Curtis Hill accused......

[printcraft]

"So, did I ever tell you about my 870...."

That question seems... loaded.

 

[Kirk Freeman]

Hill fights Special Prosecutor request: https://www.theindianalawyer.com/ar...cial-prosecutor-role-in-groping-investigation

 

[T.Lex]

"That request is about as useful as a forward assist on an AR!"

 

[Libertarian01]

This was the brewhaha that started it. I stopped the Prosecuting Attorney up here trying to shoe horn a non-Rape into a Rape prosecution. The world then turned sanctimonious after the verdict.

Background:

Purdue student found not guilty of rape

Sanctimony:

Purdue student seeks a rape by impersonation law

The law generally hasn't considered that to be rape going WAY back. It is the classic "fraud in the inducement" vs "fraud in the fact"* question they teach everyone who takes criminal law.

Ive never looked at it, does Indiana have caselaw on the distinction?

* "fraud in the inducement"= deception about who/why you are consenting to have sex with. Not rape at common law.

"fraud in the fact"= Deception about if you are having sex vs. a gyno exam, etc... Generally rape at common law.

Didn't they have a Law & Order case that was similar to this? A young guy pretended to be a top admissions administrator at a prestigious school. He tricked mommies into having sex with him so their children would be admitted. They got mad when they found out he was a nobody.

If I recall they wanted to go after him for something (rape?) but didn't want to go after the mommy units for prostitution. It seemed hypocritical to me to want to nail him for rape or some other charge but not the women for selling themselves so their kids would get preferential treatment.

Doug

 

[Kirk Freeman]

"That request is about as useful as a forward assist on an AR!"

Both requests are made by Higher Higher and have no knowledge of how the platform functions.

 

[MarkC]

I guess they figure the best defense is a good offense:

https://www.theindianalawyer.com/ar...-memo-say-hill-considering-defamation-lawsuit

Did anyone watch the Betz and Blevins news conference? I left it unsure what they were asking/demanding/wanting/wondering?

 

[T.Lex]

Did anyone watch the Betz and Blevins news conference? I left it unsure what they were asking/demanding/wanting/wondering?

Attention.

 

[MarkC]

Attention.

Attention, to divert attention? The best defense is a strong offense?

From Long and Bosma:

Note to the Press – Please include the following joint statement from House Speaker Brian C. Bosma (R-Indianapolis) and Senate President Pro Tem David Long (R-Fort Wayne) in response to today’s announcement by an Indianapolis law firm hired by Indiana Attorney General Curtis Hill:

STATEHOUSE (July 18, 2018) – “We believe Curtis Hill is the individual who should be answering questions about allegations of inappropriate conduct, and we stand by our prior statements regarding this matter. We are fully cooperating with the Inspector General’s Office as they conduct their current investigation and will await the results.”

 

[T.Lex]

In the #MeToo era, a "strong offense" in this situation will be at least tone-deaf.

I remain convinced that, for Long, Bosma, and Holcomb to all take the extreme position of asking him to step down, there must be more fire under all this smoke. Going back to printcraft's wife's experience, I wonder if this wasn't a poorly-kept secret for a long time.

 

[historian]

I remain convinced that, for Long, Bosma, and Holcomb to all take the extreme position of asking him to step down, there must be more fire under all this smoke. Going back to printcraft's wife's experience, I wonder if this wasn't a poorly-kept secret for a long time.

This is my take. I was stunned at how fast the Bigs got out in front of this. There wasn't the typical "well...these are allegations...we need to be thorough" comments. Especially with Hill who is well liked in the party and was being viewed as someone who would move up to the front of the line in other races. This went wayyyyyyy too fast.

 

[Leadeye]

He's irritated some big money somewhere and now the brass will use a long known weakness/problem to get rid of him. I'm reminded of how Silvio got rid of Feech LaManna in the Sopranos.

 

[Fargo]

This is my take. I was stunned at how fast the Bigs got out in front of this. There wasn't the typical "well...these are allegations...we need to be thorough" comments. Especially with Hill who is well liked in the party and was being viewed as someone who would move up to the front of the line in other races. This went wayyyyyyy too fast.

If you think Bosma/Long/Holcomb are fans of Hill, I think you may be mistaken. He has very publicly and openly opposed some of their pet projects, especially in the area of the state giving away opiates and needles. He also was one of the few people that could potentially primary Holcomb.

As I understood it, the potential defamation lawsuit was directed toward whoever published the now contradicted legislative report, but since as I understand it that person's identity is not known I am curious how they think they are assured of meeting the public figure standard.

The whole thing is a massive cluster, I would guess that he survives it but with a lot of damage along the way.

If there were a bunch of prior allegations, I would think that the Dems would have trotted them out by now, but who knows.

It is a pure media trial at this point, which makes any actual objective investigation/proceeding more and more difficult/unlikely by the day.

 

[Kirk Freeman]

I really like the part where they talk about how much respect they have for women speaking up while they are preparing to sue them for defamation.

Is this akin to talking about how you "side with women" as victims and then prosecute them for reporting a rape at a Big Ten university?

Just asking.

 

[Expat]

Or like stating that women making such claims should always be believed... except when it is about your husband.

 

[4651feeder]

Has this matter been resolved or is it still an investigation in progress?
View attachment 70957

 

[4651feeder]

Interesting news conference this morning, as it now appears any further action will be civil action in nature; is it more likely a public information non-disclosure nature will take over?

 

[MarkC]

Looks like although there are no criminal charges, the Indiana Supreme Court Disciplinary Commission has filed ethics charges against Hill:

https://www.nwitimes.com/news/local...cle_c88af190-3b70-55a7-b93b-323c3f12a505.html

 

[Libertarian01]

Mr. Hill should be proud. He just made national news!

https://apnews.com/0b597d2ee82e4af8a750107c248991ba

Regards,

Doug

 

[KellyinAvon]

I saw this the other day and the name caught my eye. It's been a long time since I tended bar (1998, in before the "did you take cover behind the player-piano during the gun fights?" comments) but what self-respecting bartender allows customers behind the bar? Senator Obtuse behind my bar? Did Hell freeze over??

“Contrary to my public persona, I’m a fun guy,” said Hill, who recounted he looked at the party as an opportunity to “laugh and engage.”


Legislative aide Niki DaSilva testified that while she stood at the bar, Hill approached and announced, “Don’t you know how to get a drink? You have to show your knee. You have to show a little skin.”


In Hill’s recounting of the comment, he said he was making the remark to the crowd in general at the bar, but it was directed at State Senator Greg Taylor, who was behind the bar serving up drinks.


“’Geez, you wanna get this guy’s attention, you have to show some leg,’” Hill testified, recalling the comment. “What I did not do was turn to some individual and offer to buy them a drink.”

https://fox59.com/2019/10/24/indiana-a-g-curtis-hill-takes-stand-in-disciplinary-hearing/

 

[T.Lex]

Curtis Hill announces he's running again for AG.

And throws in a barb about some Republicans not being willing to stand up for "our" values.

That's awkward now. And will be more awkward next summer.