Fall 2017 allegations against unnamed players (aka Situation 2)

[Old guy]

Cheeseman, the problem is that there is not anything that can be labelled total truth, and nothing that can be labelled total falsehood. There is always a mix of both involved. Yes is always conditional and can become No at the drop of a pin. I would be pretty sure that anything short of a real trial will not be able to extricate what is total truth or what is total falsehood about these events. For sure something happened that pissed off some of the women enough to head to the hospital and start this mess. We really do not know what happened there,.Assuming the women's statements were totally false accusations is just childish, even though they probably were not totally true either. 

We will not know what the outcome of this situation is, period. The University may indeed impose sanctions that will never be made public and you will never find out about. For example, the players and the women may be placed under specific conditions that must be fulfilled or on outright probation for a period of time. If there are any repeat issues involving any or all of them then whoever is involved may be suspended for periods of time or expelled on the spot. There are almost infinite variations as to how the University may actually handle this title IX investigation. Therefore the fact that the participants receive no readily visible suspensions does not in any way mean they (the girls as well) have not been placed under some kind of conditional requirements or under some kind of probation as the result of this inquiry. There will be no public statement made about these conditional requirements or probation, if this is what they actually decide to do in this case.

 

 

[VeniceMenace]

39 minutes ago, Old guy said:

Cheeseman, the problem is that there is not anything that can be labelled total truth, and nothing that can be labelled total falsehood. There is always a mix of both involved. Yes is always conditional and can become No at the drop of a pin. I would be pretty sure that anything short of a real trial will not be able to extricate what is total truth or what is total falsehood about these events. For sure something happened that pissed off some of the women enough to head to the hospital and start this mess. We really do not know what happened there,.Assuming the women's statements were totally false accusations is just childish, even though they probably were not totally true either. 

We will not know what the outcome of this situation is, period. The University may indeed impose sanctions that will never be made public and you will never find out about. For example, the players and the women may be placed under specific conditions that must be fulfilled or on outright probation for a period of time. If there are any repeat issues involving any or all of them then whoever is involved may be suspended for periods of time or expelled on the spot. There are almost infinite variations as to how the University may actually handle this title IX investigation. Therefore the fact that the participants receive no readily visible suspensions does not in any way mean they (the girls as well) have not been placed under some kind of conditional requirements or under some kind of probation as the result of this inquiry. There will be no public statement made about these conditional requirements or probation, if this is what they actually decide to do in this case.

 

 

Hope the matter is settled in private and the players start either Tuesday or vs Butler.

If it’s anything like last time, they’ll sit out the entire fall semester due to code of conduct. 

[Billboy1]

Maybe donations should be delayed.

[ARon]

3 hours ago, slufan13 said:

My prediction is we never hear anything. The players magically start playing again around mid December. The players will have a reputation of being sexual assaulters for the rest of their lives because SLU never did anything to publicly clear the names.

Or we never hear anything until it is reported that certain players are no longer enrolled at the university sometime in January.

[VeniceMenace]

2 minutes ago, ARon said:

Or we never hear anything until it is reported that certain players are no longer enrolled at the university sometime in January.

I say it’s 50/50.

[almaman]

1 hour ago, VeniceMenace said:

I say it’s 50/50.

At least

[cheeseman]

4 hours ago, Old guy said:

Cheeseman, the problem is that there is not anything that can be labelled total truth, and nothing that can be labelled total falsehood. There is always a mix of both involved. Yes is always conditional and can become No at the drop of a pin. I would be pretty sure that anything short of a real trial will not be able to extricate what is total truth or what is total falsehood about these events. For sure something happened that pissed off some of the women enough to head to the hospital and start this mess. We really do not know what happened there,.Assuming the women's statements were totally false accusations is just childish, even though they probably were not totally true either. 

We will not know what the outcome of this situation is, period. The University may indeed impose sanctions that will never be made public and you will never find out about. For example, the players and the women may be placed under specific conditions that must be fulfilled or on outright probation for a period of time. If there are any repeat issues involving any or all of them then whoever is involved may be suspended for periods of time or expelled on the spot. There are almost infinite variations as to how the University may actually handle this title IX investigation. Therefore the fact that the participants receive no readily visible suspensions does not in any way mean they (the girls as well) have not been placed under some kind of conditional requirements or under some kind of probation as the result of this inquiry. There will be no public statement made about these conditional requirements or probation, if this is what they actually decide to do in this case.

