Fall 2017 allegations against unnamed players (aka Situation 2)

[slufanskip]

4 hours ago, Wendelprof said:

Actually the Title IX process is being analogized more and more to a judicial process, and the courts have been instrumental in that evolution.  Schools that have not applied a presumption of innocence have gotten themselves into trouble (subsequent litigation).  But more importantly, the matter is not about whether or not a criminal action happened.  The matter is over whether there was a violation of the school's code of conduct.  That school is more than happy to leave any potential criminal matters to the police and the "real" courts.  The problem here is the video is evidence of a likely violation of the school's code of conduct.  It is just a question of what the punishment should be.  That turns on the details of the violation, which turns on the details of what actually (who said what when, and who did what when), and none of us know that.  Easy to speculate, but the devil is in the details, and we'll likely never know them.

You either trust the process or you don't.  I prefer to assume that everyone involved in the process will do their best because I believe in and support not only the basketball team but the university.  If later it turns out someone involved in the process didn't do their job, then I'll be happy to join in the criticism.  It is criticism based on no facts whatsoever - other than the delay - that I find unfair to the university, and if one is familiar with Title IX investigations, this delay has not been unreasonable yet.  If it gets into next semester, then I agree something has gone wrong, but once the university decided to bring in an outside investigator they lost control of the timeline.  They knew that was a risk, but no doubt they decided the benefits of using an outside investigator outweighed that risk.

Fu.ck a schools code of conduct. There are laws to govern. SLU's job should be to educate not dictate people's morals. And please don't play the Jesuit institution card. 

[slufanskip]

7 hours ago, Wendelprof said:

kshoe,

I don't think you understand the climate on college campuses due to Title IX.  I personally know of a kid who is probably your typical freshman.  Went to a typical college party.  He drank some, the girl drank some, they went back to her room, they fooled around some more (nothing - repeat nothing - went below the waist), and then they both fell asleep.  She woke up the next morning, regretted her decision, claimed the consent was not effective because of the alcohol, and the male student was suspended from the university for a whole semester.  The university is a private institution, but not a Catholic or religious one.  The kid was just your typical freshman - not on any sports teams.  She was just a typical freshman, no special connections.  Yes, kids do these things and make bad decisions, but universities are running scared of Title IX complaints because of the way the federal government overseas and reviews them.  Kids are routinely being suspended for much less than what was alleged happened here.  If the players are suspended, it will not be because the basketball program is held to a different standard.  We know about this incident because the kids happened to be on the team and therefore people notice their absence, but this happens in Title IX complaints all the time.

I think the fact that the university went outside to hire an investigator gives some hope for a more impartial review and analysis.  But if you know the fuller history and record of Title IX complaints, you'd be expecting some kind of punishment.  My guess is the players have been held out to date in the hope that the school will decide that is punishment enough, but I'm not optimistic (I'd be thrilled if we get one or more of them back, but truly surprised if we get them all back).  I'd prepare yourself for a less than ideal outcome.

 

 

Seriously? I highly doubt this story is true. In this hypothetical scenario (as that's what it is) did the female get suspended also? He drank and so his consent wasn't effective either. I'd find it funny if every male student at SLU went out tonight had a few beers, made out with a girl and then claimed they were assaulted tomorrow. Wonder how many of the girls would get suspended? How long would it take to conduct 1200 title IX investigations?

[Bobby Metzinger]

6 hours ago, DirtyRican said:

Handbook?  I was caught drunk pissing in the ice machine on 2 Walsh and all I received was a 3 day vacation from fall baseball practices.  I don’t know if Title 9 was involved but do know I received a summons of sorts from res life after 2 days then suspended that afternoon. 

Maybe this isn’t covered in the handbook.  

Kathy Humphries lay the hammer down on you, too?

[TRN]

After 120 pages on this thread, I guess it’s safe to say the 3C Christmas Party is a thing of the past.  I’m sure it’s been dead for a long time.  It was a fun time, from what I recall...

[DirtyRican]

7 hours ago, Bobby Metzinger said:

Kathy Humphries lay the hammer down on you, too?

I believe it was Argyle Wade.  

[kappy96]

7 hours ago, TRN said:

After 120 pages on this thread, I guess it’s safe to say the 3C Christmas Party is a thing of the past.  I’m sure it’s been dead for a long time.  It was a fun time, from what I recall...

I credit being assigned to live on 3C for most everything good that happened to me at SLU.  Walking onto the floor as a new freshman and seeing the AC/DC wall mural made me feel at home.  It was like it’s own fraternity.

[davidnark]

3 hours ago, kappy96 said:

I credit being assigned to live on 3C for most everything good that happened to me at SLU.  Walking onto the floor as a new freshman and seeing the AC/DC wall mural made me feel at home.  It was like it’s own fraternity.

I echo that sentiment. I still get together regularly with my closest 3C buddies. 

[Clock_Tower]

19 hours ago, Wendelprof said:

Actually the Title IX process is being analogized more and more to a judicial process, and the courts have been instrumental in that evolution.  Schools that have not applied a presumption of innocence have gotten themselves into trouble (subsequent litigation).  But more importantly, the matter is not about whether or not a criminal action happened.  The matter is over whether there was a violation of the school's code of conduct.  That school is more than happy to leave any potential criminal matters to the police and the "real" courts.  The problem here is the video is evidence of a likely violation of the school's code of conduct.  It is just a question of what the punishment should be.  That turns on the details of the violation, which turns on the details of what actually (who said what when, and who did what when), and none of us know that.  Easy to speculate, but the devil is in the details, and we'll likely never know them.

