Blog Entry

Turned a blind eye? I disagree

Posted on: May 19, 2011 9:42 am
Edited on: May 19, 2011 3:02 pm
I just watched the "Today" story on the woman who accused Wake Forest's Gary Clark of sexual assault in 2009.

I don't know what to make of it.

The woman, Maggie Hurt, says she performed oral sex on Clark because he told her to and because she was too scared to not do what he said. Clark, obviously, says it was consensual. No charges were ever filed because there were no witnesses or physical evidence to back her story. So what we have is a classic he-said-she-said situation with the character of each party under attack. Clark's attorney, for example, has told the newspaper in Winston-Salem (N.C.) that Hurt had sex in a hotel bathroom with a male cheerleader just hours before the alleged incident. That comment, presumably, was designed to suggest Hunt is promiscuous, which may or may not be true. Either way, it doesn't mean she wasn't also sexually assaulted. So here we are, just running in circles.

My only issue with the "Today" show story is this: Host Meredith Vieira set up the piece by saying "some schools are turning a blind eye" to sexual assault, and -- though it might be true in general -- that just seems incredibly unfair as it pertains to this case. Again, I have no idea whether Clark sexually assaulted Hurt. If he did, it's a shame he's getting away with it. But the bigger shame would've been punishing Clark based on nothing more than the word of a woman, because though men get away with sexual assaults all the time, men are also falsely accused of sexual assaults all the time, and I can't see a way for Wake Forest or police to punish or charge Clark with sexual assault in this case given the lack of witnesses and physical evidence.

Bottom line, it's an uncomfortable and sad story all the way around.

But I don't think anybody turned a "blind eye."

The only alternative to not charging Clark would've been to charge him without witnesses and physical evidence.

And that, to me, would've been much, much worse.

Category: NCAAB

Since: Apr 21, 2008
Posted on: May 19, 2011 11:44 am

Turned a blind eye? I disagree

Other press articles call the alledged victim "Hurt" not "Hunt."

Since: Sep 17, 2007
Posted on: May 19, 2011 11:29 am

Turned a blind eye? I disagree

To make the statment that "the facts of the case established probable cause to believe Clark committed the crime of Sexual Battery" and also that there was simply not enough evidence to have him arrested, are contradictory. 

If there is probable cause someone committed a crime, then there is probable cause to have them arrested, period!  That is the law.  

However, with NO victim statement and NO witnesses and NO physical evidence....well then there is NOT probable cause a crime has been committed.  

I'm not a "big" supporter of Parrish, but he got it right.  This is a he said, she said, and nothing more.  

Maybe there was a crime committed and maybe not.  But there is not evidence to establish probable cause.  

The Today Show is tripe and was just looking to increase ratings.  It is unprofessional to do stories like they did!  The Today Show should be blamed and punished! 

Get your facts  and verbiage straight Crow11101!   

Since: May 19, 2011
Posted on: May 19, 2011 10:39 am

Turned a blind eye? I disagree

The report does not actually have the victim's statement in it.  It has only the transcription of the detective.  The report also says, "the facts of the case established probable cause to believe Gary Clark committed the crime of Sexual Battery."  There was simply not enough evidence to have him arrested.  In a case like this, all "colorful" language is removed.  The officer's report would not have any indication of the accused using coercion or force because there is no proof that he did this.  If there was a transcription of the victim's statement in a public report, which there is not, it would likely include all of the information she explained on television and much more.  The Today Show does run thorough investigations into their reports because of the threat of slander and/or libel cases.  You should not be so eager to condemn a girl who has so obviously been affected by a negative experience such as this.  Regardless of whether there was enough evidence to arrest Clark, the girl deserves to have her voice heard.  Calling her a liar is a repulsive move on your part, especially when you clearly don't understand how police reports work.

Since: May 19, 2011
Posted on: May 19, 2011 10:10 am

Turned a blind eye? I disagree

Her tale on the Today show completely contradicted the report that she filed with the Miami police department.  You can read it at the following link.  It's too bad that the Today show didn't bother to read the police report before they let her get in front of a camera.  This can't end well for her.

The views expressed in this blog are solely those of the author and do not reflect the views of CBS Sports or