 

 

I was not the one who brought up the label matter. My point was people will do the labeling if the want so worrying about what people think is not productive. Control what you can and what you can't let it go. 

[Old guy]

That is reasonable, thank you.

[slu72]

http://www.espn.com/college-football/story/_/id/21583974/woman-files-title-ix-gender-discrimination-lawsuit-michigan-state

I would recommend reading the above article on ESPN as something of a warning about where the long and slippery road a Title IX investigation can eventually lead. I don't want to be a debby downer here, but this article should give us all some idea as to what the consequences for all parties involved can end up being.

I viewed the situation the young lady described as somewhat consensual at first but when the booze plus testosterone factor kicked in things got a little dicey. Still, it sounds like a no harm deal in the end, and MSU found there should be no foul. Case closed. Not so quickly, Sparty, she's back a year and a half after the fact with lawsuit in hand.

Bottom line: I think this is exactly why SLU is treading very carefully in situation II.     

 

[cheeseman]

1 hour ago, slu72 said:

http://www.espn.com/college-football/story/_/id/21583974/woman-files-title-ix-gender-discrimination-lawsuit-michigan-state

I would recommend reading the above article on ESPN as something of a warning about where the long and slippery road a Title IX investigation can eventually lead. I don't want to be a debby downer here, but this article should give us all some idea as to what the consequences for all parties involved can end up being.

I viewed the situation the young lady described as somewhat consensual at first but when the booze plus testosterone factor kicked in things got a little dicey. Still, it sounds like a no harm deal in the end, and MSU found there should be no foul. Case closed. Not so quickly, Sparty, she's back a year and a half after the fact with lawsuit in hand.

Bottom line: I think this is exactly why SLU is treading very carefully in situation II.     

 

Well as they say - anybody can sue anybody anytime.  I think when one girl is involved it is hard to do the consensual thing - when it is a group, the odds of it being consensual is more likely - after all any one could say no so stop the situation.  If peer pressure took over than shame on them.

[3star_recruit]

You can tread as softly you like. If you have a system where only one side is accountable, the unaccountable side can always choose to push back the goalposts at a later date.

[Old guy]

From my point of view this is absolutely correct, there may not be any publicly announced sanctions when the time comes, but this does not mean the situation will be over and everyone involved will be free and clear of any further issues or consequences, this includes the University as well. Just take a break and look at the news for the last few weeks, sexual misbehavior is front and center in the news with more and more people resigning positions or being fired by their companies. Just look, what do you think makes the University or the involved players immune to this trend?

[mbart33]

until the family's end there quest for cash this wont die

[RUBillsFan]

Everyone keeps talking about the 60 days being up or whatever.  My understanding from Stu's original article (http://www.stltoday.com/sports/college/slu/slu-men-s-basketball-team-practices-amid-uncertainty/article_a1cf0bca-06b2-5931-8b2b-176e1de6edae.html) is that the start of the 60 days is not certain.  We know Title IX investigation must be completed within 60 days, we know when the alleged assault happened, we know when it was reported, but we do not know what the actual investigation started.  Key quote for Stu's article:

Quote

Lewis said it is not atypical for universities to delay the start of their investigations for three to 14 days while the police collect forensic data.

Therefore, we could be on day 63 if investigation started on Sept 26 when Pestello issued the initial statement about it.  However, we could also be about day 50 or so if the university waited 14 days to start the Title IX investigation.  I don't think there has been anything official about when the 60 days are up, just speculation based on timing of other events.

