Fall 2017 allegations against unnamed players (aka Situation 2)

[Slu let the dogs out?]

29 minutes ago, Quality Is Job 1 said:

As for Ashley Jost's continual insistence that St. Louis's "Finest" are continuing to investigate the criminal case:

Did they ever arrest the players?  (They did with Situation 1.)  Did they question them, interview them?  Surely any forensic details would already be in.  How long does it usually take to bring a charge of sexual assault these days?

The amount of time this has been just fluttering in the wind is maddeningly frustrating.

I hope someone with Twitter capabilities will explain this to her.

[Quality Is Job 1]

38 minutes ago, brianstl said:

They were interviewed, but never took into custody questioning like they were in situation 1.  If that happened we all would know it as arrest records are readily available to the public.

Another thing I don't understand is this:

If there's any likelihood that the evidence the police have gathered in their "ongoing investigation" suggests that these young men committed sexual assault, doesn't the prosecutor have a solemn responsibility to bring a charge against them swiftly?  Surely three months shouldn't be elapsing during which such "alleged" sexual predators are allowed to travel to places as far as halfway across the continent where they will be left to themselves lightly supervised for four hours while they're prevented from being in the arena while the team plays games!

If they're a criminal risk but something is delaying charges, then shouldn't there be an insistence that they be retained in St. Louis, where the police have access to them?  Yeah, I understand they're innocent until proven guilty, in the eyes of the law, but if there's reasonable suspension, surely it doesn't take more than two months -- let alone three -- to determine that in the 21st century.

Am I off base?

[kappy96]

7 minutes ago, Quality Is Job 1 said:

Another thing I don't understand is this:

If there's any likelihood that the evidence the police have gathered in their "ongoing investigation" suggests that these young men committed sexual assault, doesn't the prosecutor have a solemn responsibility to bring a charge against them swiftly?  Surely three months shouldn't be elapsing during which such "alleged" sexual predators are allowed to travel to places as far as halfway across the continent where they will be left to themselves lightly supervised for four hours while they're prevented from being in the arena while the team plays games!

If they're a criminal risk but something is delaying charges, then shouldn't there be an insistence that they be retained in St. Louis, where the police have access to them?  Yeah, I understand they're innocent until proven guilty, in the eyes of the law, but if there's reasonable suspension, surely it doesn't take more than two months -- let alone three -- to determine that in the 21st century.

Am I off base?

I can't see any scenario where the police / DA would wait on the University or the outside investigators findings/resolution to determine whether they make an arrest(s) or bring charges.  Then again, I am not a legal expert or law enforcement so what do I know.

[AnkielBreakers]

On 12/20/2017 at 4:07 PM, Quality Is Job 1 said:

If they're a criminal risk but something is delaying charges, then shouldn't there be an insistence that they be retained in St. Louis, where the police have access to them?  Yeah, I understand they're innocent until proven guilty, in the eyes of the law, but if there's reasonable suspension, surely it doesn't take more than two months -- let alone three -- to determine that in the 21st century.

Am I off base?

1

[Quality Is Job 1]

5 minutes ago, kappy96 said:

I can't see any scenario where the police / DA would wait on the University or the outside investigators findings/resolution to determine whether they make an arrest(s) or bring charges.  Then again, I am not a legal expert or law enforcement so what do I know.

Surely state law supersedes campus code in the eyes of the criminal justice system!  If not, something is highly messed up.  If they're waiting on a campus ruling, they're not doing their jobs.

On the flip side, the SLU administration shouldn't be waiting on the courts examining state statutes to make a determination regarding its student conduct code.  The while thing is maddening!

[almaman]

5 hours ago, dlarry said:

I'm still wondering why this isn't being talked about on sports radio.

I know the Bills aren't at the top of the st louis sports pecking order but I'm shocked I've heard so little on this.

Where is Frank C? We need someone with some reach talking about this.

the lack of any real news has been the dominating factor in this whole thing. We know very little that we didn't learn first day this started. Robert Mueller is envious how tight a lid is on this situation.

[Quality Is Job 1]

3 minutes ago, AnkielBreakers said:

Obviously, you have never watched any movies involving Inspector Clouseau.  Properly developing a case may take several years, decades even.  Perhaps SLU administration is engaged in a sting operation regarding these players as we type.

You're citing fiction?!  Anyway, if they can't determine the players' guilt for several years, then let them play and complete their careers!  Should they put an end to their college careers (or force them to transfer out [again, in some cases]) only to exonerate them in 2024?  Absurd!

[slufanskip]

3 hours ago, moytoy12 said:

Ha! I noticed that.  I assume on some govt watch list now.  To be fair, I was probably on a couple already.

Nah .. you got an Abomb in your back pocket. You're ok

[Billiken Rich]

2 hours ago, keyser soze said:

Fred looked solid sitting courtside last night

Soon he's going to have his pick of tickets, but the Nazi ushers will probably tell him to move......................

