Joe Mixon update

[badger]

My only question is whether there is any way to seal the files now so the tape doesn't go public

If we're playing from the Donald Sterling playbook, whatever you do, don't let your estranged wife demand the recordings or they'll end up on TMZ and before you know it, you're no longer an NBA owner and face a lifetime ban from the league.

I really have no idea which way is the best course of action. Do you downplay them so that they don't get mentioned ever again, or do you own up to the mistakes you made so that if they do surface, you can say that you've been owning up your mistakes all along?

It would not surprise me if Mixon became a star that the tape hits TMZ right before a big game/big moment/etc. Heisman ballots due? Tape on TMZ. About to play for national title? Tape appears on TMZ.

[Soonerjeepman]

The courts didn't determine anything. The DA did. The criminal case has absolutely no bearing on civil litigation.

It's not slander if she called him that, but it is a mitigating circumstance. "Them is fightin' words," as we like to say.

So far as I know, she can sue Mixon, but he isn't some rich football player yet. She ought to claim lifelong headaches about 5-6 years down the road when he's making bank, depending on what the statute of limitations is. By then, it's probably too late to sue. Not sure what the laws are in Oklahoma, but I think it's something like 2-3 years in Texas because my buddy got sued over a car wreck that occurred 2-3 years to the day prior. Frigging lawyers.

stand corrected........ yes, I know that

I could see it being held for awhile until he makes it big...if he does.

My point is/was the kid got punished. She wasn't completely "innocent" YES, TDTW, he was wrong.....as a teacher if a kid does something wrong, we correct (punish) whatever ya call it...then move on. Having this being shown is nothing more than a continued or 2nd punishment. Move on...it's over and done with (except the civil). The only ones needing to see it are those involved in the civil if it happens.

[8timechamps]

I'm sure Mixon's lawyer waited as long as he could trying to get the best deal. He knew the 11/1 tape release would not be good. But the DA is no dummy and he knew he had hand. The plea is very favorable to Mixon which shows the DA is sympathic to the circumstances. My only question is whether there is any way to seal the files now so the tape doesn't go public. Not that it would make any difference in a civil suit, but it would keep OU out of an FSU-esque spotlight.

No doubt Mixon's attorney waited as long as possible to take a deal. I don't think he ever wanted/planned to take the case to trial.

If I'm understanding what I've been reading, the tape will be sealed forever, unless there is litigation at some point down the line (and even then, it would be made available only to the players in the case/court). It's very possible the tape will never be seen by the public.

olevet did bring up a good point though, I have to wonder if someone didn't keep a copy...as a bargaining chip for the future. It sounds crazy, but there are some evil people out there.

[badger]

In case you're wondering where Joe is in all of this, interesting read from back in September.

“Right now, he’s just relaxing, working out by himself and with a trainer,” Sunderland said. “Everytime I’m with him, he’s like, ‘I want to make a statement to everybody in the country, even though I messed up.’ Like next year he wants to make a statement, try to win the Heisman and stuff like that. Joe Mixon, he’s got big goals right now to try to reach for next year.”

So, Mixon appears to have said that he messed up and by accepting this plea, he's shown it as well. It also appears that his head's in the right place as far as working hard in school and staying in shape and still having goals for his athletic career.

College football loves redemption stories just as much as they love how the mighty have fallen stories. I hope Mixon's OU story doesn't start and end with this incident.

[Aries]

I believe the statute of limitations would be 3 years, but I'm not a lawyer.

[Tear Down This Wall]

stand corrected........ yes, I know that

I could see it being held for awhile until he makes it big...if he does.

My point is/was the kid got punished. She wasn't completely "innocent" YES, TDTW, he was wrong.....as a teacher if a kid does something wrong, we correct (punish) whatever ya call it...then move on. Having this being shown is nothing more than a continued or 2nd punishment. Move on...it's over and done with (except the civil). The only ones needing to see it are those involved in the civil if it happens.

No, it isn't a "second punishment." Whether or not his actions were criminal is the interest of the state. He chose not to allow the state to show it's evidence to 12 jurors, and struck a plea deal.

Whether his actions were negligent to point of causing bodily injury or property damage or not is the interest of individuals. It is not a question of guilt or innocence, but rather of negligence or non-negligence. Here, she has a legal avenue to be compensated for her medical issues, as well as pain and suffering, now and which may arise in the future because of the incident.

[Soonerjeepman]

No, it isn't a "second punishment." Whether or not his actions were criminal is the interest of the state. He chose not to allow the state to show it's evidence to 12 jurors, and struck a plea deal.

Whether his actions were negligent to point of causing bodily injury or property damage or not is the interest of individuals. It is not a question of guilt or innocence, but rather of negligence or non-negligence. Here, she has a legal avenue to be compensated for her medical issues, as well as pain and suffering, now and which may arise in the future because of the incident.

damn dude, you must the chick's lawyer....it's all good. I agree she does have that right...MY POINT IS NO NEED IN SHOWING THE VIDEO TO THE PUBLIC

[nighttrain12]

damn dude, you must the chick's lawyer....it's all good. I agree she does have that right...MY POINT IS NO NEED IN SHOWING THE VIDEO TO THE PUBLIC

The Ray Rice video was shown many months after the fact and after his court case was over. I'm sure his wife didn't want it out there in the public either but it wasn't her choice. The public has a right to see it and hopefully we will soon.

[REDREX]

He does not want to admit guilt ----I would guess a civil trial will be coming

[TheHumanAlphabet]

It sounds like the video may never reach the public eye. The DA said they will not release the video Monday (now that a plea deal is done), and a copy of the tape will stay on file (in case of future litigation). The original will be returned to Pickleman's, and they will destroy it once received.

This is all from the Tulsa World's Guerin Emig.

As I predicted...

[Therealsouthsider]

....the public has a right to see nothing

....move along


ss

[bluedogok]

The public has a right to see it and hopefully we will soon.

Why does the public "have a right to see it"?
Not all evidence in a case is always released to the public.
Leaking something to TMZ isn't a legal distribution of such material and the person doing the leak could be held liable in either a criminal or civil manner if the leak violated an order.

[herecomedajudge]

Statute of limitations is one year for intentional torts like battery. Civil suit would likely have to filed by this summer.

[herecomedajudge]

Summer of 2015.