How the hearing was handled - per Burwell

[davidnark]

From Burwell's article:

According to Reed Sr., the alleged victim had an attorney and her parents present at the hearing, and the lawyer came armed with a thick book full of documents that supported her case.

His son was not given the same privileges. According to Reed Sr., statements that supported his son's innocence were not admitted into the proceeding. Neither player was allowed to have parents in the room, and the only legal representation Reed had was a second-year law student who had less than 48 hours to prepare his defense.

Reed Sr. said he was very angry and added, "We were not allowed to be there at all. Her parents were allowed to be there. Her parents were the ones who were pressing the school to kick them out for one year and that's what they (originally) did. Once I got involved in the process, (the university) tried to tell me it wasn't a legal matter. But it was a legal matter, because if it wasn't why did she have an attorney involved and why was her attorney allowed in the room when the student conduct code said no attorney was supposed to be involved?

I had heard this exact information from unrelated sources. The rules posted by Bonwich on this board clearly indicate that a lawyer is not supposed to be in involved in the process unless they are representing a party who has criminal charges pending against him or her. I place blame on the players for putting themselves in this situation, but the university should not be allowed to get away with conducting this kind of kangaroo court.

[Bizziken]

From Burwell's article:

I had heard this exact information from unrelated sources. The rules posted by Bonwich on this board clearly indicate that a lawyer is not supposed to be in involved in the process unless they are representing a party who has criminal charges pending against him or her. I place blame on the players for putting themselves in this situation, but the university should not be allowed to get away with conducting this kind of kangaroo court.

It's pretty sickening isn't it...

Due Process violations abound...

[bk18]

Wow. This could get BIG.

[GOSLU68]

It's pretty sickening isn't it...

Due Process violations abound...

Actually students "rights" have come a long way; much of the improvement came during Vietnam. Students storming buildings did not change the draft until after the war. But please consider

this kind of fact not quite 50 years ago a friend of mine was thrown out of a Michigan (state university) (not MSU) where they had lots of snow for throwing snowballs. It was so stupid someone

gave him a job and he went on to be a partner and wealthy business man.

These really aren't facts (the young men were black or due to metabolism and body size they could drink most females under the table). Those kinds of characterizations may add to the drama

but that is all. If it was Cherubic Kyle Cassity I am sure the university would have acted the same.

We all hope scholarships are stepping stones to being leaders in society. Because they are young we hope that WR and KM and the coed can all tolerate what the world is like in the future. They

certainly can not buy back their innocence.

I for one would like to close these kinds of threads and talk about who we are not who we could have been.

[Bizziken]

Actually students "rights" have come a long way; much of the improvement came during Vietnam. Students storming buildings did not change the draft until after the war. But please consider

this kind of fact not quite 50 years ago a friend of mine was thrown out of a Michigan (state university) (not MSU) where they had lots of snow for throwing snowballs. It was so stupid someone

gave him a job and he went on to be a partner and wealthy business man.

These really aren't facts (the young men were black or due to metabolism and body size they could drink most females under the table). Those kinds of characterizations may add to the drama

but that is all. If it was Cherubic Kyle Cassity I am sure the university would have acted the same.

We all hope scholarships are stepping stones to being leaders in society. Because they are young we hope that WR and KM and the coed can all tolerate what the world is like in the future. They

certainly can not buy back their innocence.

I for one would like to close these kinds of threads and talk about who we are not who we could have been.

Regardless of WHO was brought in front of the student conduct board, the MANNER in which the hearing was carried out was disgraceful...White, black, asian, etc...it doesn't matter...

[Box and Won]

I don't understand why everyone isn't as appalled by this as I am.

I'm incensed - angry enough to reconsider my support of the university. This is absolutely egregious.

[slufanskip]

Actually students "rights" have come a long way; much of the improvement came during Vietnam. Students storming buildings did not change the draft until after the war. But please consider

this kind of fact not quite 50 years ago a friend of mine was thrown out of a Michigan (state university) (not MSU) where they had lots of snow for throwing snowballs. It was so stupid someone

gave him a job and he went on to be a partner and wealthy business man.

These really aren't facts (the young men were black or due to metabolism and body size they could drink most females under the table). Those kinds of characterizations may add to the drama

but that is all. If it was Cherubic Kyle Cassity I am sure the university would have acted the same.

We all hope scholarships are stepping stones to being leaders in society. Because they are young we hope that WR and KM and the coed can all tolerate what the world is like in the future. They

certainly can not buy back their innocence.

I for one would like to close these kinds of threads and talk about who we are not who we could have been.