My Idea for a good chant for our next game "MAKE A DECISION--fred--FREE THE THREE!"

[slufan13]

Apparently this is the 7th biggest news story in St Louis sports in 2017

http://www.stltoday.com/sports/columns/ben-frederickson/top-st-louis-sports-stories-for/collection_d6f48950-d864-52ba-8316-9125bea634a1.html?utm_content=buffer9dfa3&utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook.com&utm_campaign=LEEDCC

And at this rate, it'll be on the 2018 list too

 

[keyser soze]

We need T-Shirts, plus it might help to get Eddie Vedder and the Dixie Chicks to help, like when they helped free The West Memphis Three..

[Adman]

3 hours ago, Pistol said:

If they have the full investigation in hand, along with a recommendation, and then the people responsible for making the ultimate decision put it aside for a few weeks to go on hiatus for winter break, that would be appalling. There are at least 5 students whose futures are directly at stake here, and many more indirectly impacted.

Stu's absolutely right. Timing is becoming an increasingly critical issue here in terms of what decisions those students will be able to make.

The thing that's frustrating is that, even if the full investigation/final report is now in hand with a recommendation, and even if SLU DOES work through the holidays to resolve this, we are not at the final decision point. First, the Hearing Officer must make a decision. That decision must then be communicated to the parties in an official "Notice of Outcome". I doubt we're at this step yet.

Then... each side has 3 business days to file an appeal. After appeals are filed, each party has 3 more University business days to file a written response to the other party's appeal.  Then a 3-person SLU panel will make the final decision. This appeal process -- including the two sets of 3-day appeals/written responses plus the final adjudication -- is supposed to be complete within 10 University business days of the Notice of Outcome. But that timing is the recommended guideline, subject to "extraordinary circumstances", which if the appeal process is anything like the rest of the process, will be extraordinary.

Just a guess. If they're working the holidays, maybe early next year. If not, mid/late January. At this point, some of this is in SLU's hands, some is not (attys submitting appeals, reviews of other party appeals.) I hope I'm wrong and this is faster. Otherwise I fear attorneys filing injunctions, players leaving or both. And lawsuits later.

[Billboy1]

If a decision is not made by the first of the year it is useless and makes no sense.

[Old guy]

2 hours ago, Adman said:

The thing that's frustrating is that, even if the full investigation/final report is now in hand with a recommendation, and even if SLU DOES work through the holidays to resolve this, we are not at the final decision point. First, the Hearing Officer must make a decision. That decision must then be communicated to the parties in an official "Notice of Outcome". I doubt we're at this step yet.

Then... each side has 3 business days to file an appeal. After appeals are filed, each party has 3 more University business days to file a written response to the other party's appeal.  Then a 3-person SLU panel will make the final decision. This appeal process -- including the two sets of 3-day appeals/written responses plus the final adjudication -- is supposed to be complete within 10 University business days of the Notice of Outcome. But that timing is the recommended guideline, subject to "extraordinary circumstances", which if the appeal process is anything like the rest of the process, will be extraordinary.

Just a guess. If they're working the holidays, maybe early next year. If not, mid/late January. At this point, some of this is in SLU's hands, some is not (attys submitting appeals, reviews of other party appeals.) I hope I'm wrong and this is faster. Otherwise I fear attorneys filing injunctions, players leaving or both. And lawsuits later.

This sounds like a couple of months to me.

[moytoy12]

2 hours ago, Adman said:

The thing that's frustrating is that, even if the full investigation/final report is now in hand with a recommendation, and even if SLU DOES work through the holidays to resolve this, we are not at the final decision point. First, the Hearing Officer must make a decision. That decision must then be communicated to the parties in an official "Notice of Outcome". I doubt we're at this step yet.

Then... each side has 3 business days to file an appeal. After appeals are filed, each party has 3 more University business days to file a written response to the other party's appeal.  Then a 3-person SLU panel will make the final decision. This appeal process -- including the two sets of 3-day appeals/written responses plus the final adjudication -- is supposed to be complete within 10 University business days of the Notice of Outcome. But that timing is the recommended guideline, subject to "extraordinary circumstances", which if the appeal process is anything like the rest of the process, will be extraordinary.

Just a guess. If they're working the holidays, maybe early next year. If not, mid/late January. At this point, some of this is in SLU's hands, some is not (attys submitting appeals, reviews of other party appeals.) I hope I'm wrong and this is faster. Otherwise I fear attorneys filing injunctions, players leaving or both. And lawsuits later.

I'm not hopeful, but maybe we're through the appeals process already.  

Ultimately, we all know that we won't see #the3 playing this season in a Billiken uniform. 

[almaman]

I would not be surprised if we ever see any of them play here. I don't think we  know if they'll play this year though. I still think they all could be reinstated for new year. I also think they could all be expelled. Jury still out so stupid to speak

[Spoon-Balls]

Maybe Adonys will just head straight to the JBA after all of this is over? 

