Targum article today on Caitlin Jenkins:
- Thread starter Abro1975
- Start date
This is really sad: "When the dust settled and the charges cleared, senior forward Caitlin Jenkins was proven an innocent woman, but one who had permanently lost her Rutgers basketball career."
and the reason I won't rush to judge anyone charged with a crime until their trial begins or they take a plea deal before it starts.
I agree with the idea of not rushing to judgement and I hope for the best for Ms Jenkins in the future, but it's always been my understanding that having the charges eventually dropped by the accuser doesn't necessarily mean "proven innocent". Guess it depends on one's definition of innocent.
It does not necessarily mean proven innocent - but it also doesn't mean that the charges were true either. A sad situation in any event.
Thanks for the article. It was bittersweet to read what ultimately happened to her, and I hope Caitlin can make her dream come true of playing in the WNBA. She also needs to complete her degree.
If you are not proven guilty, you remain innocent.
Thanks for posting Abro. Really insightful article by Targum reporter.
Just an incredibly sad situation. And given the details of how this all went down, I think the team's 3-game slump makes a lot more sense right now.
The idea of not rushing to judgement is because
what we hear at first might not be the whole story.
What's reported as a major crime might have been blown out of proportion and in the end be the minor infraction it was and not worth a trial.
Prosecutors sometimes put a felony charge on someone trying to get them to accept a plea deal for a far lesser charge.
I'm not saying Catlin was completely innocent of anything, I just think we shouldn't say she was guilty before she had a chance to prove her innocence or the charge(s) she faced was for more than it should have been.
To me with the charges dropped, that seems to be the case and what she might be guilty of wasn't worthy of bringing her to court.
Sorry but in this Country everyone is innocent until proven guilty, no one has to prove that they are innocent.
Our definitions of "innocent", and "proven innocent" are just a little different. No need to get all bold on me. (smile). My definition of "innocent" means the person truly didn't commit the offense, not just that they weren't found guilty in a court of law and weren't convicted.
Obviously most of us don't know exactly what happened in this case, but my initial point was just that the author's statement in the original Targum article, that Caitlin Jenkins was "PROVEN an innocent woman", may not necessarily be accurate, if that statement was based solely on the fact that the alleged victim eventually withdrew the charges. It's not that uncommon for a victim to eventually withdraw charges against a mate, loved one, etc. for various reasons, and the reasons aren't always that the offenses were never committed.
:
Jenkins might have been innocent of the charges brought forth against her and that why they were dropped.
But did a lesser offense that she wasn't charged for and since she wasn't charged for
it ,shouldn't be considered guilty of anything.
All I know is a young woman was treated badly and had her College career ruined because of being treated like someone proven guilty of a crime.
Seeing that Catlin had charges against her dropped, no one should consider her guilty of anything . Making her , like True said, innocent because she wasn't proven guilty of anything she was accused of and didn't plead guilty to any lesser offenses
As for the alleged victim eventually withdrew the charges. It could be : in the heat of anger the victim made some exaggerated claims about what happened and after thinking about it, withdrew the claim .The prosecutor realized it wasn't a crime or both parties were equaly
at fault , making dropping the charges the only thing he could do because they didn't fit what really happened.
Such a sad way to lose your senior year in college. Cannot get that back and everyone will only remember the original media coverage.
Courts do not determine innocence. Possible verdicts are guilty and not guilty. A verdict of not guilty means the evidence presented did not meet the standard of beyond a reasonable doubt in the eyes of the jury (or the judge if not a jury trial).
The person who initiated the complaint in this case withdrew the charges, so there will be no determination for the court to make on the initial charges.
Last edited:
Not my point - I was responding to someone who said they "were not proven innocent". Within his context, they were not "proven innocent". Of course they are innocent in a legal sense, and my over-arching point was that the opposite also wasn't true - the fact that they were charged didn't mean that they committed a crime, which seemed to be what the poster was suggesting.
From the beginning, I have never seen folks pile on someone who hadn't had their day in court without (actually) even knowing any details at all like they did in this case. The reason I responded in the first place.
