A lot of the OKC bball ops leadership stems from the branches of the Spurs tree. They know how to shut down controversy quick. It's wild how little press got out about Brent Barry - Tony Parker. Or Dennis Rodman back in the day. Or Kawhis uncle drama. Or even the recent Josh Primo stuff. They keep stuff on the DL.
I've heard there will be basically no charges against him if she doesn't cooperate with law enforcement. Also heard she was not responding to the NBA investigation. Maybe there's updates I haven't seen. Anyone know if Giddy could pay her off for silence? Not sure if that's possible with a minor.
Isn’t the story that two years ago, when he was 19, she lied about being 19 when she was 17? So she’d be 19 now.
The early reports were that she was 15 and I’m not sure where this stuff about it being a one night stand came from because the videos make it sound like they were dating when he talks to her brother.
It would be based on her age at the time of the incident not now. Don't see why her lying matters, that's not a defense for statutory rape. Yeah I had heard 15 which is way more serious problem for Giddy than 17, it's viewed more as child rape. Maybe you mean now she isn't a minor so could enter into a hush agreement, which yeah might be the case I don't know.
If the authority's want to push it, technically her lying isn't a defense for Giddy. Now, some states have laws that do offer some protections based on the age difference in situations like this. For instance, in Pennsylvania, I think there's a 4-year age difference that's allowed. Basically, the law recognizes that it's not uncommon for people of this kind of age difference to date and probably engage in intercourse when they are both minors and it shouldn't go from legal to illegal just because one member in the relationship has a birthday. The courts theoretically could be filled with cases where consensual sex suddenly became statutory rape. Now, one other thing to consider here, and I know some are going to say it's unlikely, but being unlikely doesn't mean it doesn't happen -- people actually can be a couple and not engage in sex. I know it's reported they had sex, and it's natural to presume they did, but unless that can be ascertained, I'm not sure there's a crime here. I don't think a 19-year-old dating a 15-year-old would be a crime in most states. It's the sex that would make it a crime, or perhaps some other type of blatant exploitation. But, if their relationship is holding hands, kissing, and going roller skating or to the movies and draws a line before intercourse, I don't believe that would be against the law.
https://www.tmz.com/2023/12/02/girl...stigation-hires-celeb-attorney-gloria-allred/ Looks like her family hired a high profile lawyer.
Isnt lying an excuse if they’re both in a place that requires you to be 18 or over? Not saying that applies here, but if I’m 21 and I meet a girl in a bar, do I have to check her ID before sleeping with her?
One would think, but no, not as I understand it. As RR7 said, ignorance of the law isn't an offense. And that would wind up being more a case where both broke the law than her breaking the law absolved him. And, again, that's even presuming they actually had sex and Giddy wasn't protected by being so close to her in age and barely a legal adult himself. That said, I'd be shocked if the DA prosecuted. If the girl and her family aren't pushing for it and Giddy doesn't have a track record of having sex with the underaged, it essentially becomes a victimless crime, regardless of how some random puritans in society (and non-Thunder fans) might beg to differ. There are a lot of more pressing crimes out there, and there are so many extenuating circumstances here that it'd wind up being a loser in most senses for the state if they tried to bring charges.
Eh. It's a non-issue, IMO. Most teens I know (and most adults, for that matter) are guilty of a lot worse things in their lives than something like this.
Just thought of this, but it isn't really ignorance of the law. He might very well have known the law. The claim is that he didn't know her age. It's not really here nor there. There are cases where it's been prosecuted anyway (and I believe successfully), that not knowing the age of the other party isn't considered a defense. In other cases, it doesn't even draw a charge. It all comes down to whether the family of or the younger party themself wants to pursue it and just how zealous the DA's office that has jurisdiction chooses to be.