[HenryB]

44 minutes ago, RUBillsFan said:

Everyone keeps talking about the 60 days being up or whatever.  My understanding from Stu's original article (http://www.stltoday.com/sports/college/slu/slu-men-s-basketball-team-practices-amid-uncertainty/article_a1cf0bca-06b2-5931-8b2b-176e1de6edae.html) is that the start of the 60 days is not certain.  We know Title IX investigation must be completed within 60 days, we know when the alleged assault happened, we know when it was reported, but we do not know what the actual investigation started.  Key quote for Stu's article:

Therefore, we could be on day 63 if investigation started on Sept 26 when Pestello issued the initial statement about it.  However, we could also be about day 50 or so if the university waited 14 days to start the Title IX investigation.  I don't think there has been anything official about when the 60 days are up, just speculation based on timing of other events.

50 or 63 no matter.  This whole process is a joke.  Get it over with.

[Cowboy]

46 minutes ago, RUBillsFan said:

Everyone keeps talking about the 60 days being up or whatever.  My understanding from Stu's original article (http://www.stltoday.com/sports/college/slu/slu-men-s-basketball-team-practices-amid-uncertainty/article_a1cf0bca-06b2-5931-8b2b-176e1de6edae.html) is that the start of the 60 days is not certain.  We know Title IX investigation must be completed within 60 days, we know when the alleged assault happened, we know when it was reported, but we do not know what the actual investigation started.  Key quote for Stu's article:

Therefore, we could be on day 63 if investigation started on Sept 26 when Pestello issued the initial statement about it.  However, we could also be about day 50 or so if the university waited 14 days to start the Title IX investigation.  I don't think there has been anything official about when the 60 days are up, just speculation based on timing of other events.

-from the home page it looks like Stu tweeted today is day 63

[juniorbill76]

In a subsequent tweet he says "It’s based on date of statement from president that said an investigation was happening." So it sounds like the same speculation as here.

[DeSmetBilliken]

I would think it was 60 days from the date of reported incident, or date of the report if the dates are different. If you go back to the first post of this thread, Pestello sent out an email on the allegations on September 26. I’d think that 9/26 would be the latest the 60 day clock should have started.

[RUBillsFan]

4 minutes ago, juniorbill76 said:

In a subsequent tweet he says "It’s based on date of statement from president that said an investigation was happening." So it sounds like the same speculation as here.

I saw that.  Re-reading the original statement from Pestello, it does seem like the investigation had started when the statement was issued.  However, he switches tense during the statement, so I think there is still some room for uncertainty.

The University has also launched its own investigation through its Office of Institutional Equity and Diversity. The University’s Title IX coordinator will be working with an external investigative team — engaged by the University — which specializes in assisting colleges and universities with reports of sexual assault and misconduct. The Athletics Department is cooperating with all ongoing investigations and fully supports the University’s processes.

He uses past, present, and future tenses when discussing investigations.  Who the hell knows.

[Spoon-Balls]

I am still utterly perplexed by the original claim that 4 players were involved. SLU cannot just brush all of this under the rug; they need to be transparent and admit (if false allegations were made) that such events occurred. The local media will not give up on trying to obtain the full story and this will just be a negative cloud hanging over the program until everything is resolved. 

[prebilliken]

Just now, Spoon-Balls said:

I am still utterly perplexed by the original claim that 4 players were involved. SLU cannot just brush all of this under the rug. The local media will not give up on trying to obtain the full story and this will just be a negative cloud hanging over the program until everything is resolved transparently. 

Agreed. 

[brianstl]

The sixty day time period isn't required anymore.  

[NH]

As people have noted, I don’t think the end of the 60 days necessarily means an announcement from the University is forthcoming. I’m working on a game-by-game basis at this point.

[juniorbill76]

Just now, brianstl said:

The sixty day time period isn't required anymore.  

Correct. Under the new guidance released by Department of Education Office for Civil Rights September 2017:

 

Question 5: What time frame constitutes a “prompt” investigation?

Answer: There is no fixed time frame under which a school must complete a Title IX investigation. OCR will evaluate a school’s good faith effort to conduct a fair, impartial investigation in a timely manner designed to provide all parties with resolution.

 

From https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2017/09/25/education-department-releases-interim-directions-title-ix-compliance:

Crystal C. Coombes, the senior deputy Title IX coordinator at the University of South Florida … complimented the removal of the 60-day window for investigations, saying it was “very, very rare” that the entire process could be wrapped up in two months.

[Old guy]

OK so the missing players will not play this week it seems.