dlarry Posted January 15, 2018 Share Posted January 15, 2018 4 hours ago, Tilkowsky said: So because the accused are allegedly SLU basketball players their case should be investigated first? Mainly because of the impact to the basketball team? Shame on you. Again, the players are to blame for putting themselves in this position. Yes. If it was any other student the time frame wouldn't matter. Joe college student can sit on probation for the entire year and it won't affect him or anybody else. He can go about his daily routine and nothing is changed. With an athlete the decision needs to be made quicker. What happens to them has more affect on their daily life and had more affect on the University. The athlete is also being punished more than the average student by being suspended from his sport the average student wouldn't be missing anything esle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AnkielBreakers Posted January 15, 2018 Share Posted January 15, 2018 13 hours ago, Tilkowsky said: So because the accused are allegedly SLU basketball players their case should be investigated first? Mainly because of the impact to the basketball team? Shame on you. Again, the players are to blame for putting themselves in this position. It has been said by a lot of people, but you are clearly a troll seeking to elicit a reaction. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slufanskip Posted January 15, 2018 Share Posted January 15, 2018 10 hours ago, kshoe said: Depends on what your definition of sexual assault is. If a women drinks, has consensual sex and regrets it later and that is considered a sexual assault then yes, I agree there are more unreported cases than not. If the definition is more along the lines of a women saying NO multiple times and a man still forcing himself on her, I don't really know how often that occurs but I doubt its all that frequent. Is there one of us who has not committed sexual assault if the first scenario counts? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
juniorbill76 Posted January 15, 2018 Share Posted January 15, 2018 8 minutes ago, slufanskip said: Is there one of us who has not committed sexual assault if the first scenario counts? Yes Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billikenfan05 Posted January 15, 2018 Share Posted January 15, 2018 5 hours ago, Clock_Tower said: Til. You are [censored]. You have no idea what the players did or didn't do so don't blame them. If the Board wont' ban you, I will speak up against trolls like youl @Quality Is Job 1 tilkowsky deserves namecalling Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slufanskip Posted January 15, 2018 Share Posted January 15, 2018 10 hours ago, juniorbill76 said: Yes I'm not talking about whether or not she regretted it later, but could she have. And under SLU's policy if she had a drink she could claim she didn't actually consent. So I'll make the question more clear. Have you had sex with a girl or woman who had a drink? If so you could be guilty of sexual assault. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bobby Metzinger Posted January 15, 2018 Share Posted January 15, 2018 6 minutes ago, slufanskip said: I'm not talking about whether or not she regretted it later, but could she have. And under SLU's policy if she had a drink she could claim she didn't actually consent. So I'll make the question more clear. Have you had sex with a girl or woman who had a drink? If so you could be guilty of sexual assault. This is where the blurriness of the situation really gets gritty. Where are the lines in the sand between "civil/legal policy" and "Saint Louis University policy?" If being cleared on one doesn't necessarily clear the hatchet from falling on the other, this is really unfortunate. The student handbook should be something that goes away very soon, considering now SLU has the power to deliberately make changes to the next volume of the handbook to harden and reinforce these situations even more in favor of the accusers. And you can forget crying ex post facto, because obviously U.S. legal and criminal law does not apply in Fred Pestello's world. This is bull****. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
juniorbill76 Posted January 15, 2018 Share Posted January 15, 2018 26 minutes ago, slufanskip said: I'm not talking about whether or not she regretted it later, but could she have. And under SLU's policy if she had a drink she could claim she didn't actually consent. So I'll make the question more clear. Have you had sex with a girl or woman who had a drink? If so you could be guilty of sexual assault. No, unless you count my wife. ... Not trying to be holier than thou, just answering the question. