I don't think I've seen a story this crazy in a long time. This is Vanover-level holy shit. A little Larry Johnson thrown in.
[Reply]

Kansas one party consent law



Recording Conversations. One-Party Consent: Kansas law bars the interception, recording and or disclosure of any oral or telephonic communication by the means of an electronic recording device without the consent of at least one party or if they are a party to said communication.


Missouri's wiretapping law is a "one-party consent" law. Missouri makes it a crime to intercept or record any "wire, oral, or electronic communication" unless one party to the conversation consents.
[Reply]

K CTV 5 is about to screw Hill
[Reply]

The problem is KC media chose to crucify Hill...instead of waiting until it played out. Now they have to double down after there were no charges... to cover their irresponsible asses.

They are going to drive this morality thing into the dirt instead of admitting they were wrong...and it might cost Hill his job with KC.

All for nothing...created a shit storm for clicks.

I hope local Chiefs fans publicly destroy those reporters...and drive them into the dirt like they did to Hill.
[Reply]

In today's world, if there is dirt and it's out there, it's going to find it's way out. Especially if it involves abuse of a child.
[Reply]

Attorney or not on the line, it's a giant no no to record a conversation when there's an expectation of privacy.
[Reply]

We should assemble a compendium of the best CP alternative spellings.
There have been some amusing doozies.
[Reply]

Oklahoma does, indeed, have a one-party consent tape recording law. HOWEVER it only applies to IN-STATE phone calls. If the call is from (or to) an OUT-OF-STATE party, federal law prevails (ALL parties to the call must consent).
[Reply]

Do you fucking idiots not understand that he good?
[Reply]

honestly?

I'm seeking an explanation that it's like...one of the grandparents or an uncle or something that grabbed the kid way too hard not really meaning to and the reason there are no charges is that the family closed ranks.

I really hope that's what shakes out.

but 'doesn't look good'- are you really going to tell me with Hill's history that this looks like 'nothing to see here'?

something bad happened here and just because everybody is being tight-lipped so there are no charges doesn't mean nothing happened. It just means they can't charge anyone because they don't know WHO to charge.

Part of getting a second chance is that you ARE under extra scrutiny.

So, yeah, I feel pretty comfortable with saying, at the very least, this looks suspicious. i.e. 'doesn't look good'.

I really don't think if you're going to be logical about it you could say otherwise.
[Reply]

KCTV5 didn't screw Hill. Hill screwed Hill.
[Reply]

Why would the police not get this recording.
[Reply]

Hes fucked. I can feel it.
[Reply]

I guess things depend on what your philopsohical view of a 'second chance' is.

I'm all for a 'short leash' second chance where the premsises are;
you messed up
you credibly express remorse
you realize that the next established incident is a 'no quarter' situation.

Seems though, that some are altering the conception somewhat midstream, where, instead of the next credible incident, to where the next whiff of smoke and you have no benefit of doubt whether there is smoke AND fire or whether you caused the smoke and fire, because this wasn't so much a second chance as a temporary suspension of our wrath over the first chance.
[Reply]

What the **** is the end game here...for the local media to drive a generational WR out of the city?

When all this media dust settles...people are going to realize how ****ed up this all is.

Local TV is trying to broadcast illegal phone recordings of it's star player? TMZ?

DA pulling strings?
[Reply]