[jonnyss]

On Hector, it depends on what exactly his role allegedly was and what he did in the aftermath.  In the piece (before it was taken down) a statement from the family lawyer (so take it with a grain of salt) was that Ayden talked to police as a witness.

It also depends on what he disclosed on his admission app.

I don't know the answer to either of the questions, so I have no idea if Stanford could have even entertained the notion of acting differently.

BC

right, but as i recall, also in the piece was a report that what the family likely wanted to suppress in the police report was a statement from a girl at school that students were showing each other the video of the sex scene that they had received on their phones, saying it was taken by ayden hector.

that could make hector's press release accurate on a technicality as filming and distributing the video (without the girl's consent) could be said to be not exactly sexual misconduct. but if true, it's still illegal and reprehensible.

[jonnyss]

On Hector, it depends on what exactly his role allegedly was and what he did in the aftermath.  In the piece (before it was taken down) a statement from the family lawyer (so take it with a grain of salt) was that Ayden talked to police as a witness.

It also depends on what he disclosed on his admission app.

I don't know the answer to either of the questions, so I have no idea if Stanford could have even entertained the notion of acting differently.

BC

right, but as i recall, also in the piece was a report that what the family likely wanted to suppress in the police report was a statement from a girl at school that students were showing each other the video of the sex scene that they had received on their phones, saying it was taken by ayden hector.

that could make hector's press release accurate on a technicality as filming and distributing the video (without the girl's consent) could be said to be not exactly sexual misconduct. but if true, it's still illegal and reprehensible.