The media had absolutely nothing to do with Kitna's ordeal, they simply reported the story as it happened. Some people love to make them the scapegoat tho.
I have my doubt that we will ever know the full truth, but IF what he is saying is true, he should sue the police for derailing his potential NFL career. In fact, if he doesn't sue the police, that tells me he really doesn't want the facts to come out in public/court. That my opinion. Now let's see those "disagrees".
Without adding politics to this thread, I'll just say that police enjoy what's called "qualified immunity." It's VERY difficult to sue for an "unlawful arrest" unless there was absolutely zero probable cause (no reasonable suspicion under the circumstances to believe a crime MAY have been committed and, if so, the person arrested committed it). It's an extremely low bar to clear. The single photo sent by whatever agency initially reported to GPD is most likely enough to establish probable cause for an arrest under the circumstances, IMO. So . . . does he want to tilt at windmills and sue in a case that will likely be thrown out at the summary judgment hearing in about a month?
40 years from now, when this is long forgotten, any potential employer, date, landlord, private school registrar, could type his name into google and see this. Maybe he wants to coach his daughter's volleyball team someday, I'm sure some parent will freak out. This was life changing for him and it won't go away. You can sue the police when their mistakes are egregiously bad or fraudulent ... the police initially said there four illegal images, including a "prepubescent girl engaged in a sexual act with an adult male". He implies there was only one photo, and says it is not even a complete nude ... "The photo included only a portion of the female body, I had no reason to believe the photo might be illegal." That's a world of difference. I don't think he'd be "tilting at windmills" if police ruined his life over completely legal partial nudes.
You might remember the police saying things that way but they almost always couch their language in "allegedly" and "suspected." Even if they don't, there has to be a clearly articulated right the police KNEW about and violated. This thread won't devolve into a discussion of the merits of qualified immunity but you should look it up. It's the current state of the law. In addition, fraud is one of the more difficult claims to successfully prosecute. I think he's doing what he can to tell his story. However, there's another shoe to drop. I wonder if all the media and blogs that originally ran with sensationalized headlines are just as eager to write an "oops, looks like we jumped the gun" follow-up? Here's just one I would be targeting for a serious lawsuit including $$$ and a huge retraction story: ESPN I urge everyone to re-read that story, starting with the headline . . . knowing what we now know . . . and realize there were dozens if not hundreds just like it. ESPN's reporting was, IMO, reckless and sensationalized and they could well be sued for defamation. That's one I would definitely allow to proceed to discovery and trial . . . reading that story alone. There is no "allegedly" or "suspected." It's all stated as facts.
Yeah maybe the media just stuck to the facts and reported everything as accurately as possible. Maybe so, but it would be a first in decades. People ran with worst case scenarios though. I remember questioning “was it a teenager or was it the worst kind” and responses came back that it was the latter — so yes, it’s natural to assume that false information was being circulated. EDIT: There’s a world of difference between what Kitna ended up being charged with, and what BSPN reported as fact. I rest my case
I hope the young man is able to overcome this if in fact he is not a pedophile, but this is much worse than a DUI or typical young man nonsense to overcome, even with dismissed charges. If he is a pedophile my understanding is that statistically speaking, he will re-engage in the behavior. Sad case for the Kitnas and of course UF. If he was a victim of stupidity or poor judgement he should stay very far away from the dark web or any sites even remotely associated with that activity.
I mean if a media outlet reports a story with the headline ”Gators QB Jalen Kitna arrested on child pornography charges” and gives details of the arrest (that were available at the time) in the story, I don’t know how that constitutes as them having an agenda, they’re just reporting exactly what happened.