You either trust the process or you don't.  I prefer to assume that everyone involved in the process will do their best because I believe in and support not only the basketball team but the university.  If later it turns out someone involved in the process didn't do their job, then I'll be happy to join in the criticism.  It is criticism based on no facts whatsoever - other than the delay - that I find unfair to the university, and if one is familiar with Title IX investigations, this delay has not been unreasonable yet.  If it gets into next semester, then I agree something has gone wrong, but once the university decided to bring in an outside investigator they lost control of the timeline.  They knew that was a risk, but no doubt they decided the benefits of using an outside investigator outweighed that risk.

2

Like all oppressing federal law, it is usually the accumulation of regulations and the myriad of interpretations by administrative law judges or court judges.  I doubt there is any statutory language or legislative history ever passed by Congress and signed by any President which says that Title IX is law to "protect" a tipsy non-scholarship female college student from non-scholarship male athletes who engage in heavy petting or consensual sex.  And I doubt that Title IX legislation from 1972 mentioned cell phones, snapchat and sex videos.  Also, I would also suspect that no politician ever passed a law saying that a female has no further responsibility and is incapable of providing consent if she has a drink.

Forgive me but I thought Title IX was instead all about making sure women have equal access to scholarships/sports at colleges.  Save me from the good people!!

[slufan13]

I can't believe SLU planted people on this board thinking that it would make us be more understanding of this debacle of a process 

[Billboy1]

This board can discuss to infinity this situation but it does not change the fact that a decision needs to be made.

[MattyMo213]

5 hours ago, kappy96 said:

I credit being assigned to live on 3C for most everything good that happened to me at SLU.  Walking onto the floor as a new freshman and seeing the AC/DC wall mural made me feel at home.  It was like it’s own fraternity.

5c was where it was at

[LindellWest]

28 minutes ago, slufan13 said:

I can't believe SLU planted people on this board thinking that it would make us be more understanding of this debacle of a process 

 

[615Billiken]

31 minutes ago, slufan13 said:

I can't believe SLU planted people on this board thinking that it would make us be more understanding of this debacle of a process 

LOL. I think the university has better things to do.

[kmbilliken]

Is it one person or the Title IX committee that makes the decision? 

[majerus mojo]

47 minutes ago, 615Billiken said:

LOL. I think the university has better things to do.

That’s what we thought, too 🙄

[Box and Won]

1 hour ago, 615Billiken said:

LOL. I think the university has better things to do.

Don’t be so sure.

[dlarry]

[billikenfan05]

Wendelprof seems to know a lot about the process 🤔

[billiken_roy]

Maybe wendelprof is really  that arrogant clueless krafty lady that is so proud of her stupid process.

[LindellWest]

54 minutes ago, billikenfan05 said:

Wendelprof seems to know a lot about the process 🤔

A little too much......

[DirtyRican]

2 minutes ago, billiken_roy said:

Maybe wendelprof is really  that arrogant clueless krafty lady that is so proud of her stupid process.

This reminds me of the Beastie Boys

She's crafty, she's gets around
She's crafty, she's always down
She's crafty, she's got a gripe
She's crafty, and she's just my type
She's crafty

[willie]

10 minutes ago, billiken_roy said:

Maybe wendelprof is really  that arrogant clueless krafty lady that is so proud of her stupid process.

I will vouch for wendlelprof. He is not with SLU or involved. He is a Billiken fan. 

[cgeldmacher]

On ‎12‎/‎15‎/‎2017 at 1:53 PM, brianstl said:

 

I am not sure what Catholic institutions you have been to, but drinking is definitely not frowned upon.  It is only used when administrators want to get a student on something else, but can't.  The school serves beer on campus.  Catholic churches have grade school basketball tournaments where you can buy beer.  Catholic orders have their own wineries and distilleries.  Binge drinking? Sure they have a problem with that.  Just having some drinks?  They don't care as long as you don't do anything that can embarrass the institution or harm someone.

It isn't the drinking itself they are really going after.  They use it to add to your punishment or as way to punish you for something they can't get you on.

Don't know how long it's been since you've been to a youth sporting event at a catholic church in St. Louis, but alcohol has been banned at all St. Louis Archdiocese youth sports events for a few years now.

[philliken]

1 hour ago, cgeldmacher said:

Don't know how long it's been since you've been to a youth sporting event at a catholic church in St. Louis, but alcohol has been banned at all St. Louis Archdiocese youth sports events for a few years now.

I volunteered for one of these tournaments each of the past two years. I was personally selling the beer, and to many people involved in the arch-diocese. Yes, it was ‘banned’; but they turn a blind eye. The school needs the $ from these. We sold beer prob a full hour after tournament ended.

Big revenue generator. Also, good for the community. Families/friends were having a good time socializing. I worked  2-3 nights each year.

[brianstl]

27 minutes ago, philliken said:

I volunteered for one of these tournaments each of the past two years. I was personally selling the beer, and to many people involved in the arch-diocese. Yes, it was ‘banned’; but they turn a blind eye. The school needs the $ from these. We sold beer prob a full hour after tournament ended.

Big revenue generator. Also, good for the community. Families/friends were having a good time socializing. I worked  2-3 nights each year.

And the only reason the Archdiocese did the “ban” was to provide  cover in case someone does something stupid.  They can say we knew nothing about it and that we told them not to sell beer anymore.  They really don’t care about people drinking at these tournaments.

Like you said, the beer sales are a big money maker at these tournaments and a community builder.  The same is true at the school picnics where the beer booths and gambling booths are the most popular things.  Hell, you will run into the priests enjoying both.