Fall 2017 allegations against unnamed players (aka Situation 2)

[billikenfan05]

1 minute ago, majerus mojo said:

Did anyone ask Ford about the player’s tweets after the game?

HA HA 

[kshoe]

13 minutes ago, Bills_06 said:

Well Free the 3 made the post.  Did anybody watch channel 5 last night?  I saw Frank turn his camera to the Free the 3 sign early on in the game.

http://www.stltoday.com/sports/college/slu/billiken-beat/slu-players-fans-go-public-with-free-the-slogan/article_77abe528-8199-52c9-adb6-19005ef86e22.html

Frank showed the sign and mentioned the suspended players. Nothing all that meaningful though.

[DeSmetBilliken]

If there was solid evidence that some serious misconduct occurred, the players would have and should have been gone by November 1. The university has a duty to protect its students, and it couldn't keep people they knew were dangerous in the school. They definitely wouldnt have let these guys practice and travel with the team. Can you imagine the news story? "Players X, Y, and Z were sent back to St. Louis from the team's road trip in Massachusetts after being expelled from school following the conclusion of a sexual assault investigation." That doesn't sound very good.

As a lawyer, I can appreciate the CYA mentality, but this still seems to be taking too long. Make a decision.

I don't dispute that 1 or more of the women feels like something bad happened to her that night. How you feel about something, however, isn't enough to sustain charges. You need evidence, or at least to be convincing enough in telling your story that you seem more credible than anyone else.If all of this skews toward a finding that 1 or more of these players committed wrongdoing, then make that decision and assign punishment. If that burden can't be met, clear the players and move on. Just make a decision. 

[billiken_roy]

from all stories i have heard, the only "something bad" is that mom and dad were going to find out due to the video.   ironically though the video probably saved the players from being wrongfully prosecuted by the police.   tough catch 22.   video bad but video good.  

 

make a decision.   

[dlarry]

I was reading some stuff about all the Aziz Ansari crap and it linked a survey on the economist/you gov (ive never heard of it or know much a out it) it said that 25% of millennials believe buying a woman a drink is harassment.  It aslo said 33% of millennial women Believe complimenty a woman's looks is harassment. 

This is the problem and just insane.  One in 3 young women believe being complimented is harrasment? Why in the world would any rational person believe that. 

People are confusing regret and poor decisions with harassment and it is going to cause a serious problem very soon if something isn't done about it.

[Clock_Tower]

1 hour ago, billiken_roy said:

what "bad decision" did the players make?

JeffinMH

Don't hide and refuse to answer BRoy's simple question.  

You, not BRoy or me, chose to make your lengthy post about the boys making a "bad decision" and that most on campus believe a sexual assault occurred.

Now, as mentioned to you, the Title IX hearing officer is not a criminal prosecutor and is not charging the boys with "sexual assault."  Whoever believes a sexual assault occurred should be down at St. Louis City Prosecuting Attorney Kimberly M. Gardner's office protesting and seeking justice.  Instead, this hearing is about possible Title IX violations.  Now, as to Title IX violations, the process should be protect the rights of all parties involved and I would suggest to you that the temporary ban on games until further notice/resolution itself violates Title IX and that the names of the 3 boys have permanently been damaged no matter what happens going forward.

Also, I would suggest to you that the 60 day time line is long past and that this case is less complex than some might suggest.  Some Judges/hearing officers allow the parties as much time as they request for anything and everything, from trial prep to the trial itself, and others have a much firmer and stricter rules and limitations -- both approach have been found to be fair and not unconstitutional. 

And again, why the ban on games for these scholarship athletes? especially when non-scholarship athletes don't have the same?  Why the ban on housing and now reinstatement of on campus housing with the team? why no reinstatement to play under these circumstances?

[kmbilliken]

Were the players kicked off campus and then allowed to return to campus housing this semester? If so, someone made a decision to allow that. Who was that? They should have to explain their decision.

[kappy96]

5 minutes ago, Clock_Tower said:

JeffinMH

Don't hide and refuse to answer BRoy's simple question.  

You, not BRoy or me, chose to make your lengthy post about the boys making a "bad decision" and that most on campus believe a sexual assault occurred.

Now, as mentioned to you, the Title IX hearing officer is not a criminal prosecutor and is not charging the boys with "sexual assault."  Whoever believes a sexual assault occurred should be down at St. Louis City Prosecuting Attorney Kimberly M. Gardner's office protesting and seeking justice.  Instead, this hearing is about possible Title IX violations.  Now, as to Title IX violations, the process should be protect the rights of all parties involved and I would suggest to you that the temporary ban on games until further notice/resolution itself violates Title IX and that the names of the 3 boys have permanently been damaged no matter what happens going forward.

Also, I would suggest to you that the 60 day time line is long past and that this case is less complex than some might suggest.  Some Judges/hearing officers allow the parties as much time as they request for anything and everything, from trial prep to the trial itself, and others have a much firmer and stricter rules and limitations -- both approach have been found to be fair and not unconstitutional. 

