Jump to content

Fall 2017 allegations against unnamed players (aka Situation 2)


DoctorB

Recommended Posts

58 minutes ago, VeniceMenace said:

We’re weeks away from a final verdict, what’s changing between now and then that will make tomorrow nights game more interesting than usual?

Hey troll- Do you think giving VCU a double digit ass whooping will make the game more interesting than usual? How about if JGood throws in another triple double and Roby goes off for 20+ in solidarity? Have you been watching the same team as the rest of us, troll? This team is on a roll; inspired by S2. F'## Pestello and the TIX feminazis! Tomorrow night at least, the Bills are kicking ass! That's as far into the future that I care to look for now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 9k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

3 hours ago, Quality Is Job 1 said:

Or perhaps, contrary to what many media outlets and posters here have been reporting as fact, no one who has been playing for SLU this season has been under investigation by the Title IX office and no one who has been playing in games for SLU this season played Saturday after having been suspended Friday and no one who has been playing was represented by Rosenblum.

SLU won't comment, Rosenblum won't name his clients, and the team won't comment, so how exactly can anyone state as fact that Goodwin or any other player who's been playing this season has been suspended and had to file a quick appeal in order to play Saturday?  If any currently playing player was a client of Rosenblum's along with Henriquez and Bishop (as it seems reasonable to assume), then why would two of them not have appeals ready to go while the other one did?  Also, nothing I've read from Rosenblum suggests that only some of his clients had been suspended in interim.

Graves' dad supposedly said that he didn't understand how one of the players involved could play while his son couldn't.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, ChangeOfPace said:

So for the no contact theory to hold any water, we are supposed to believe that 3 of the guys had “contact” with the one cheerleader? And the 4th didn’t?

From my understanding the cheerleader had only one-on-one contact during the whole "incident"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, kmbilliken said:

The post article linked on page 106 of this thread refers to the 2014 overnight bag incident. In that case the guy was suspended after his hearing based on ridiculous evidence. Two months later the assistant Vice President of Student Affairs, after having no contact with the case up to that point, stepped in, reviewed the evidence and set aside the ruling. Apparently the administration had the power to throw out the Title IX decision then. Why not now?

Exactly... when they got the decision originally in this current case, they could have immediately said, no way this is too harsh of a punishment. Maybe they chose to go with it, expecting an appeal and knowing they could reduce it shortly thereafter, in an attempt to please both sides. Maybe in their minds, if they do that, the guys are being punished which should please the female side, but it was reduced from an outrageous punishment to something reasonable, which should please the male side of it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, JohnnyJumpUp said:

Exactly... when they got the decision originally in this current case, they could have immediately said, no way this is too harsh of a punishment. Maybe they chose to go with it, expecting an appeal and knowing they could reduce it shortly thereafter, in an attempt to please both sides. Maybe in their minds, if they do that, the guys are being punished which should please the female side, but it was reduced from an outrageous punishment to something reasonable, which should please the male side of it.

That is what we are all hoping for at this point. A changing of punishment from the absolutely ridiculous punishments delivered Friday to something more palatable like 1 year suspensions with most of it being time served this season.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Billiken Rich said:

I'm going to be holding up a sign in section 108 during free throws.  Limited space. Should I go with "FREE THE 3" or "FIRE FRED"  you make the call.........

Both are appropriate.  Can you make your sign double sided?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Billiken Rich said:

I'm going to be holding up a sign in section 108 during free throws.  Limited space. Should I go with "FREE THE 3" or "FIRE FRED"  you make the call.........

#FireFreddyP

thank you Rich

Cannot make the VCU game will be at the next game to yell fire Pestello.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

During the civil suit:

Rosenblum: Um, Ms. Weathers, why did you volunteer for the Title IX Hearing Officer position?

Ms. Weathers: Men are evil.

Rosenblum: Could you elaborate?

Ms. Weathers: Women are pure.

Rosenblum: Uh, let me ask you another question.  Do you think men have ever been falsely accused of sexual misconduct?

Ms. Weathers: Never.  All the training I have ever received show without a doubt that women never lie and men are always wrong in these situations.  

Rosenblum: Has any women ever been accused of sexual misconduct?

Ms. Weathers:  Never.  Women are pure.  Didn't you hear me the first time?

Rosenblum: What do you post on Facebook and Twitter?

Ms. Weathers: As much women rights stuff that I can.  I accidentally deleted all the postings after the SLU lawyer ordered me to delete them.  

