Details on removed football player Logan Tuley-Tillman available
Details are out there on the incident leading to Logan Tuley-Tillman's dismissal from the Michigan Football team. Because the article and details are found only at the Freep, and are somewhat sordid, I'm not providing a link. Suffice to say, there was significant alcohol consumption and impaired judgement by both parties involved. The article is largely factual, and not editorial in comments. Poor decisions were made, with sad consequences for all, and Tuley-Tillman being removed from the team. I hope he turns his life around and learns from this incident. I also hope this is somewhat of a teaching tool for all those currently on the team.
EDIT: Masses have spoken. Here is the article. Someone in the thread below has pasted the whole thing in.
LINK: Ex-Wolverine Logan Tuley-Tillman was too drunk to recall filming sex act
EDIT 2: Apparently much of this information was posted already. In a thread which I missed somehow. I searched for it, but because the thread was deleted, I didn't find it.
October 20th, 2015 at 7:42 PM ^
October 20th, 2015 at 8:20 PM ^
October 20th, 2015 at 9:03 PM ^
I don't hear anyone saying she caused the problem.
The police caused it by pressing charges and getting everyone in an uproar over very murky circumstances.
I also don't think getting drunk and having sex is inherently foolish, but that is an entirely different topic.
October 20th, 2015 at 9:12 PM ^
October 20th, 2015 at 8:53 PM ^
The issue comes down to consent. Given the victim herself admits she can't remember the encounter clearly, how can we convict this kid in the court of public opinion based on her account alone?
Because the intoxicated, like the under age and the mentally deficient are unable to give consent.
It doesn't matter what they say - they are not able to do so.
October 20th, 2015 at 9:14 PM ^
October 20th, 2015 at 10:14 PM ^
I always ask this question of people who say this and never get a straight answer: Two college students get drunk. They both (drunkenly) consent to engage in a sexual act.
In your mind, does this mean that they sexually assaulted/raped one another and they should both be expelled? Because according to you, neither actually had the capability to consent.
October 21st, 2015 at 10:31 AM ^
Two college students get drunk. They both (drunkenly) consent to engage in a sexual act.
In your mind, does this mean that they sexually assaulted/raped one another and they should both be expelled?
My mind doesn't matter.
The LAW matters.
In Michigan - that would not be seen as non-consensual sex, unless one of the people intentionally got the other drunk for the purpose of sex. In other states it would be considered non-consenual.
...and yes, it is possible under the law for BOTH persons to have been unable to give consent.
Because according to you, neither actually had the capability to consent.
Under Michigan law - I believe both could legally consent to sex and neither could legally consent to being filmed.
October 21st, 2015 at 11:10 AM ^
issue is the level of intoxication, and whether one of the participants was intoxicated enough to render them incapacitated to give consent. There is no specific BAC or per se definition of what that level of intoxication is when consensual becomes unconsensual. If the victim is so intoxicated that they cannot willingly participate, then it is not only "non-consensual" but forceable and would be first-degree sexual assault, real actual rape. In the very rare circumstance that charges would be brought against one participant of a sexual encounter where both parties were intoxicated, it is a 4th degree misdemeanor charge and I, quite frankly, have never seen or heard of anybody charged with it.
October 20th, 2015 at 7:08 PM ^
This is drunken idiots doing stupid and regrettable things. Sad all around
October 20th, 2015 at 7:16 PM ^
October 20th, 2015 at 7:14 PM ^
He freely admits to a serious alcohol problem.
Show me where he said this. He got drunk, that is very diffent from what you just said.
October 20th, 2015 at 7:18 PM ^
October 20th, 2015 at 7:49 PM ^
She ruined his life even though they both behaved foolishly?
October 20th, 2015 at 5:17 PM ^
he was kicked off the team. But I don't think he should go to jail for it. It was the wrong thing to do for sure and hence Coach Harbaugh was right to let him go but on the grand scale of things it doesn't strike me as felonious conduct.
