Jump to content

Fall 2017 allegations against unnamed players (aka Situation 2)


DoctorB

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 9k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

8 minutes ago, brianstl said:

I think it was brought up here earlier that Goodwin is actually part of the Rosenblum 3.  

If Goodwin is apart of the Rosenblum 3 then the players hadn't been sitting out at the advice of their counsel. None of this makes sense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Old guy said:

What about the girls?

 

Great question. But as far as we know they have not been punished like the players for consensually participating in the exact same actions (based on the information we have). If school rules were broken and no assault occurred they all broke the same rules. We also know that two girls didn't participate in the investigation. How then can the investigation proceed. SLU is a joke. I'm embarrassed to be an alumnus.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, slufan13 said:

Actually hearing that there are women on campus who are pissed that the players were allowed to attend classes, practice, etc if this was going to be the end result 

Well SLU's decision makes it appears as if they let sexual predators roam the campus for almost four months.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, brianstl said:

I thought I saw somewhere the fall of 2019.

It looks like he is getting the Willie Reed treatment this time.  No sexual contact with the women who is pursuing the case, but being punished for being there.

Also correct.  No sexual contact by JG.  I have it fourth hand, but still traceable directly back to JG, he was suspended until 2020.  As much as I hate it, the “transfer to Mizzou” talk is very real.  My hope is JG goes the Kwamain route...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Gremio14 said:

Also correct.  No sexual contact by JG.  I have it fourth hand, but still traceable directly back to JG, he was suspended until 2020.  As much as I hate it, the “transfer to Mizzou” talk is very real.  My hope is JG goes the Kwamain route...

Makes absolutely no sense why he got the longest suspension then.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It must have been Goodwin's decision to play. If Goodwin is suspended, he was a Rosenbloom client since the student who wasn't a Rosenbloom client was expelled. Therefore, two Rosebloom clients elected to sit and Goodwin decided to play. I am curious as to the reasons for the different punishments. I assume the expulsion was for posting the video on snapchat. Why did Goodwin only get 18 months and the other two 24 months? 

Finally, this thing was agreed to and planned ahead of time. That would take alcohol out of the equation since every consented previously by engaging in the planning. The only punishable thing would have been the camera. The 4 must have all conspired with the video plan without the women's input. There is no other way this could have come down to end up with this decision. Unless of course the decision just has no basis in fact and is inconsistent with the evidence.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is very disappointing, but I think we're all ignoring the environment that we're living in today. Just because these four may not be charged with a crime, that doesn't mean they didn't violate the moral code of a private university. I'm unaware of what the student code is at SLU, but it is a religious institution. Their standard might be higher than a public institution and the players should have known what that standard was before signing up.

What I'm surprised about is how very few are blaming the players for their irresponsible and reckless actions. Yes, I know that there are plenty students and student-athletes across the country that might have committed similar acts which went unpunished, but that doesn't excuse their behavior.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, brianstl said:

Well SLU's decision makes it appears as if they let sexual predators roam the campus for almost four months.

that is the feminist title 9 definition of a sexual predator, not the legal real world definition.....

hell every male baby born today is deemed a sexual predator in those "women's" eyes....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It must have been Goodwin's decision to play. If Goodwin is suspended, he was a Rosenbloom client since the student who wasn't a Rosenbloom client was expelled. Therefore, two Rosebloom clients elected to sit and Goodwin decided to play. I am curious as to the reasons for the different punishments. I assume the expulsion was for posting the video on snapchat. Why did Goodwin only get 18 months and the other two 24 months? 

Finally, this thing was agreed to and planned ahead of time. That would take alcohol out of the equation since every consented previously by engaging in the planning. The only punishable thing would have been the camera. The 4 must have all conspired with the video plan without the women's input. There is no other way this could have come down to end up with this decision. Unless of course the decision just has no basis in fact and is inconsistent with the evidence.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, kmbilliken said:

It must have been Goodwin's decision to play. If Goodwin is suspended, he was a Rosenbloom client since the student who wasn't a Rosenbloom client was expelled. Therefore, two Rosebloom clients elected to sit and Goodwin decided to play. I am curious as to the reasons for the different punishments. I assume the expulsion was for posting the video on snapchat. Why did Goodwin only get 18 months and the other two 24 months? 

Finally, this thing was agreed to and planned ahead of time. That would take alcohol out of the equation since every consented previously by engaging in the planning. The only punishable thing would have been the camera. The 4 must have all conspired with the video plan without the women's input. There is no other way this could have come down to end up with this decision. Unless of course the decision just has no basis in fact and is inconsistent with the evidence.

apparently it is worth 6 additional months to be with a slu student.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...