It sounds like you are assumint they are guilty. A good lawyer can make a lot of people appear guilty especially when the other side isn't aloud to give their side.

One thing I'm surprised about is that we haven't heard more from or he hasn't taken a stand. I would think if there wasn't pretty clear evidence the athletes were guilty and they were treated this way, RM would be taking a stand against it.

[jjray]

It's pretty sickening isn't it...

Yes, makes me want to puke.

Due Process violations abound...

No, due process doesn't apply to the actions of a private university. But agree that SLU will be beat over the head with the concept of lack of due process and unequal treatment. It's ugly.

[davidnark]

Yes, makes me want to puke.

No, due process doesn't apply to the actions of a private university. But agree that SLU will be beat over the head with the concept of lack of due process and unequal treatment. It's ugly.

For those wondering why the university has been so cryptic in its information and Majerus and the athletic department isn't saying a word, the university is clearly acting under the counsel of their attorneys to mitigate the risk of defamation claims. I just wonder where these lawyers were when the university was conducting this hearing. At a minimum, they should have ensured that the rules and process were followed and that both sides were afforded the same rights and resources.

[Pistol]

2 good posts, Nark, and a well-done article by Burwell. It's clear that Reed and Mitchell weren't given a fair fight with this in-house judicial board from the start, and Mr. Reed has every right to be furious. What parent wouldn't think their son or daughter doesn't deserve the same rights the other party receives in this situation?

By the way, leave it to the wonderful commenters on stltoday to start screaming at Burwell out of the gate; I'll never understand how their tiny brains work.

[Archy McNally]

From Burwell's article:

I had heard this exact information from unrelated sources. The rules posted by Bonwich on this board clearly indicate that a lawyer is not supposed to be in involved in the process unless they are representing a party who has criminal charges pending against him or her. I place blame on the players for putting themselves in this situation, but the university should not be allowed to get away with conducting this kind of kangaroo court.

Didn't they have an appeal to correct this mess. It sounds like it was a fiasco and it sounds like everybody was involved in the appeal.

There are stark differences in the response from KM's party and WR's. It seems to me that KM's lawyer was involved in the appeal and are satisfied with the outcome. But WR's dad is using the original trial as grounds for a suit and is going to reporters to win public opinion with it.

[Tonka]

Actually students "rights" have come a long way; much of the improvement came during Vietnam. Students storming buildings did not change the draft until after the war. But please consider

this kind of fact not quite 50 years ago a friend of mine was thrown out of a Michigan (state university) (not MSU) where they had lots of snow for throwing snowballs. It was so stupid someone

gave him a job and he went on to be a partner and wealthy business man.

These really aren't facts (the young men were black or due to metabolism and body size they could drink most females under the table). Those kinds of characterizations may add to the drama

but that is all. If it was Cherubic Kyle Cassity I am sure the university would have acted the same.

We all hope scholarships are stepping stones to being leaders in society. Because they are young we hope that WR and KM and the coed can all tolerate what the world is like in the future. They

certainly can not buy back their innocence.

I for one would like to close these kinds of threads and talk about who we are not who we could have been.

GOSLU68, I fall into the same camp as those who think there should have been more wisdom from the players to walk the straight line. If you are an athlete and have any potential or chance to go to the next level then you should fly under the radar and not put your self in situations that could remotely come back to harm you. BUT, they did what they did and probably regret being there that night. We all make mistakes and when we make mistakes, we have to pay for those mistakes. BUT, the way this situation has been handled by SLU is ridiculous. I am one of those that tend to support SLU when all we have is speculation. The information that Mr. Reed has given us is appalling. The school stacked the cards against these two men and in my opinion sabotaged them. That is BS.

I too wish we could all just move on, but that will be hard since SLU handled this situation poorly and unfairly.

[Clock_Tower]

Didn't they have an appeal to correct this mess. It sounds like it was a fiasco and it sounds like everybody was involved in the appeal.

There are stark differences in the response from KM's party and WR's. It seems to me that KM's lawyer was involved in the appeal and are satisfied with the outcome. But WR's dad is using the original trial as grounds for a suit and is going to reporters to win public opinion with it.

Sure, they had the right ot appeal and try to correct the mess. Their efforts worked in that the the suspensions got reduced from 1 year to 1 semester. Still, they had no right to present evidence (witnesses, written statements) or to test the girl's evidence (cross-exam, impeach her statements and those of her witnesses).