The way the media reported this was mostly by quoting the police and factually reciting the charges he was facing ... For example, the initial ESPN report, in 3 consecutive paragraphs, every sentence leads with it ... According to a news release from the Gainesville Police Department, police received a tip from the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children that a user had distributed an image of child sexual abuse material on Discord, a social media platform. Police allege that an investigation revealed Kitna was the probable owner of the Discord account. The Gainesville Police Department said Kitna was interviewed by officers and that he told them he thought the images he shared were "legal" because he found them online. Police say they searched Kitna's electronic devices and found three more images of child sexual abuse material. And they also quote the UF AA ... "We are shocked and saddened to hear of the news involving Jalen Kitna," the University of Florida Athletic Association said in a statement. "These are extremely serious charges and the University of Florida and the UAA have zero tolerance for such behavior." Florida QB Jalen Kitna jailed on child pornography counts - ESPN I don't think Kitna has a case against ESPN based on how they reported it ... I do think he should sue the police if they misrepresented what was on his phone to extent that he claims.
I mean some people always have a bone to pick with ESPN for various reasons, but I don’t see what they did wrong here. They used terms like “alleged” and quoted the police department and University of Florida as their sources. Unless people think they weren’t supposed to report on the arrest at all because it involved a Gator athlete? Anyway, I’m glad Kitna has been able to clear his name, wish him a productive career.
I recall that there were several posters here who claimed to be be close to the scene who reported that it was WORSE than reported. Lock him up was echoed on these boards. Perhaps those blaming the "media" (which usually means, 'the other guy's media') should simply look at human behavior. Seeing the worst in the "other tribe" and goodness in our team is the norm.
In the single story I referenced, ESPN wrote: "One of the images shared by Kitna was of a prepubescent girl being sexually abused by a man." There is no "allegedly" nor any other qualifier such as "quoting police." That sentence is factually wrong, tarnished Kitna's name and reputation and the story in which it was contained was likely linked numerous times, thus amplifying the damage. That single sentence is actionable . . . whether you like it or not. Yet your focus is still on the police for bringing the charges when I've explained to you the heightened hurdle anyone would have to clear to keep their lawsuit alive beyond 30-days or so. I suspected it was a mistake to try engaging in factual discussions on a matter like this so I'll stop now.
In a perfect world, Jalen is re-instated at Florida, leads them to a National Championship, and that story is the subject of a future ESPN 30 for 30 segment.
What you are quoting there is quoted and cited by multiple sources as coming ... wait for it ... straight from the GPD report. I assume that report has to be FOIA'ed by the news organizations because I can't find it publicly online. But again, it's right back at the police. ESPN can't report what's in the GPD arrest warrant? I'm pretty sure that covers them from liability. The only thing I'd fault them for is not starting every sentence with "Police say" like they did in the original story ... but they certainly used that phrase enough in that article you linked to let the readers know where the information was coming from. Also, we don't know that it was factually wrong. He plead guilty to a lesser charge. I mean, no can say for sure if the photos described in the report were on his phone or not, but I'm guessing the state police ran this by some experts in child sex crimes before making a high profile arrest.
You're still mixing the different standards. By now it seems intentional. I gave you a perfect example of a factual statement by ESPN that was incorrect. You . . . wait for it . . . just dismissed their defamation while defending ESPN and making assumptions to do so and continuing to attack the police. Without further hi-jacking the thread (and I'm sorry it has been so far) I'll just address this: Your assertion in defense of ESPN that "we don't know it was factually wrong." That's silly. Again, I repeat the single line from a single ESPN story you are defending: "One of the images shared by Kitna was of a prepubescent girl being sexually abused by a man." "We don't know that it was factually wrong?" What would be child pornography, by any standard, shared by the suspect who is then allowed to plead no contest (not guilty as you asserted) to "disturbing the peace" instead of distribution of child pornography? Pretty clear evidence the statement was wrong. There are only two (2) possibilities. If it was as described by ESPN and shared (distributed) by Kitna, he should be headed to a prison. He is not. If not, your entire argument in defense of ESPN crumbles because both the Attorney General and a judge agreed it's not true.
Based upon my life experiences, it is always a good policy to withhold judgment until all the facts are in. Unfortunately, he said/she said often comes into play and reliable facts upon which to base a judgment can’t be determined. My position is to give a youngster with no priors the benefit of the doubt and withhold judgment. Too many, unfortunately, don’t see it that way. I think if they tools seriously the adage about walking in another man’s shoes, they would behave differently.
Are you saying police sometimes lie about what they charge people with and then the media repeats back those lies? You sound like antifa.
