Parents Michigan coach indecent exposure case

[Muddlethru]

Just wondering your thoughts on this matter. Currently, the coach’s case is still pending and has a pre-trial hearing on the 18th of this month. The athlete’s case had its last hearing on Feb 11 resulting in a court order of Nolle Prosequi. Nolle Prosequi is latin for “we shall will not prosecute”. This means the case against the defendant is being dropped either by declaration of a judge or by perhaps the prosecutor deciding not to go forward with the case. I’d be curious to know if the coach gets or deserves the same leniency.

 

[mommyof1]

The athlete was 18 years old at the time of her arrest. In my personal opinion, the imbalance of power in the relationship should have caused the prosecutor to screen out the case against the athlete immediately after her arrest.

A nolle pros means that the prosecutor decided not to go forward with the charges; it was not the judge's decision. It is possible that the threat of prosecution was used to induce the athlete to testify against the coach, and that the nolle pros indicates that she has agreed to do so.

It is worth noting that the athlete is Canadian, so she might have faced immigration consequences if she had been convicted. (I am not an expert in immigration law and cannot say for sure.) She is still listed on the team roster but has not competed in 2019.

 

[Muddlethru]

Yes, the judge usually cannot drop a case in an order nolle prosequi without a motion of prosecutor or plaintiff.

 

[flippin out]

I was told that the athlete discreetly left the the team before season started. She may still be listed on the roster but is not on the team at all.

 

[Muddlethru]

Nonetheless, the court still must grant the motion.

 

[mommyof1]

Nonetheless, the court still must grant the motion.

Yes. My point is that a nolle pros is on motion of the prosecution, not sua sponte.

 

[Muddlethru]

I was told that the athlete discreetly left the the team before season started. She may still be listed on the roster but is not on the team at all.

I wondered about that.

 

[Seeker]

I absolutely support not pursuing legal action against the athlete. The coach had the power here, not the athlete. She is a victim full stop - regardless of her age.

Being 18 doesn’t somehow magically make you suddenly “mature enough” to somehow be immune to the actions of an aggressive or perhaps harassing suitor. It’s a difficult situation for anyone to deal with, but in this case his actions seem particularly egregious considering his position of power over her, him being married, having children, etc. I certainly hope the judge is not lenient on him.