I have said all along that this was/is a Kangaroo Court. For those who disagree, please explain why SLU felt the need to and did provide WR and KM with a "student advocate" -- a second year law student -- if this was just an issue between students. No legal rights at stake but the girl can bring her parents and lawyers and, with no legal rights at stake, SLU apparently still recognized something was at stake regarding the players so it decided to provide a second year law student?? I was a second year law student and can tell you, the ONLY thing a second year law student has learned is theory/Constitutinal Law and not hearing procedures, presentation of evidence, cross-exam, etc. Law students can take a class (usually in their third/last year) but the real learning for a law student comes after school when he/she begins practicing law. If SLU feels the need to provide someone to assist the players, why not their parents and/or their attorney?

[jjray]

The various laws protecting against discrimination certainly apply to the university.

The 14th amendment due process clause doesn't apply to a student disciplinary proceeding at SLU. If you are talking Title VII, fine. That's a whole other road to hoe with a vast array of problems to overcome in order to state a cognizable cause of action. Good luck.

[Cowboy]

Sure, they had the right ot appeal and try to correct the mess. Their efforts worked in that the the suspensions got reduced from 1 year to 1 semester. Still, they had no right to present evidence (witnesses, written statements) or to test the girl's evidence (cross-exam, impeach her statements and those of her witnesses).

I have said all along that this was/is a Kangaroo Court. For those who disagree, please explain why SLU felt the need to and did provide WR and KM with a "student advocate" -- a second year law student -- if this was just an issue between students. No legal rights at stake but the girl can bring her parents and lawyers and, with no legal rights at stake, SLU apparently still recognized something was at stake regarding the players so it decided to provide a second year law student?? I was a second year law student and can tell you, the ONLY thing a second year law student has learned is theory/Constitutinal Law and not hearing procedures, presentation of evidence, cross-exam, etc. Law students can take a class (usually in their third/last year) but the real learning for a law student comes after school when he/she begins practicing law. If SLU feels the need to provide someone to assist the players, why not their parents and/or their attorney?

-if what we have been told is true it sure seems like SLU handled this way beyond poorly, and all the arrows are pointing that way

-but if what we are hearing is not true, how would SLU make that known without violating the law? and there are not many, if any, arrows pointing this way

-just a really bad situation from every perspective

[billikendave]

The 14th amendment due process clause doesn't apply to a student disciplinary proceeding at SLU. If you are talking Title VII, fine. That's a whole other road to hoe with a vast array of problems to overcome in order to state a cognizable cause of action. Good luck.

If SLU didn't follow their own code of how these proceedings are to have been handled (Bonwich found it a while ago) by allowing lawyers/parents on one side (a major donor) and denies the same right to accused, then expels the student, I think that will state a claim.

[SLU Hilljack]

Didn't they have an appeal to correct this mess. It sounds like it was a fiasco and it sounds like everybody was involved in the appeal.

There are stark differences in the response from KM's party and WR's. It seems to me that KM's lawyer was involved in the appeal and are satisfied with the outcome. But WR's dad is using the original trial as grounds for a suit and is going to reporters to win public opinion with it.

Just because a person is allowed to appeal doesn't mean the original, flawed process should be cast aside. Willie Sr. is rightfully saying that if his kid hadn't been (evidently) sandbagged the first time, then the "appeal" wouldn't have had to happen in the first place.

I can't help but think that Fr. B stayed as far away from this whole situation as possible. He'd have a woman's (and potentially donor) issue on one hand and a racial and/or press stigma on the other. Lose-lose. And that's just from forces outside the University. I can only imagine what is going on in the athletic department and in Dubourg today. Lots of walking on egg shells I'd presume

[Bizziken]

SLU's Code of Conduct most certainly does lay out due process procedures (not in the constitutional sense), some of which were obviously violated in this circumstance. The standard for private institutions with respect to due process procedural violations is a determination if the procedures followed were 'arbitrary and unjust'. It certainly seems like that argument could be made here...

[Billikan]

From Burwell's article:

I had heard this exact information from unrelated sources. The rules posted by Bonwich on this board clearly indicate that a lawyer is not supposed to be in involved in the process unless they are representing a party who has criminal charges pending against him or her. I place blame on the players for putting themselves in this situation, but the university should not be allowed to get away with conducting this kind of kangaroo court.