Rosenblum:  Were there any men rights stuff posted?

Ms. Weathers: Never.  Men are evil.  Didn't you hear me the first time?  

SouthSide_Billiken likes this
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, MattyMo213 said:

From my understanding the cheerleader had only one-on-one contact during the whole "incident"

This makes the whole no-contact order narrative a bit suspect. Wouldn't the no-contact order apply to 1 player then? Why would it apply to two extra players? Why wouldn't it apply to the fourth? This whole thing gets more bizarre by the minute. SLU is a joke.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, NextYearBill said:

but why has Goodwin been allowed to play????????????????????????????????? so much mystery 

Couldn't have Travis Ford played the supposed 3 guys who have been out all season? Like no one knew the names of the players who could have done it when the news broke but their social media posts suggest they were the ones suspended. Why would Travis Ford sit out those players but not the one who has continued to play? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

50 minutes ago, SouthSide_Billiken said:

Maybe we can convince the band to play, "Hey Baby" with some special lyrics for Deplorable Katherine : "Hey, Katherine! We gotta know, why do you hate men?"

Or perhaps for Freddy P: "Hey, Pestello! Even Biondi knows, that you gotta go."

Ummmm......NO.

Let’s not suggest that the Band do something that will get them in trouble.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, SouthSide_Billiken said:

This makes the whole no-contact order narrative a bit suspect. Wouldn't the no-contact order apply to 1 player then? Why would it apply to two extra players? Why wouldn't it apply to the fourth? This whole thing gets more bizarre by the minute. SLU is a joke.

The whole "no-contact" thing, if true, if ridiculous.  I mean, they still went to class...on campus...with other students. If the threat of incident was so serious, then why not provide the no-contact protection at all times wherever the player(s) went on campus? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, moytoy12 said:

The whole "no-contact" thing, if true, if ridiculous.  I mean, they still went to class...on campus...with other students. If the threat of incident was so serious, then why not provide the no-contact protection at all times wherever the player(s) went on campus? 

The best actually happened first day of classes this semester. One of the three, that has been denied attending the games for fear of contact with one of the females, shows up for class and she's there.  The school pisses away money on off campus housing, and guards when the players are on campus, doesn't have enough sense to make sure they're not enrolled in the same classes. 

Excellent work Dr. P

majerus mojo and Box and Won like this
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, slu72 fan said:

The best actually happened first day of classes this semester. One of the three, that has been denied attending the games for fear of contact with one of the females, shows up for class and she's there.  The school pisses away money on off campus housing, and guards when the players are on campus, doesn't have enough sense to make sure they're not enrolled in the same classes. 

Excellent work Dr. P

From what I was told the security was to protect the players from certain threats.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So what type of punishment should the players have gotten? Nothing?

Was this just a boys will be boys situation and SLU should have ignored it? 

Because they were basketball players they can do whatever they want without repercussions?

It sounded like a pretty serious situation to me.

Sad that most of the posters on this site only care about wins/losses of the basketball team and not the moral fiber of the school.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Tilkowsky said:

So what type of punishment should the players have gotten? Nothing?

Was this just a boys will be boys situation and SLU should have ignored it? 

Because they were basketball players they can do whatever they want without repercussions?

It sounded like a pretty serious situation to me.

Sad that most of the posters on this site only care about wins/losses of the basketball team and not the moral fiber of the school.

That's pure, unadulterated bull****.

The moral fiber of the school is being woven by the same people who threaded their pink hats. You should be concerned by that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Tilkowsky said:

So what type of punishment should the players have gotten? Nothing?

Was this just a boys will be boys situation and SLU should have ignored it? 

Because they were basketball players they can do whatever they want without repercussions?

It sounded like a pretty serious situation to me.

Sad that most of the posters on this site only care about wins/losses of the basketball team and not the moral fiber of the school.

Dude, no one said these guys should be up for canonization, what we are saying is that crimes (or in this case lack of) and punishment should be proportional and should be adjudicated in an unbiased manor. Not exactly extreme positions you turd.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, LindellWest said:

Dude, no one said these guys should be up for canonization, what we are saying is that crimes (or in this case lack of) and punishment should be proportional and should be adjudicated in an unbiased manor. Not exactly extreme positions you turd.

 

10 minutes ago, Bobby Metzinger said:

That's pure, unadulterated bull****.

The moral fiber of the school is being woven by the same people who threaded their pink hats. You should be concerned by that.

Dudes, he's a troll.

2010andBeyond likes this
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...