October 20th, 2015 at 6:17 PM ^
What did he do that was wrong? We are seriously now at the point in the story where you need to lay it out in words and then agree you think it was inappropriate. Don't just trust the cops (or Harbaugh for that matter). I wonder if LTT was already in the doghouse with Harbaugh (likely not the first alcohol incident?) and this was the tipping point to move him out and make a statement. At least, that is what makes sense to me.
October 20th, 2015 at 7:14 PM ^
October 20th, 2015 at 7:15 PM ^
And where did he "send it around" again?
October 21st, 2015 at 1:01 AM ^
LTT clearly did something wrong here, but the level of charges and punishment seem to be greatly exaggerated compared to what went down. He drunk videoed himself having sex (for 15 seconds) and then messaged or mailed the video to himself (total time taken, maybe 1 minute?), then deleted it when he sobered up. Yeah, you can't do that. But multiple felony charges? Seriously?
The laws were written for a day and age when creating movies and distributing them actually took effort. Times have changed. He probably did all of this in just a moment without even much thought. That doesn't seem to rise to the level of a felony to me.
Obviously if he went on to distribute the video to tons of other people or post it online then all bets are off.
October 20th, 2015 at 6:48 PM ^
I would want to know whether she has a passcode on her phone/ fingerprint sensor, which most iPhones have. If she does then you could venture that she would have at least given him access to the phone.
October 20th, 2015 at 7:18 PM ^
I had the same thought.
October 20th, 2015 at 6:58 PM ^
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
October 20th, 2015 at 7:21 PM ^
says it was consentual.
October 20th, 2015 at 8:14 PM ^
He is talking about the video, not the sex.
I find it amazing how incapable many have become (myself included even with this article that I have commented on multiple times) at carefully reading anything longer than 2 paragraphs while surfing the web. It is some kind of a disease for sure.
October 20th, 2015 at 7:45 PM ^
October 20th, 2015 at 7:19 PM ^
this is piling on.
Fuck them.
October 20th, 2015 at 7:22 PM ^
but a felony? You got to be kidding.
I'd fire Minik before I threw that kid off the team. People don't get killed taking pictures.
October 20th, 2015 at 8:01 PM ^
October 20th, 2015 at 8:19 PM ^
October 20th, 2015 at 9:09 PM ^
I'm with you. This is a notion that is highly toxic to young adults developing healthy responsible accountable relationships.
October 20th, 2015 at 9:38 PM ^
I read every post to this point, and logged just to make this point. She consented to sex, by her own admission. She is drunk, so cannot consent. Fine, whatever.
He consented to sex, by his own admission. He was drunk, so he cannot consent.
Both parties admit they both made the decision to have sex with each other, willingly. Both parties admit they can't remember what happened through the entire night. How, then can anyone in their right mind claim the male in this party is the one in the wrong, based solely on the fact she said so?
It isn't victim-blaming to point out drunk women can make decisions they will regret the next day. Unless I missed something, there is nothing that indicates he forced her into the video, and the "distribution" sounds to me an awful lot like apple's automatic backup service.
Just because she doesn't think "sober her" would agree to making a sex film and sharing it with her partner doesn't mean "drunk her" didn't, and I haven't seen anything yet that indicates that isn't what happened.
Finally, telling a man that a drunk woman can do as she pleases without consequence, but a drunk man is responsible for all good (or bad) decision made together is the very definition of sexism.
LTT may well have a problem. He may well have a "gift" for talking drunk women into having sex with him and filming it, but to say those are crimes where he alone is responsible for the decisions they made together is indefensible.
October 20th, 2015 at 10:58 PM ^
You're basing your argument on the assumption that she consented to a video. What evidence do you have to back that up? She acknowledged that she consented to sex, but how is that automatically consent to being filmed? If she remembers enough to know that she consented to sex, why wouldn't she remember enough to know if she consented to being filmed? You say there is nothing that indicates he forced her into a video. But if she was unaware of it, she can't say yes. There are no details in the article that describe how the video was taken, so unless you have the police report or additional facts, we're responding to the same information. I think it's impossible to know under what circumstances the video was taken.
