'A Star Player Accused'

being questioned without a lawyer is not constittionally infirm. Only being interrogated while in custody without being offered the opportunity to remain silent or have a lawyer present.

Since there was no way Winston was going to be placed into custody prior to this initial questioning, any statements he makes are admissable as evidence. What weight one assigns to tht is a another question.

BTW, what is the journalistic rationale for publishing the quotes of his lawyer? He has no first hand information nor is he relating what his client said. Allowing a spokesman to offer his opinion on the events serves no useful purpose other than to advance the subject's case without subjecting the subject to having to answer for himself.

Also, this case serves a usefull function in the advance of racial relations in the country, a black man in the Deep South is presumed innocent of rape as long as he can carry that rock across the goal line.

 

I think it's basically to be able to signal to readers that they sought Winston's side. Other than that, you're 100 percent correct. It's dumb rhetoric that contributes nothing.

 

If you're doing a story strongly implying a notable person skipped on a rape charge due to incompetence/collusion by law enforcement, you sure as shit had better have at least one quote from his lawyer.

 

The NCAA can't be bigger than the Constitution, although they sure as shit have tried to be in the past. They're fine with players getting legal advice, they just don't want them to make any money by doing it.

 

I think this discussion would have been more extensive with a more descriptive thread title. And reading the Times' reporting of yet another Florida law enforcement goatfuck gave me the same sick feeling as hearing Calipari pushing his book yesterday about how it's all "for the kids".

 

The Times has done more investigative work on this case then they ever did on
The Bubba rape accusations.