And again, why the ban on games for these scholarship athletes? especially when non-scholarship athletes don't have the same?  Why the ban on housing and now reinstatement of on campus housing with the team? why no reinstatement to play under these circumstances?

Was thinking about this last night.  Do you think that the players are not playing based on advice they are receiving from their counsel?  While it does indirectly implicate them by their absence it could also be a strategy to preserve eligibility?  I'm sure in the black hole that is this thread this has been discussed so apologies...I'm just not up to searching for it.

[wgstl]

How the heck do people copy and paste tweets on this board? 

[RiseAndGrind]

2 minutes ago, wgstl said:

How the heck do people copy and paste tweets on this board? 

Just "copy link to tweet" on twitter and paste into the post. It should automatically do it then. 

[HenryB]

1 hour ago, JeffinMH said:

High Horse?  I figure you are joking.  The very first post of this thread says the "Saint Louis Police Department informed".... whatever it was. The original claim spoke of sexual assault and everything grew out of that. SLU cannot/will not/ would be foolish too... ignore that simple fact.  That is why this has played out the way it has.   I really do hope these guys play for SLU in the future (whether near future or next season).  However,  the way things seem to be right now, with everything being drawn out, I don't think that will happen.  Believe me, I would be happy to be wrong on this!!!   I am sure deep down they are good kids who made bad decisions. I am also sure SLU doesn't want to be looked upon by the community as trying to overlook questionable things going on on there own property. I don't know how many female students read this board discussion. but the ones I know who are aware of the allegations or are alum think a sexual assault went down that night. In today's world, sexual assault allegations are a point of high focus.  When I read all the recent news over the last year, I conclude women are simply not going to let this kind of thing go.. That is the difference between now and say 20 - 40 years ago. This, above all other things, is why this whole mess has unfolded like it has.  Is it justice? Is it UNfair to the accused?  Maybe not... at least you can make an argument that it isn't. However this is the lay of land in this era.  These high-profile student athletes have to know they are held to a higher standard and when something questionable happens, they basically have a target hanging around their necks. They have to decide if it is worth a scholarship education.  Like I said, I hope this is resolved soon so the boys can put this behind them. 

Nope....I was not joking.  What is your definition of soon?  It has been well over 100 days.  Your defense of this travesty is nauseating.  Maybe Fred will buy your drivel but  no one here is.  You so casually dismiss the unfairness of this crap with your "lay of the land" rationale.  The STLPD clearly found nothing to charge the players with  so spare us the sanctimonious nonsense that the absurd length of this charade is in any way justified. The bottom line is that Fred is fine with persecuting the players.  It is an outrage.  I am ashamed to be associated with a university that  so callously sacrifices young men in the name of political correctness...shame on you for protecting the likes of Fred. Fire Fred Now.... and if you are employed by the university your sorry tail needs to go to.

[ARon]

14 minutes ago, kappy96 said:

Was thinking about this last night.  Do you think that the players are not playing based on advice they are receiving from their counsel?  While it does indirectly implicate them by their absence it could also be a strategy to preserve eligibility?  I'm sure in the black hole that is this thread this has been discussed so apologies...I'm just not up to searching for it.

No.

[Bills_06]

17 minutes ago, kappy96 said:

Was thinking about this last night.  Do you think that the players are not playing based on advice they are receiving from their counsel?  While it does indirectly implicate them by their absence it could also be a strategy to preserve eligibility?  I'm sure in the black hole that is this thread this has been discussed so apologies...I'm just not up to searching for it.

I think the tweets from the players yesterday basically indicate they aren't sure why the process still isn't completed and that they want to be playing. 

[kappy96]

9 minutes ago, Bills_06 said:

I think the tweets from the players yesterday basically indicate they aren't sure why the process still isn't completed and that they want to be playing. 

Agree with your interpretation of the players sentiment but that doesn’t necessarily indicate who is advising (or requiring) them to sit. 

[Schasz]

Sitting here in my comfortable Florida home with the heater set at 72...Temp was 29 (Brrrr) when I woke up today. This whole thing seems really crazy that it continues to drag on and on so freakin long. I don't understand Title IX from sunburn and frankly I'm not sure I want to understand it. Some of the epistles written by folks on this thread were way more than I care to know. I do think I read a few pages back that a decision was rendered??? If so, what was it??? It seems only fair that since no criminal charges came of this escapade that it is time to let these 3 young men know if SLU will let them play hoops anytime this semester. If not, they should be set free to play for someone else as I am sure some other school would like to have their hoops skills. As some other fans have stated...Make A Decision!!! Kind of wonder with this way over due decision what it might do to future recruiting???

[JeffinMH]

2 hours ago, billiken_roy said:

what "bad decision" did the players make?

I am not sure how to answer.  Most times when the police get involved in the middle of the night something really bad transpired.I am not saying there is blame on both sides but everyone would have better served if basically an orgy wasn't videoed in the middle of the night on school property.