October 20th, 2015 at 11:12 PM ^
October 21st, 2015 at 12:27 AM ^
Given the evidence - which, by the way, you and I are not privy to even though we're acting like we are - the prosecutor must believe he has a case. This one article gives no detail whatsoever about how the videotape was obtained by LTT. But because a woman said she didn't give consent, you assume she's either wrong or lying.
October 21st, 2015 at 12:39 AM ^
October 21st, 2015 at 8:05 AM ^
First, I've always been a fan of his because I'm from Illinois, I know his story, I know how hard he worked to get here. But there's a lot that's missing from the story.
-We haven't seen the video. It could be damning in terms of his actual role in all this. It could show that she really wasn't aware of the filming - no way to know unless you see the video.
-Harbaugh doesn't seem to be an arbitrary or knee jerk kind of guy, and he made his decision quickly, based on something. Unless you're best friends with LTT or Harbaugh, you don't know what. There may have been a prior incident. Again, the evidence may be unequivocal.
-It seems odd to me that she would be fine with the consensual sex but would have a problem with a video that merely passed from one device to another through the Cloud unless the video itself was not consensual. This is a Freep article; we don't know the whole story.
-Also, consent. I know it's tricky now on college campuses (and everywhere else) because of this consent thing, and how people are supposed to communicate before having sex. And I know it can go the other way, with morning after regret being confused with an actual crime. But the bottom line is, unless she knew she was being videotaped, it's a crime.
October 20th, 2015 at 8:59 PM ^
if impaired. He was drinking too...wouldn't she get kicked out? Also, you could literally kick a goodly number of the students could be kicked out any given Thursday, Friday, Saturday night
October 20th, 2015 at 8:59 PM ^
if impaired. He was drinking too...wouldn't she get kicked out? Also, you could literally kick a goodly number of the students could be kicked out any given Thursday, Friday, Saturday night
October 20th, 2015 at 9:24 PM ^
Bottom line if any person male female or other is too intoxicated then they can't give consent to have sex.
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
October 20th, 2015 at 9:41 PM ^
Why isn't she being held responsible, and having her name drug through the mud for having sex with someone who couldn't give consent?
October 20th, 2015 at 10:30 PM ^
If there had been no video, there'd be no case. This isn't about consensual sex - they both consented - it's about finding herself in a video of the encounter and not consenting to the video. He admitted to taking the video. Neither remember anything because they were both too drunk. If you are drunk, you are unable to consent. Moral of the story: stop drinking so much that you are unable to remember whether you said yes or not. Both males and females.
October 20th, 2015 at 11:18 PM ^
October 21st, 2015 at 12:20 AM ^
I'm not commenting on whether the punishment fits the crime; that's for the Michigan legislature to decide. I'm saying that what happened here is above and beyond "hey, it's college and there's alcohol and things happen." Consent means that both people are aware and sober enough to understand what they're agreeing to before any sexual activity happens. She wasn't, as far as the videotaping went. You can't videotape drunk girls because by definition, there's no consent. I would think football players at Division 1 schools would be extra careful, having seen fellow players face the same kind of thing.
October 21st, 2015 at 12:45 AM ^
October 21st, 2015 at 10:36 AM ^
Sorry... but if you're filming your drunk sex encounters - you're a douchebag. End of Story.
Anything other than a striaght, up front, obviously sober agreement to film between the two parties equals douchebag.
Does it happen all the time? Yep... and those folks are idiots.
October 20th, 2015 at 10:10 PM ^
October 21st, 2015 at 1:17 AM ^
because that is what seems to be happening in this case.
Both people say they can't remember what happened, and so the man is being charged with multiple felonies.
Now, does common sense say that it's very possible that LTT did this crap without consent? Sure. But given that both of them were drunk out of their gourds, I don't see how anything can be proven.
Of course, we may not have the whole story.
October 20th, 2015 at 10:18 PM ^
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
October 20th, 2015 at 8:27 PM ^
because many other kids have done far worse and been allowed to continue football or , ahem, basketball, some at Michigan some at other schools.
This seems like an "ok, what you did was pretty wrong, don't do it again and get the help you need" moment.
October 20th, 2015 at 8:51 PM ^