cheeseman Posted January 22, 2018 Share Posted January 22, 2018 33 minutes ago, Pistol said: May 23, 2016 letter from Palestine Legal to Pestello: https://static1.squarespace.com/static/548748b1e4b083fc03ebf70e/t/5743560be707eb621f1c445a/1464030732181/SLU+Letter+-+Christopher+Winston.pdf St. Louis American editorial: http://www.stlamerican.com/news/columnists/jamala_rogers/student-gets-probation-for-free-speech/article_4c9773cc-6a66-11e6-a819-7bf937cd839b.html I have no idea what this site is, but another take: https://electronicintifada.net/blogs/nora-barrows-friedman/black-student-censured-st-louis-challenging-israeli-spin I am confused - the 2 links I looked at never mentioned Weahthers name - did I just miss something? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bills_06 Posted January 23, 2018 Share Posted January 23, 2018 It's been a couple days and I still can't give over how incredibly dumb Katherine Weathers and SLU administration appeared from her twitter account. Putting what politics somebody believes aside because that isn't the big deal, it's the fact that she couldn't scroll through twitter and read without clicking the retweet button. It isn't that difficult and looking at the screenshots, it was all within the last 2 months so not like this was an old account from years ago. Then the day after she hands down the punishment, she tweets out about being at the women's march to her 18 followers! How on earth somebody with that poor of judgement is the sole judge and jury on Title IX process at SLU is unbelievable. I would love to know if you went through all administrators and professors at SLU, what percentage would have that public of a twitter account that displays that much bias towards one side of politics. Has to be a really small percentage because to most people it isn't worth the headache that comes with reading Twitter politics all day. Then somehow that person is put in a position that is supposed to be unbiased. Feel like I am taking crazy pills. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LongLiveLisch Posted January 23, 2018 Share Posted January 23, 2018 Let’s stop pretending that retweeting women’s march material is any kind of indication of her ability to remain impartial. Supporting women’s rights and being a hearing officer in this case is not the contradictory golden goose we want it to be. Buster, waldo027, Zink and 2 others like this Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NextYearBill Posted January 23, 2018 Share Posted January 23, 2018 2 minutes ago, LongLiveLisch said: Let’s stop pretending that retweeting women’s march material is any kind of indication of her ability to remain impartial. Supporting women’s rights and being a hearing officer in this case is not the contradictory golden goose we want it to be. wrong Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billikenfan05 Posted January 23, 2018 Share Posted January 23, 2018 1 minute ago, LongLiveLisch said: Let’s stop pretending that retweeting women’s march material is any kind of indication of her ability to remain impartial. Supporting women’s rights and being a hearing officer in this case is not the contradictory golden goose we want it to be. The Winston case is more of a golden goose. However, the militant nature of her tweets don't hurt our cause. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slufan13 Posted January 23, 2018 Share Posted January 23, 2018 2 minutes ago, LongLiveLisch said: Let’s stop pretending that retweeting women’s march material is any kind of indication of her ability to remain impartial. Supporting women’s rights and being a hearing officer in this case is not the contradictory golden goose we want it to be. All that matters is that she is free from perceived bias. She could be the most neutral hearing officer SLU has, but her twitter account will get destroyed if the lawyers want to show a pre-conceived bias. Bobby Metzinger likes this Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pistol Posted January 23, 2018 Share Posted January 23, 2018 15 hours ago, cheeseman said: I am confused - the 2 links I looked at never mentioned Weahthers name - did I just miss something? Yes, you missed the first link. Open that one and search "Weathers" to see her role in the Winston case. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slufan13 Posted January 23, 2018 Share Posted January 23, 2018 5 minutes ago, slufan13 said: All that matters is that she is free from perceived bias. She could be the most neutral hearing officer SLU has, but her twitter account will get destroyed if the lawyers want to show a pre-conceived bias. To add to this, I think it's telling that she took her twitter account down after people found it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LongLiveLisch Posted January 23, 2018 Share Posted January 23, 2018 5 minutes ago, slufan13 said: All that matters is that she is free from perceived bias. She could be the most neutral hearing officer SLU has, but her twitter account will get destroyed if the lawyers want to show a pre-conceived bias. I get your point, I just don’t think supporting women’s rights activities indicates a bias? