West Brook's Flanigan Placed on Administrative Leave

[AthleticSupporter - Jock]

51 minutes ago, Bandwagon Ranger said:

You can not have a video camera in a locker-room. Period.

There are hundreds of video cameras in every locker room, every day across the country. These days, we call them cellular phones. 

[ST413]

3 hours ago, TXFBfan said:

Bare chested boys/men are not considered indecent.  I still say of course we have to use more care for girls.  Privacy is important, and blatant violations are the same for both.   I don't see that here.

I have one son and two daughters.  

Have you been in a locker room.  Even if they aren't showering, you have to totally undress to put on a jock strap.  Even at that, especially if it's illegal, a camera shouldn't be in a locker room.  All juveniles should be protected completely!  Sure girls may be more vulnerable but in all these student/teacher inappropriate relationships that you hear of it seems like more boys are involved. And anyone's privacy in a locker room/ changing area should be as well. Now do I think the Coach had any alterior motives, no but I will say this I recently discovered someone ,that I never in my life would have thought, is a registered sex offender.  

[Gabe]

42 minutes ago, AthleticSupporter - Jock said:

There are hundreds of video cameras in every locker room, every day across the country. These days, we call them cellular phones. 

And that might be what was used.

[nappyroots]

43 minutes ago, AthleticSupporter - Jock said:

There are hundreds of video cameras in every locker room, every day across the country. These days, we call them cellular phones. 

Can't install camera in locker room, act of stupidity and a criminal act

[ST413]

1 hour ago, Sambrown said:

Why don't the coaching staff just lock the locker room doors after everyone is out then open it when practice is complete?

In the field houses I have been in the coaches could be in their office and someone enter and get access to locker rooms and other areas without them even knowing.

[Peppermint Patty]

46 minutes ago, AthleticSupporter - Jock said:

There are hundreds of video cameras in every locker room, every day across the country. These days, we call them cellular phones. 

Tis true. If the crook would have posted a cell phone video, no problems.

 

[AthleticSupporter - Jock]

5 minutes ago, nappyroots said:

Can't install camera in locker room, act of stupidity and a criminal act

Installed?  What qualifies as an installation? 

[nappyroots]

2 minutes ago, AthleticSupporter - Jock said:

Installed?  What qualifies as an installation? 

Can't be done. Whether installed or set on desktop

[AthleticSupporter - Jock]

5 minutes ago, nappyroots said:

Can't be done. Whether installed or set on desktop

What are your thoughts on this video that went viral a few weeks ago?  Should the adult player that shot this video and posted it online be held criminally responsible?  Arrested?  Loss of scholarship?  What would you think would be appropriate? And how does this kind of video compare to a coach snapping a video of an empty locker room to catch a thief?

 

This is the hidden content, please

• Sign In
• or
• Sign Up

[CardinalBacker]

33 minutes ago, nappyroots said:

Can't install camera in locker room, act of stupidity and a criminal act

That's weird.  It's not a criminal act according to the actual code.  Maybe you could enlighten us on where to find this "criminal act" as you describe it?

By the way... I guess we're in trouble, too.

This is the hidden content, please

• Sign In
• or
• Sign Up

Check out the video.

[CardinalBacker]

The fact is this... people who want to see Flanigan fired are feigning outrage... everybody else doesn't give a flip.  

 

[Raider24]

21 minutes ago, CardinalBacker said:

The fact is this... people who want to see Flanigan fired are feigning outrage... everybody else doesn't give a flip.  

 

Funny thing is, none of the football parents I know and have talked to want him fired!

[5GallonBucket]

27 minutes ago, Raider24 said:

Funny thing is, none of the football parents I know and have talked to want him fired!

ur right....they want the stuff back that was stolen.

[AthleticSupporter - Jock]

53 minutes ago, CardinalBacker said:

That's weird.  It's not a criminal act according to the actual code.  Maybe you could enlighten us on where to find this "criminal act" as you describe it?

By the way... I guess we're in trouble, too.

This is the hidden content, please

• Sign In
• or
• Sign Up

Check out the video.

 

Dubois is a goner for sure.  No wait.  He should be OK because his camera was not "installed".  It makes me wonder, would the WB coach still be in trouble if he had an assistant coach stand "hidden" in the corner with a cell phone recording the locker room thief?  Would that have been OK or does that fall under the NappyRoots "installed" criteria?

[5GallonBucket]

16 hours ago, CardinalBacker said:

In short... I know of a Dollar Store manager that set up a camera in the ladies room... he did time. There is currently the story of the Playboy "model" that snapped a pic of an older, out-of-shape woman in the locker room at the gym and posted it on instagram. The gym instance wasn't sexual, but it was an obvious violation of the other lady's privacy. Both of instances were of someone filming in a restroom or locker room, and both appear to be intentionally done to invade the privacy of the victim(s).  

In this case at WB, it seems clear that the coach's intent was to catch the known thief, not to film his players changing. 

Does anybody know if any kids were actually filmed while undressed? Or are we just wanting to destroy the coach for what he might have captured, but didn't actually? 

