It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by dr_strangecraft
I don't know about that. He was on painkillers, after all.
Originally posted by jsobecky
Really? And do you walk around with a lawyer in your back pocket, to scrutinize every word you say every day?
You have a point there- but nobody twisted his arms 000ps, you know what i mean!
Originally posted by dr_strangecraft
Originally posted by dgtempe
He is not mentally challenged.
I don't know about that. He was on painkillers, after all.
Was he of sound mind when he signed his release, or too high to know the difference. The "reality" show COPS makes a living by getting consent from people too high to know what they are getting into . . .
.
Originally posted by grimreaper797
further more if he can prove he was mentally incapable of being able to understand what was going on, only then can he have a case able to stand in court. Unless he has the records of how much painkillers he was on at the time of the interview, then he cant have sufficient evidence to prove he wasnt mentally "there".
Anyone know just how high he was? There is such a thing as taking advantage of someone not of the right mindset, but they would have to prove that.
If he can prove he was doped up with morphine or some equally potent narcotic, he may have a case. I dont think a coupla Vicodans are gonna cut it.
A spokeswoman at NBC News explained the company's policy of making news footage available for use in the public domain.
"As all news organizations do, NBC News does license footage that has already aired on NBC programs. As a general rule, most news organizations, including NBC News, do not obtain releases from people who appear on our news programs. When we do license footage - as in this instance - NBC includes a provision that it is the responsibility of the licensee, not NBC, to obtain all required consents and releases necessary to use the footage," the spokeswoman said in an e-mail.
thenewsstar.gannettonline.com...
Originally posted by dr_strangecraft
Originally posted by dgtempe
He is not mentally challenged.
I don't know about that. He was on painkillers, after all.
Was he of sound mind when he signed his release, or too high to know the difference. The "reality" show COPS makes a living by getting consent from people too high to know what they are getting into . . .
.
Originally posted by grimreaper797
these are all things that he would have to prove. A lack of evidence doesnt mean he was true. If they cant provide any evidence that the painkillers caused him to be mentally incapacitated(sp?) then regardless of if he was or not, he wont win the case. He might very well have been, but that doesnt mean he can prove he was.
Its like getting consent for sex from a person who is intoxicated.
Who's twisted?
Originally posted by jsobecky
Its like getting consent for sex from a person who is intoxicated.
Whoa...are you saying there are other ways?
Originally posted by jsobecky
Whoa...are you saying there are other ways?
Originally posted by Skadi_the_Evil_Elf
Good Point! Ive heard there are other ways, but why bother when a fifth of JD is almost surely a 95% success rate!
I find the allegory in this case fitting, regarding MM and this soldier.
Soldier was too doped up to give consent, so MM took advantage of him and screwed him.
Sounds about right!