Walton accuser drops case

[Tetsujin]

https://www.tmz.com/2019/12/05/luke...nnant-drops-sexual-assault-lawsuit-nba-coach/


Well this surely will lead to no controversy or heated discussions whatsoever

 

[jcassio]

Just read about this in the Bee.
Just remember, dropping a lawsuit doesn’t mean one admits the lawsuit was baseless. And yet, I’d like to believe that’s the case here.

 

[pdxKingsFan]

Oh, that's so weird. Seemed like she had a really solid case.

 

[Jkbiker]

Per TMZ article:

Unclear if Walton and Tennant struck a settlement -- but it's not uncommon in situations like this.

Hmmmm makes you wonder

 

[upinsmoke]

Ha!

 

[kb02]

Ultimately, both sides win. Tenant gets her money, but disappears and loses her me too platform. Luke gets to move on.

 

[upinsmoke]

Ultimately, both sides win. Tenant gets her money, but disappears and loses her me too platform. Luke gets to move on.

So let me ask an open ended question. Let's say Walton is guilty as sin. Some cash made it all better instead of him being in jail to her?

 

[kb02]

So let me ask an open ended question. Let's say Walton is guilty as sin. Some cash made it all better instead of him being in jail to her?

Sorry, answering a biased, open ended question is not my thing.

 

[KingsFanSince85]

Just remember, dropping a lawsuit doesn’t mean one admits the lawsuit was baseless.

Also remember the reverse can be true.

I actually tend to side with that being the case here. From the very beginning, there's never been a compelling case at all. The NBA seems to agree.

Truth is, nobody but the two parties involved will likely ever know.

 

[pdxKingsFan]

Also remember the reverse can be true.

I actually tend to side with that being the case here. From the very beginning, there's never been a compelling case at all. The NBA seems to agree.

Truth is, nobody but the two parties involved will likely ever know.

Walton's defense was far more adamant and left no wiggle room whatsoever than you typically see in these cases. I'd be pretty disappointed to find out he paid her to make this go away. My guess is that between the NBA's private investigation and the fact that not one soul seemed to pop up to corroborate any of this or shed any doubt on Walton's character that Walton could have had grounds to counter with a defamation suit of his own.

 

[Capt. Factorial]

So let me ask an open ended question. Let's say Walton is guilty as sin. Some cash made it all better instead of him being in jail to her?

Walton was never in danger of going to jail. This was a civil case, not a criminal case.

 

[kb02]

Walton's defense was far more adamant and left no wiggle room whatsoever than you typically see in these cases. I'd be pretty disappointed to find out he paid her to make this go away. My guess is that between the NBA's private investigation and the fact that not one soul seemed to pop up to corroborate any of this or shed any doubt on Walton's character that Walton could have had grounds to counter with a defamation suit of his own.

The dismissal without prejudice part implies there was likely a settlement. It's implications are large--she gives up the right to ever sue again for the same reasons and, more importantly, she also cannot claim that she's a victim, which hinders her ability to leverage the me too platform.

It's a win for both sides.

 

[pdxKingsFan]

The dismissal without prejudice part implies there was likely a settlement. It's implications are large--she gives up the right to ever sue again for the same reasons and, more importantly, she also cannot claim that she's a victim, which hinders her ability to leverage the me too platform.

It's a win for both sides.

Like I said though, there were calls for Walton to lose his job immediately over what turned out to be a nothingburger. The settlement very likely could just be that he will not counterclaim.

 

[upinsmoke]

Walton was never in danger of going to jail. This was a civil case, not a criminal case.

Yes I'm aware of that it's the point I'm making.

 

[macadocious]

Only question I have is, is there a chance this pops up again. Or is this now past the statute of limitations?

 

[fnordius]

I don't see how it could come up again. She can't bring any further civil actions, and if there was ever enough evidence to result in a criminal conviction (which is much harder), most possible witnesses would have forgotten too much by now to be useful. I don't think this is dead in a way which proves anything, but I do think it's dead.

 

[macadocious]

Only question I have is, is there a chance this pops up again. Or is this now past the statute of limitations?

So it looks like this year the statute was extended from 2 years to 10 years. So she would have an additional 5 years in which she could reopen, unless it was somehow dismissed with prejudice not allowing that.

 

[Capt. Factorial]

So it looks like this year the statute was extended from 2 years to 10 years. So she would have an additional 5 years in which she could reopen, unless it was somehow dismissed with prejudice not allowing that.

The article says that the case was dismissed with prejudice, which means that Tennant cannot re-file a civil case. I don't know the statute of limitations on a criminal case but there didn't seem to be much enthusiasm from the law enforcement side up to now, and I can't imagine that such enthusiasm would increase following Tennant requesting her civil case to be dismissed.

99.999% this is completely over, with the exception of occasional references to the accusation in the media.

 

[macadocious]

TY, did not see the with prejudice part.

 

[pdxKingsFan]

I'm not an expert in CA criminal code and maybe I misunderstand the full extent of the allegations, but if he's guilty of anything it is using extremely poor judgement, especially for a married man. Not sure how what is alleged would be a criminal case.

 

[fnordius]

Not sure how what is alleged would be a criminal case.

It wouldn't. Getting unwantedly grabby is a crime, but with no direct evidence or witnesses, proving it happened "beyond a reasonable doubt" might prove so daunting that DAs wouldn't even attempt it.