The camera was a bad idea, but I believe it's very defensible from a criminal standpoint. Keeping his job might be another story. 

I highly doubt he would stay here if they gave it back to him.  only Head Coaches that stay in bmt or come back to bmt are coaches that are from here.....Foreman will be leaving soon too and not because he's forced because he wants too.  Its a political tangled jungle. Trap city.... 

 

[ST413]

24 minutes ago, AthleticSupporter - Jock said:

Dubois is a goner for sure.  No wait.  He should be OK because his camera was not "installed".  It makes me wonder, would the WB coach still be in trouble if he had an assistant coach stand "hidden" in the corner with a cell phone recording the locker room thief?  Would that have been OK or does that fall under the NappyRoots "installed" criteria?

That camera isn't installed and the players were aware of the camera and its recording. Two differences in the situations.

[L-Train11]

7 minutes ago, ST413 said:

That camera isn't installed and the players were aware of the camera and its recording. Two differences in the situations.

You don't know that ALL players were aware. 

[ST413]

I don't know any were but doing the mannequin challenge and standing still like that, I am sure they are aware.

[AHUDDLESTON]

OK Here is the law:

Texas Penal Code § 21.15. Invasive Visual Recording - See more at:

This is the hidden content, please

• Sign In
• or
• Sign Up

(a) In this section:

(1) “Female breast” means any portion of the female breast below the top of the areola.

(2) “Intimate area” means the naked or clothed genitals, pubic area, anus, buttocks, or female breast of a person.

(3) “Changing room” means a room or portioned area provided for or primarily used for the changing of clothing and includes dressing rooms, locker rooms, and swimwear changing areas.

(4) “Promote”, “promote” has the meaning assigned by Section 43.21.

(b) A person commits an offense if, without the other person's consent and with intent to invade the privacy of the other person, the person:

(1) photographs or by videotape or other electronic means records, broadcasts, or transmits a visual image of an intimate area of another person if the other person has a reasonable expectation that the intimate area is not subject to public view;another at a location that is not a bathroom or private dressing room:(A) without the other person's consent;  and(B) with intent to arouse or gratify the sexual desire of any person;

(2) photographs or by videotape or other electronic means records, broadcasts, or transmits a visual image of another in a bathroom or changing roomanother at a location that is a bathroom or private dressing room:(A) without the other person's consent;  and(B) with intent to:(i) invade the privacy of the other person;  or(ii) arouse or gratify the sexual desire of any person;  or

(3) knowing the character and content of the photograph, recording, broadcast, or transmission, promotes a photograph, recording, broadcast, or transmission described by Subdivision (1) or (2).

(c) An offense under this section is a state jail felony.

(d) If conduct that constitutes an offense under this section also constitutes an offense under any other law, the actor may be prosecuted under this section or the other law.

(e) For purposes of Subsection (b)(2), a sign or signs posted indicating that the person is being photographed or that a visual image of the person is being recorded, broadcast, or transmitted is not sufficient to establish the person's consent under that subdivision.

- See more at:

This is the hidden content, please

• Sign In
• or
• Sign Up

[tennisbc]

Is there any update on the time frame on a resolution? This looks to drag out and may go to court. The sooner this gets resolved however the better for all involved. imo 

[navydawg31]

I hope this whole situation is solved rather sooner than later for the kids sake at Brook. 

[TXFBfan]

8 hours ago, ST413 said:

Have you been in a locker room.  Even if they aren't showering, you have to totally undress to put on a jock strap.  Even at that, especially if it's illegal, a camera shouldn't be in a locker room.  All juveniles should be protected completely!  Sure girls may be more vulnerable but in all these student/teacher inappropriate relationships that you hear of it seems like more boys are involved. And anyone's privacy in a locker room/ changing area should be as well. Now do I think the Coach had any alterior motives, no but I will say this I recently discovered someone ,that I never in my life would have thought, is a registered sex offender.  

Yes, of course I've been in many locker rooms.  I don't condone naked pictures of any student.  More care IS required for girls and I don't think a crime was committed in this case.  Especially if intent is an important element.  As to registered offenders, most of the time it's important, but don't assume all of those cases have merit.  Cases have happened where a person urinates in a public place and is required for a lifetime to register as a sex offender.  That isn't the case most of the time, but it happens.

[D3zii]

7 hours ago, 5GallonBucket said:

I highly doubt he would stay here if they gave it back to him.  only Head Coaches that stay in bmt or come back to bmt are coaches that are from here.....Foreman will be leaving soon too and not because he's forced because he wants too.  Its a political tangled jungle. Trap city.... 

 

Lol I don't think anyone would be angry...Foreman is kinda like Charlie Strong..makes puzzling decisions and loses more games then we would like but he puts the boys in college and is a great guy 

[Alpha Wolf]

On 11/27/2016 at 1:20 AM, setxguru said:

 

[Alpha Wolf]

29 minutes ago, D3zii said:

Lol I don't think anyone would be angry...Foreman is kinda like Charlie Strong..makes puzzling decisions and loses more games then we would like but he puts the boys in college and is a great guy 

Trying to stay off this thread but I agree 100% with your post...