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bills_06 Posted January 23, 2018 Share Posted January 23, 2018 7 minutes ago, LongLiveLisch said: Let’s stop pretending that retweeting women’s march material is any kind of indication of her ability to remain impartial. Supporting women’s rights and being a hearing officer in this case is not the contradictory golden goose we want it to be. Yea it has nothing to do with retweeting a women's march or supporting women's rights. It's the fact that her job is to remain unbiased but lacks the judgement to realize that all retweets and tweets for a certain cause create a perceived bias to an outsider observer. It isn't difficult not to tweet and retweet those things. It's not like somebody pulled up her voting history and people are on that, it's just common sense to realize doing things like that give off the impression you already have your mind made up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slufan13 Posted January 23, 2018 Share Posted January 23, 2018 1 minute ago, LongLiveLisch said: I get your point, I just don’t think supporting women’s rights activities indicates a bias? I don't necessarily think so either but I think it's a pretty easy point for a lawyer to attack and would definitely get fans/media in an uproar (which is already happening) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NashvilleBilliken Posted January 23, 2018 Share Posted January 23, 2018 3 minutes ago, LongLiveLisch said: Let’s stop pretending that retweeting women’s march material is any kind of indication of her ability to remain impartial. Supporting women’s rights and being a hearing officer in this case is not the contradictory golden goose we want it to be. Disagree. We are at a place in society where women's rights and sexual misconduct are one in the same...as much as it does not make sense. She was responsible for determining the fate of 4 young men accused of sexual misconduct. She levied a completely UNJUST punishment that does NOT fit the crime. Why? The only reasonable explanation is a total bias toward these evil men who had a consensual sexual encounter. She feels so incredibly passionate about "women's rights" that she felt the need to hammer it home on the internet for all the world to see. She literally threw the book at these guys - pretty much ruining what is supposed to be the best days of there life...and within 24 hours screamed from the hilltops about how evil men are. If something was wrong here and she and/or SLU wanted to be "holier than thou", they would have taken the opportunity to teach these kids something. Perhaps community service at an orphanage? Maybe some time in a hospital treating folks with STD's? I mean, aren't we supposed to be a JESUIT institution? gobillikens13 and TheDude like this Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NextYearBill Posted January 23, 2018 Share Posted January 23, 2018 9 minutes ago, NashvilleBilliken said: Disagree. We are at a place in society where women's rights and sexual misconduct are one in the same...as much as it does not make sense. She was responsible for determining the fate of 4 young men accused of sexual misconduct. She levied a completely UNJUST punishment that does NOT fit the crime. Why? The only reasonable explanation is a total bias toward these evil men who had a consensual sexual encounter. She feels so incredibly passionate about "women's rights" that she felt the need to hammer it home on the internet for all the world to see. She literally threw the book at these guys - pretty much ruining what is supposed to be the best days of there life...and within 24 hours screamed from the hilltops about how evil men are. If something was wrong here and she and/or SLU wanted to be "holier than thou", they would have taken the opportunity to teach these kids something. Perhaps community service at an orphanage? Maybe some time in a hospital treating folks with STD's? I mean, aren't we supposed to be a JESUIT institution? great post Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cowboy Posted January 23, 2018 Share Posted January 23, 2018 -just wondering, is she married? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brianstl Posted January 23, 2018 Share Posted January 23, 2018 5 minutes ago, LongLiveLisch said: I get your point, I just don’t think supporting women’s rights activities indicates a bias? I am not sure for me the lack of preconceived bias is the biggest thing here. Legally it is, but the fact the a person in her position was doing what she was doing shows utter incompetence on her part. She is the Director of The Office of Student Responsibility and Community Standards in addition to a hearing officer. She has used the social media posting of students in the past as evidence against them. She is responsible for the Student Handbook which contains multiple references to social media activity. She should be fired for being stupid. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cheeseman Posted January 23, 2018 Share Posted January 23, 2018 11 minutes ago, Cowboy said: -just wondering, is she married? You interested in getting fixed up? (just kidding) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wgstl Posted January 23, 2018 Share Posted January 23, 2018 38 minutes ago, slufan13 said: To add to this, I think it's telling that she took her twitter account down after people found it. exactly, she knew this could only hurt. If she knew her twitter page wouldn't have had or could have an impact she wouldn't have touched it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cowboy Posted January 23, 2018 Share Posted January 23, 2018 11 minutes ago, cheeseman said: You interested in getting fixed up? (just kidding) -that was not my intent, but thinking about it I would like to have a conversation with her to see if I could avoid being physically ill Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.