I'm sorry that some of you evidently feel that I was suggesting that she really did commit the crimes, because I definitely wasn't. I avoided commenting on Ms Jenkins' situation previously in order to be fair.
My work has involved many victims of abuse, and there are many reasons why a victim may eventually choose to request that the charges against the accused be withdrawn, even when the offense really did occur. (love, fear, or money being a few of the reasons). Because of that, I felt that the Targum's statement that she was PROVEN innocent may have been an unwarranted conclusion, regardless of whether she was innocent or not. There's a difference between being PRESUMED innocent, and being PROVEN innocent. She may very well be innocent and she may very well have done nothing wrong in this case, but just having the charges withdrawn at an alleged victim's request doesn't automatically prove that no offense was ever committed in a case. The Targum article could've been about anyone else instead of Ms Jenkins, and if I'd read the article, I'd have posted the same comment.
Last edited:
This was a situation that had only losers.
Catlin because she lost her College career because of being dismissed , not indefinitely suspended till everything was settled .
Jenkins , if suspended, might have been able to return to the team, dismissed could have ended that option .
No matter how you look at it, with the charges being dropped, losing her college playing eligibility was a miscarriage of justice.Being accused does make it right to be suspended, but being dismissed before going to court to defend yourself against the charges against you is not right.
Nor should we expect Jenkins to have explained what happened to anyone but her lawyer, in court what was said could be spun against her during the trial.
Rutgers faced a no win situation , suspending Catlin was right, because if they didn't dismiss Jenkins the media would go after the program for allowing a domestic abuser to remain in the RU WBB program.
I feel that was the case and by dismissing Catlin Rutgers done her wrong as it turned out.
The shame is : if Rutgers didn't dismiss Jenkins they would be known as a program that condones domestic abuse, regardless of how the charges were dropped.
Keeping Catlin while she was accused would be remembered and charges dropped would be forgotten.
This is why everyone needs to let justice take its course and not pre-judge before it does.
If someone is arrested for a crime, don't presume guilt and punish the person like they were guilty.
In college sports programs suspensions for being arrested is not pre-judging, but dismissing the player is.( in my book) :chairshot:
Catlin because she lost her College career because of being dismissed , not indefinitely suspended till everything was settled .
Jenkins , if suspended, might have been able to return to the team, dismissed could have ended that option .
No matter how you look at it, with the charges being dropped, losing her college playing eligibility was a miscarriage of justice.Being accused does make it right to be suspended, but being dismissed before going to court to defend yourself against the charges against you is not right.
Nor should we expect Jenkins to have explained what happened to anyone but her lawyer, in court what was said could be spun against her during the trial.
Rutgers faced a no win situation , suspending Catlin was right, because if they didn't dismiss Jenkins the media would go after the program for allowing a domestic abuser to remain in the RU WBB program.
I feel that was the case and by dismissing Catlin Rutgers done her wrong as it turned out.
The shame is : if Rutgers didn't dismiss Jenkins they would be known as a program that condones domestic abuse, regardless of how the charges were dropped.
Keeping Catlin while she was accused would be remembered and charges dropped would be forgotten.
This is why everyone needs to let justice take its course and not pre-judge before it does.
If someone is arrested for a crime, don't presume guilt and punish the person like they were guilty.
In college sports programs suspensions for being arrested is not pre-judging, but dismissing the player is.( in my book) :chairshot:
There are an awful lot of assumptions going on in this thread. We don't know if the charges were outright false, exaggerated, or simply dropped because the accuser chose not to proceed. We also don't know if Jenkins might have violated one or more team rules that prompted her dismissal. I would think that the inner circle of RU women's basketball knows the facts and acted accordingly. Are you really suggesting she's going to sue Rutgers and win a settlement?
Pretty sure that the way it goes is innocent until proven guilty. One is not required to prove innocence. In most cases, it’s impossible.
The "innocent until proven guilty" phrase keeps coming up in replies to my original post, that was actually about the Targum article author's choice of words, and about domestic violence cases in general... Please see my previous responses to similar replies. Thanks.
Last edited:
Similar threads