I have attempted to learn a bit more about this whole hearing situation and although I am still sworn to secrecy and have not been told all of the details, I have learned one thing-- everyone should not accept everything that Mr. Reed says as the absolute truth of the situation. The second thing I would say is for everyone to read the comments of Kwamain's attorney. Read them carefully and you see a completely different picture than the one painted by many of the posters on this board. Also, as a person who is very involved in dealing with folks in the African American community in St. Louis, I must say that the unsupported and highly speculative comments about race and the attempts to turn this whole thing into a racial issue is really hurtful to everyone involved. Make no mistake, it would not have mattered if the individuals were white, black, green or blue, if a serious allegation is made then the University is required to follow up on it. I have been involved in several serious academic "investigations" and I can tell everyone that they are not like a civil court in any sense. Faculty with tenure have their own view of the world and often think that they do not have to answer to anyone-- they only have to do what they think is appropriate. Some of the hearings go in directions which would be unexpected and not follow normal civil procedure in courts. The last thing we need if to have this entire group of posters adopting the idea that this was a hearing affected by racial prejudice. That is false and unfair to the university.

[slufanskip]

I have attempted to learn a bit more about this whole hearing situation and although I am still sworn to secrecy and have not been told all of the details, I have learned one thing-- everyone should not accept everything that Mr. Reed says as the absolute truth of the situation. The second thing I would say is for everyone to read the comments of Kwamain's attorney. Read them carefully and you see a completely different picture than the one painted by many of the posters on this board. Also, as a person who is very involved in dealing with folks in the African American community in St. Louis, I must say that the unsupported and highly speculative comments about race and the attempts to turn this whole thing into a racial issue is really hurtful to everyone involved. Make no mistake, it would not have mattered if the individuals were white, black, green or blue, if a serious allegation is made then the University is required to follow up on it. I have been involved in several serious academic "investigations" and I can tell everyone that they are not like a civil court in any sense. Faculty with tenure have their own view of the world and often think that they do not have to answer to anyone-- they only have to do what they think is appropriate. Some of the hearings go in directions which would be unexpected and not follow normal civil procedure in courts. The last thing we need if to have this entire group of posters adopting the idea that this was a hearing affected by racial prejudice. That is false and unfair to the university.

Where do we find Kwamain's statements?

[Westy03]

Where do we find Kwamain's statements?

Here you go Skip:

Mitchell's attorney applauded the university's decision Wednesday.

"The administration and the appellate process found that there was no evidence to substantiate that Kwamain should be disciplined for any type of sexual assault," Rogers said. "I anticipate that Kwamain will do everything in his power to satisfy the administration that he is a student worthy of reconsideration when he attempts to re-enroll ... after the first of the year."

Rogers said he would not discuss whether Mitchell was asked to write such a letter, or any other specific requests the university has made in considering whether to re-enroll him.

No criminal charges

[Box and Won]

It's a shame that KM can't just be suspended from the team for the first semester, as opposed to being expelled.

[davidnark]

Let's be clear. I don't believe the university or its actions were racially motivated in any way. However, let's not be blind to the fact that being sensitive to racial factors is critically important in these matters. If you aren't careful to ensure that both sides are treated equally, race--even if it was not a factor--can quickly become the crux of the issue.

[kmbilliken]

Let's be clear. I don't believe the university or its actions were racially motivated in any way. However, let's not be blind to the fact that being sensitive to racial factors is critically important in these matters. If you aren't careful to ensure that both sides are treated equally, race--even if it was not a factor--can quickly become the crux of the issue.

I don't think we can rule out race as a factor. Racism today tends to be subtle and the perpetraiters may not even be conscious of it. Daddy's rage may have been fanned more because it was KM & WR as opposed to KC & PE. Same goes for the student court.

One thing for sure, SLU has mishandled this big time. If they're guilty of sexual assault they should have been permanently expelled last summer and not let back on campus. They should have taken a hard line and said we won't tolerate this. If they weren't guilty of sexual assault the punishment is for having bad judgment, underage drinking(if they're not 21) or poor dating skills. They could expel most of the university for that.

[saluki762]

I don't think we can rule out race as a factor. Racism today tends to be subtle and the perpetraiters may not even be conscious of it. Daddy's rage may have been fanned more because it was KM & WR as opposed to KC & PE. Same goes for the student court.

One thing for sure, SLU has mishandled this big time. If they're guilty of sexual assault they should have been permanently expelled last summer and not let back on campus. They should have taken a hard line and said we won't tolerate this. If they weren't guilty of sexual assault the punishment is for having bad judgment, underage drinking(if they're not 21) or poor dating skills. They could expel most of the university for that.

As a father of 2 daughters myself, I would doubt that Daddy's rage had anything to do with race. White, black or green, it wouldn't matter. If either of my daughters made the claim that the accuser made, I think we could pretty much all agree that a fathers reaction would be similar. When it comes to my daughters, I have no reason to be objective, I will protect them and come down with full thunder on anyone I perceive to have wronged them.