[billiken_roy]

Just now, JeffinMH said:

I am not sure how to answer.  Most times when the police get involved in the middle of the night something really bad transpired.I am not saying there is blame on both sides but everyone would have better served if basically an orgy wasn't videoed in the middle of the night on school property.

the police got involved only because the girls came to them with remorse over their bad decisions to try to save face.   one of the girls (supposedly the one not a student) has already recanted the story.   their collective stories were supposedly all over the place and extremely inconsistent and the police told them to go home.   

without the video, the players had nothing to disprove their remorseful counterparts.   THEN the players would have been in far more trouble with the he said she said issues.   

[slu72]

If all the facts are correct as to consent, this does sound like the Aziz deal. In that case all she had to do was say no and leave, but she stays. She gets in the cab to go home and suddenly thinks she was harassed or assaulted. In fact, she was suffering buyer's remorse. Sounds a lot like what's happened in Sit 2. That said, whoever made the charge and/or whoever's pushing this thing in the appeal process, assuming of course the players were found not at fault, is and extremely selfish individual. She or they have caused an entire program to go into free fall not to mention how she or they have impacted the lives of 3 young men in an attempt to salvage their virtue.

[JeffinMH]

17 minutes ago, billiken_roy said:

the police got involved only because the girls came to them with remorse over their bad decisions to try to save face.   one of the girls (supposedly the one not a student) has already recanted the story.   their collective stories were supposedly all over the place and extremely inconsistent and the police told them to go home.   

without the video, the players had nothing to disprove their remorseful counterparts.   THEN the players would have been in far more trouble with the he said she said issues.   

If that is indeed true then there is a chance.  However the school general counsel will still explore all legal exposure. They don't want to settle out of court if there is no reason to give up any cash. If it is a simple as everyone is saying then why wasn't this over in December? Missing piece that no one knows about and no one is leaking?

 

[almaman]

20 minutes ago, billiken_roy said:

the police got involved only because the girls came to them with remorse over their bad decisions to try to save face.   one of the girls (supposedly the one not a student) has already recanted the story.   their collective stories were supposedly all over the place and extremely inconsistent and the police told them to go home.   

without the video, the players had nothing to disprove their remorseful counterparts.   THEN the players would have been in far more trouble with the he said she said issues.   

If that is true all the more reason to be pissed about the time it's taken. Just watch tape and declare innocent. Boys back on court before anyone even new for sure who they were.

[juniorbill76]

Oh, woman, woman! When to ill thy mind is bent, all hell contains no fouler fiend.

[hoppybeer]

Just now, JeffinMH said:

If that is indeed true then there is a chance.  However the school general counsel will still explore all legal exposure. They don't want to settle out of court if there is no reason to give up any cash. If it is a simple as everyone is saying then why wasn't this over in December? Missing piece that no one knows about and no one is leaking?

 

The university is definitely going to be handing out cash at this point, no matter what the decision is. They may have avoided paying the players if they had made a decision over the break, but i don't think there's any way they can avoid paying them now. On top of that, there are strong rumors to the parents of one of the accusers demanding money from the school. Good ol' Freddie P the bed big time on this, i hope he enjoys the stench.

[JeffinMH]

1 hour ago, HenryB said:

Nope....I was not joking.  What is your definition of soon?  It has been well over 100 days.  Your defense of this travesty is nauseating.  Maybe Fred will buy your drivel but  no one here is.  You so casually dismiss the unfairness of this crap with your "lay of the land" rationale.  The STLPD clearly found nothing to charge the players with  so spare us the sanctimonious nonsense that the absurd length of this charade is in any way justified. The bottom line is that Fred is fine with persecuting the players.  It is an outrage.  I am ashamed to be associated with a university that  so callously sacrifices young men in the name of political correctness...shame on you for protecting the likes of Fred. Fire Fred Now.... and if you are employed by the university your sorry tail needs to go to.

I can't help you if you are claiming what is "fair" or what is not. That is fairy tale thinking.  Re member the public perception goes a long way with enrollment and donations to the school. If they would have cut the investigation short and side with the players without a full investigation then they are taking a huge risk. 

[JeffinMH]

1 minute ago, hoppybeer said:

The university is definitely going to be handing out cash at this point, no matter what the decision is. They may have avoided paying the players if they had made a decision over the break, but i don't think there's any way they can avoid paying them now. On top of that, there are strong rumors to the parents of one of the accusers demanding money from the school. Good ol' Freddie P the bed big time on this, i hope he enjoys the stench.

If they do settle with money paid there better be a damn strong non-disclosure agreement and no admission of any fault in any way.  

[brianstl]

Just now, slu72 said:

If all the facts are correct as to consent, this does sound like the Aziz deal. In that case all she had to do was say no and leave, but she stays. She gets in the cab to go home and suddenly thinks she was harassed or assaulted. In fact, she was suffering buyer's remorse. Sounds a lot like what's happened in Sit 2. That said, whoever made the charge and/or whoever's pushing this thing in the appeal process, assuming of course the players were found not at fault, is and extremely selfish individual. She or they have caused an entire program to go into free fall not to mention how she or they have impacted the lives of 3 young men in an attempt to salvage their virtue.

There are tons of college age white women that think what Aziz did is sexual assault.  They believe it to their core.   I don't know where this victim mindset has come from over the last couple of decades.  It is frightening.