the web of what TC said in his confession. To her horror she found out

http://www.insideedition.com/headli...he-left-before-running-off-with-student-im-so

Can you imagine that the man you loved and supported actually cried like a baby and begged his wife to take him back? How would you feel?

I believe that MCET called the family attorney JW to verify what she saw on the internet. I would imagine JW let her hear the recording of that confession. MCET then broke down and revealed everything. JW then immediately filed the lawsuit and had the Judge immediately require that if BH wanted to talk to MCET he would need permission. BH did not realize that there was a new lawsuit pending. He did not know that MCET was no longer the "girl who went willingly". She was now the victim.

Meanwhile the Plea bargaining was still ongoing. Now BH was blindsided with new details that TC had assaulted MCET in the closet of his classroom and had propositioned her for sex on a school field trip. He need to talk to MCET to confirm the new accusations and called her. Why not, she was the "girl who went willingly" and was on his side of the case. There was no valid reason in his mind that he could not speak to her. MCET reported the calls she received from BH to JW.

They immediately began and investigation into BH. Why???

BH just made a mistake. He was not privy to the new lawsuit and had a valid argument against the no contact order. In the end, all he had to do would be to apologize to the court for the infringement and continue on. But He left the case. Why? Lack of funds? I don't buy that. The notoriety of defending TC would be payment enough. If he could get any kind of reduced sentence from what the Feds were asking, he would be the go-to-guy for defending anyone and would be able to charge a premium. Well now the Feds are investigating his contact records with MCET. He only made the one contact after the order was made, but what about the previous contacts?

This is just my opinion, but could he have possibly called or texted MCET from the federal prison from which TC was being held? Did he allow TC to contact MCET in order to get her help?
Click to expand...
Have another toke dude :)
BWHAAHAA

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I747 using Tapatalk
 
Doghairrules said:
Well, Gitana comes to mind. [emoji6]
Click to expand...
Smiling and walking away.
Unfortunately there are too many that take advantage of a situation for their own gain. Baez comes to mind to bend the truth.
There are shining stars.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I747 using Tapatalk
 
Unreal. At this point, TC's best shot is to take the plea deal, if indeed there is a plea deal, and make sure that he gets credit for time served. Because otherwise, there will just be more motions, and more delays. And there is no defense for what he did. There's a .001% chance that a jury would vote for acquittal. Optimistically.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I747 using Tapatalk
 
Doghairrules said:
How in the world does he get to keep the money the family paid him?? He sounds like a sleazy person (the lawyer).
Click to expand...
He left because there was no more money not because he may have been investigated, which sounds allowable unless he was passing information from TC and tampering with a witness

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I747 using Tapatalk
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

DNASolves

Who is DeKalb County John Doe (2022)?

Staff online

Members online

... and 174 more.
Total: 2,830 (members: 175, guests: 2,655)

Online statistics

Members online
175
Guests online
2,655
Total visitors
2,830
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
603,480
Messages
18,157,330
Members
231,747
Latest member
Kitty7766
Back
Top