 

http://syndication.bleacherreport.com/amp/2750309-lavar-ball-to-start-big-baller-brand-league-for-players-who-skip-college.amp.html

[Macallan 18]

18 minutes ago, almaman said:

I would not be surprised if we ever see any of them play here. I don't think we  know if they'll play this year though. I still think they all could be reinstated for new year. I also think they could all be expelled. Jury still out so stupid to speak

Or they just transfer out any day now which would't surprise ma at all.  That may be what The University is aiming for by dragging this out, to have them just go away on their own.  I sure hope not though.  

[Franchise_08]

Can AD or TG even transfer? Can you transfer multiple times? I am sure this topic has been covered multiple times in this thread already.

[wgstl]

1 hour ago, Franchise_08 said:

Can AD or TG even transfer? Can you transfer multiple times? I am sure this topic has been covered multiple times in this thread already.

Short answer, yes

[Wendelprof]

14 hours ago, CBFan said:

Respectfully professor if I start chanting free the 3 and that causes Fred P. to to punish the players then Fred P. is weak and SLU should replace him.

Also if this is true why would a player ever want to play for SLU because if accused and the fans feel unfairly then the president will punish you because they felt pressured because of a fans chant.

Your post has inspired me more than ever because if after my chant the players are punished I will truly quit being a fan of this program so go ahead Freddy make my day and destroy over 30 years of my support.

Respectfully, that's not what I said.  Fred P. is not going to punish or not punish the students because of what a handful of basketball fans say at a game.  But if you go back and look at my post, it was after another poster suggested you get the student section to join in.  If that many people start chanting it, that would different.

As for comments about the on-going delay, whether or not the students deserve to be punished depends on the details of what was said and what happened that night, and none of us will ever know all the details.  Based on what has been written on this board, I believe there is a good chance one or more of the players will be punished.  If the punishment is to expel them or suspend them for another semester, if I'm the Hearing Officer, I might go ahead and let them enjoy Christmas and New Year to the extent that is possible, but then issue my ruling shortly after the first of the year so they have time to transfer if that is what they wish to do.  (I understand many of you disagree with that last sentence, but I don't know many people who would want to suspend/expel a kid two days before Christmas when waiting until right after the first of the year makes little to no difference - if that's the outcome the kids aren't going to be playing in any games anyway and they won't start the transfer process until after the first of the year as all universities close for the week between the two holidays).  If I were the Hearing Officer, and I thought the matter did not warrant any more punishment that what has already been imposed, I would probably push my decision up as quickly as possible.  If, in fact, the decision is not issued until after the first of the year I think that increases the chances the board will not be happy with the Hearing Officer's recommended punishment (at least as applied to one of the players).  Just trying to help read the tea leaves, though anything is possible.

[Billboy1]

No decision by the first of the year= no donations in the new year

[thetorch]

5 hours ago, Wendelprof said:

Respectfully, that's not what I said.  Fred P. is not going to punish or not punish the students because of what a handful of basketball fans say at a game.  But if you go back and look at my post, it was after another poster suggested you get the student section to join in.  If that many people start chanting it, that would different.

As for comments about the on-going delay, whether or not the students deserve to be punished depends on the details of what was said and what happened that night, and none of us will ever know all the details.  Based on what has been written on this board, I believe there is a good chance one or more of the players will be punished.  If the punishment is to expel them or suspend them for another semester, if I'm the Hearing Officer, I might go ahead and let them enjoy Christmas and New Year to the extent that is possible, but then issue my ruling shortly after the first of the year so they have time to transfer if that is what they wish to do.  (I understand many of you disagree with that last sentence, but I don't know many people who would want to suspend/expel a kid two days before Christmas when waiting until right after the first of the year makes little to no difference - if that's the outcome the kids aren't going to be playing in any games anyway and they won't start the transfer process until after the first of the year as all universities close for the week between the two holidays).  If I were the Hearing Officer, and I thought the matter did not warrant any more punishment that what has already been imposed, I would probably push my decision up as quickly as possible.  If, in fact, the decision is not issued until after the first of the year I think that increases the chances the board will not be happy with the Hearing Officer's recommended punishment (at least as applied to one of the players).  Just trying to help read the tea leaves, though anything is possible.

You realize waiting robs the players of games?  Semester is over.  Technically the players could transfer today, enroll and be eligible to play for another school the next day.  Waiting till after Christmas could conceivably take away 2-4 games from the players. 

[slufan13]

Graves announced his commitment to SLU on December 29th of last year. So saying the transfer process won't start until after the new year is just wrong.

There are no excuses for SLU's inaction. They are doing an injustice to everyone involved. 

[3star_recruit]

6 hours ago, Wendelprof said:

 If I were the Hearing Officer, and I thought the matter did not warrant any more punishment that what has already been imposed, I would probably push my decision up as quickly as possible. 

Tell me the background of SLU's Hearing Officer and I'll tell you right now what the verdict is.