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duff Man Posted January 15, 2018 Share Posted January 15, 2018 22 hours ago, thetorch said: This whole thing is shockingly stupid. Feds say colleges aren't responding to sexual assault cases correctly by relying on police to investigate the crimes. Colleges realize they can't investigate it themselves, as the feds want tehm to, so they hire outside firms to do it for them. The lawyers and independent investigators milk the process for months at a time. How can police wrap up cases in days and it takes months for these to finish up? Money. This whole process needs to be thrown out. No matter the outcome of this case, we need a thorough independent investigation of the investigation and hold some mofos accountable. This is a well sourced group and once the dust has settled, the truth is going to come out and depending on how the facts shape up, it's going to be bad for whoever caused it to drag on for so long...on top of any questions about whether the punishment was fair. It's not like we're going to open our presents on Xmas morning and there will be the Eureka moment where it all makes sense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cheeseman Posted January 15, 2018 Share Posted January 15, 2018 1 hour ago, juniorbill76 said: No, unless you count my wife. ... Not trying to be holier than thou, just answering the question. Your wife said no -man that is cold. If you were some one who had multiple sexual partners prior to marriage it would be very rare for you not have found yourself in a situation where drinking was involved and sex followed. It would not have been unusual for the girl to say "not now" but as time went on she would relent without you forcing yourself on her. Women are just as horny as men. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
almaman Posted January 15, 2018 Share Posted January 15, 2018 1 hour ago, juniorbill76 said: No, unless you count my wife. ... Not trying to be holier than thou, just answering the question. but did you ever with her before marriage? can't believe asking but germane to the back n forth here Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheChosenOne Posted January 15, 2018 Share Posted January 15, 2018 2 hours ago, slufanskip said: I'm not talking about whether or not she regretted it later, but could she have. And under SLU's policy if she had a drink she could claim she didn't actually consent. So I'll make the question more clear. Have you had sex with a girl or woman who had a drink? If so you could be guilty of sexual assault. That policy is why it is hard for me to ever feel confident in a male coming away from these accusations unscathed. In the end, all the female has to prove is that she had some level of impairment and some sort of sexual relations occurred. I guess if the female's story is all over the place and doesn't jive with witnesses maybe that could help the guys, but ultimately it typically does come down to those two things and the male involved typically will not (will likely admit some sort of sexual relations occurred)/cannot (whether or not the girl had been drinking) dispute those things making it really difficult for them to "win" so to say. If that is going to be the rule, my primary hope would be that the level of punishment for violating that policy fit the violation (like you said, what % of guys violated this policy during their time at SLU). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brianstl Posted January 15, 2018 Share Posted January 15, 2018 The one drink thing isn’t in SLU’s code of conduct or In their Title IX policy. I posted what it actually says earlier in this thread. I am not going to search for it now, but it basically states the person has to be showing signs of being intoxicated in a way that a reasonable person could know they were drunk. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JMM28 Posted January 15, 2018 Share Posted January 15, 2018 1 hour ago, slufanskip said: I'm not talking about whether or not she regretted it later, but could she have. And under SLU's policy if she had a drink she could claim she didn't actually consent. So I'll make the question more clear. Have you had sex with a girl or woman who had a drink? If so you could be guilty of sexual assault. If having sex drunk was a crime at SLU, Pestello would be about ready to put the needle in my arm. Spoon-Balls likes this Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
juniorbill76 Posted January 15, 2018 Share Posted January 15, 2018 12 minutes ago, cheeseman said: Your wife said no -man that is cold. If you were some one who had multiple sexual partners prior to marriage it would be very rare for you not have found yourself in a situation where drinking was involved and sex followed. It would not have been unusual for the girl to say "not now" but as time went on she would relent without you forcing yourself on her. Women are just as horny as men. This is the question I was answering: "So I'll make the question more clear. Have you had sex with a girl or woman who had a drink?" ... But my life is irrelevant to the 3 players and their situation, so let's move along. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old guy Posted January 15, 2018 Share Posted January 15, 2018 10 minutes ago, brianstl said: The one drink thing isn’t in SLU’s code of conduct or In their Title IX policy. I posted what it actually says earlier in this thread. I am not going to search for it now, but it basically states the person has to be showing signs of being intoxicated in a way that a reasonable person could know they were drunk. Brianstl, and that wording opens up yet another can of worms: what is the meaning of a "reasonable person" and how "could he/she know the lady was drunk?." You could have teams of lawyers arguing about the intended meaning of this phrase, or the real meaning, or the way it has been applied in the past. You can argue about the ways people use to know when someone is drunk, or whether there is a correlation between knowing or believing to know, and actually being drunk. And what in heavens is a reasonable person? and how can this reasonable person standard be applied to an 18 year old who is thinking with his gonads? They could argue this wording until next season, be sure of this, maybe they are doing just this right now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RiseAndGrind Posted January 15, 2018 Share Posted January 15, 2018 15 minutes ago, juniorbill76 said: This is the question I was answering: "So I'll make the question more clear. Have you had sex with a girl or woman who had a drink?" ... But my life is irrelevant to the 3 players and their situation, so let's move along. This place is getting weird rgbilliken and JohnnyJumpUp like this Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheChosenOne Posted January 15, 2018 Share Posted January 15, 2018 36 minutes ago, brianstl said: The one drink thing isn’t in SLU’s code of conduct or In their Title IX policy. I posted what it actually says earlier in this thread. I am not going to search for it now, but it basically states the person has to be showing signs of being intoxicated in a way that a reasonable person could know they were drunk. Right. And my concern there is that is primarily the word of the "victim" and/or her friends who had been with her the entirety of the night. Often times the male can't really speak to the female's level of intoxication or just how much she had to drink throughout the night (likely were not with her the entire night). Guys are in a tough spot since I assume they acknowledge they had some sort of sexual relations with the female and can't really speak to the female's level of intoxication, but presumably acknowledge there was drinking taking place. That is my experience from a long time ago (2001), so I don't know whether this is all still the case. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clock_Tower Posted January 15, 2018 Share Posted January 15, 2018 Anyone know where S2 took place? A SLU dorm? Girls’ place? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spoon-Balls Posted January 15, 2018 Share Posted January 15, 2018 7 minutes ago, Clock_Tower said: Anyone know where S2 took place? A SLU dorm? Girls’ place? I remember reading that it was in Marchetti West. So it wasn't one of the players' apartments, it had to have been one of the girls'. This story doesn't mention Marchetti directly (it just says an on campus apartment along North Grand) but I do remember a story that said it was in Marchetti West: http://www.kmov.com/story/36477268/4-slu-basketball-players-accused-of-sexual-assault Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
majerus mojo Posted January 15, 2018 Share Posted January 15, 2018 2 hours ago, juniorbill76 said: No, unless you count my wife. ... Not trying to be holier than thou, just answering the question. 42 minutes ago, JMM28 said: If having sex drunk was a crime at SLU, Pestello would be about ready to put the needle in my arm. Congrats on the sex TaLBErt, DeSmetBilliken, Littlebill and 1 other like this Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattyMo213 Posted January 15, 2018 Share Posted January 15, 2018 26 minutes ago, Clock_Tower said: Anyone know where S2 took place? A SLU dorm? Girls’ place? I think it was Grand Forest apartments. Because Pestellos email said on campus apartments Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Billboy1 Posted January 15, 2018 Share Posted January 15, 2018 See the Billiken Show resumes tonight. Probably be a lot of fluff and no substance. Since they monitor everything there will be no questions on S2. Still want to know if the three are registered for the new semester. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bobby Metzinger Posted January 15, 2018 Share Posted January 15, 2018 15 minutes ago, MattyMo213 said: I think it was Grand Forest apartments. Because Pestellos email said on campus apartments Could also describe Marchetti and the Village. Title IX meets Section 8 in my beloved Grand Forest sounds like a stretch... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheGrandLife Posted January 15, 2018 Share Posted January 15, 2018 It was Grand Forest Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts