Fall 2017 allegations against unnamed players (aka Situation 2)

[LindellWest]

Just now, slufan13 said:

 

 

All of this makes me think that the report was pretty good for the players and the 3rd party investigators recommendation was light. So I wonder if that helps with an appeal or does that fall under the grounds of "dissatisfaction with the punishment"

This whole situation has been a giant clusterfck, nothing makes sense,  trying to make any logical conclusions is a Sisyphean task. The only thing Im sure of was that justice was never the intent of this dog a pony show.

[Pistol]

1 minute ago, slufan13 said:

All of this makes me think that the report was pretty good for the players and the 3rd party investigators recommendation was light. So I wonder if that helps with an appeal or does that fall under the grounds of "dissatisfaction with the punishment"

I agree with this. It must've been neutral-to-positive from their perspective. The lawyer probably gave a pretty comprehensive summary to everyone, and they must've assumed this would all be over soon, and prepared to move forward. Man, what I wouldn't give to read that report and recommendation.

As for the appeal, the only reasons for appealing are the process being mishandled or new information coming to light, and I don't see how this is either of those. SLU may have handed down an extreme, shocking punishment, but it's going to be hard to show that they botched the *process* itself, as long as they followed the steps. I'm not sure taking an extraordinary amount of time or bleeding into the second semester counts as mishandling the process, but I doubt it.

I have a long list of questions with regard to the entire thing, but I also doubt I'll ever get a satisfying answer to any of them. Every time there's a new leak or piece of info, it doesn't necessarily help the situation make more sense, and instead new questions are raised.

[slufan13]

I also think it's interesting that the players haven't been dismissed from the team or anything. I would think that if the evidence supported such harsh punishments, Ford will feel pressured to basically deny the thought of an appeal by dismissing the players involved. 

[billikenfan05]

1 minute ago, slufan13 said:

I also think it's interesting that the players haven't been dismissed from the team or anything. I would think that if the evidence supported such harsh punishments, Ford will feel pressured to basically deny the thought of an appeal by dismissing the players involved. 

I wonder if a disconnect between the third party investigators recommendation for punishment and the schools could be considered improper handling.

[Bills_06]

9 minutes ago, Pistol said:

I agree with this. It must've been neutral-to-positive from their perspective. The lawyer probably gave a pretty comprehensive summary to everyone, and they must've assumed this would all be over soon, and prepared to move forward. Man, what I wouldn't give to read that report and recommendation.

As for the appeal, the only reasons for appealing are the process being mishandled or new information coming to light, and I don't see how this is either of those. SLU may have handed down an extreme, shocking punishment, but it's going to be hard to show that they botched the *process* itself, as long as they followed the steps. I'm not sure taking an extraordinary amount of time or bleeding into the second semester counts as mishandling the process, but I doubt it.

I have a long list of questions with regard to the entire thing, but I also doubt I'll ever get a satisfying answer to any of them. Every time there's a new leak or piece of info, it doesn't necessarily help the situation make more sense, and instead new questions are raised.

Did the reasoning for appeal change in the past couple years?  Guess I just keep going back to the 2015 Post article and it said, "The man appealed, claiming the process was unfair, the penalty was too harsh and information provided didn’t match the disciplinary board’s conclusion."

Wonder if the documents the Post obtained contained the hearing officers name.  

[Cowboy]

-is there any way to pressure the city police to close the file so it can become public before the appeal ruling is delivered? if the police report is so lacking in damages and tells the truth, that may then get pressure from someone to radically reduce the punishments or step in/override and reduce them

-I will say, however, whoever posted the video, they jumped into a different category of punishment from my pov

[brianstl]

13 minutes ago, Pistol said:

I agree with this. It must've been neutral-to-positive from their perspective. The lawyer probably gave a pretty comprehensive summary to everyone, and they must've assumed this would all be over soon, and prepared to move forward. Man, what I wouldn't give to read that report and recommendation.

As for the appeal, the only reasons for appealing are the process being mishandled or new information coming to light, and I don't see how this is either of those. SLU may have handed down an extreme, shocking punishment, but it's going to be hard to show that they botched the *process* itself, as long as they followed the steps. I'm not sure taking an extraordinary amount of time or bleeding into the second semester counts as mishandling the process, but I doubt it.

I have a long list of questions with regard to the entire thing, but I also doubt I'll ever get a satisfying answer to any of them. Every time there's a new leak or piece of info, it doesn't necessarily help the situation make more sense, and instead new questions are raised.

I want to know what was up with the delay in SLU getting the investigator's report and SLU getting that report to Rosenblum.  Did SLU decide to extend the investigation because they didn't like what Holland came back with?

[LongLiveLisch]

I know there is little to no transparency in these Title IX cases, but is the Title IX office required to explain their punishment to those being punished?

Or is it really a case of:

”You’ve been suspended for 18 months”

”Why?”

”No comment. “

[NH]

5 minutes ago, billikenfan05 said:

I wonder if a disconnect between the third party investigators recommendation for punishment and the schools could be considered improper handling.

I think that’s the best chance, arguing that the hearing officer didn’t follow protocol based on whatever feedback was provided by the investigator. No idea whether that’s true or not.

[Quality Is Job 1]

17 minutes ago, Pistol said:

I agree with this. It must've been neutral-to-positive from their perspective. The lawyer probably gave a pretty comprehensive summary to everyone, and they must've assumed this would all be over soon, and prepared to move forward. Man, what I wouldn't give to read that report and recommendation.

As for the appeal, the only reasons for appealing are the process being mishandled or new information coming to light, and I don't see how this is either of those. SLU may have handed down an extreme, shocking punishment, but it's going to be hard to show that they botched the *process* itself, as long as they followed the steps. I'm not sure taking an extraordinary amount of time or bleeding into the second semester counts as mishandling the process, but I doubt it.

I have a long list of questions with regard to the entire thing, but I also doubt I'll ever get a satisfying answer to any of them. Every time there's a new leak or piece of info, it doesn't necessarily help the situation make more sense, and instead new questions are raised.

I think what we have to hope is that the two women who did not cooperate decide to come forward with the "new information" that they didn't provide during the investigation, now that they see how unduly and unjustly damaging their friend's vindictiveness has become, and that that helps the appeal.

[slufan13]

Does Pestello have any power over the hearing officer's punishment? I would assume no direct influence/power but he's still the President of the school so I would think he has some kind of power. I just have a hard time believing that Weathers (or any hearing officer) could do whatever they wanted and never have to answer to Pestello (or any superior). 

[almaman]

If the video part is a crime and there is a video and they can prove who took and released to whatever extent it was let out then it seems the long arm of the law would be involved and would of acted by now. Also I wonder if they have any issues with having to get on the sex offender list? that would suck big time.

[Franchise_08]

Fred does respond to Twitter...look at the comments. He has to be feeling the heat. 

[majerus mojo]

2 minutes ago, Franchise_08 said:

Fred does respond to Twitter...look at the comments. He has to be feeling the heat. 

Yea looks like he’s really sweating 🙄

 

[almaman]

 Initiative Five the one that covers orgies?

[slufan13]

Pestello actually comes across as a little bit of a d.ick in his reply. 

[billikenfan05]

1 minute ago, slufan13 said:

Pestello actually comes across as a little bit of a d.ick in his reply. 

He’s the Jesus Ortiz of presidents 

[GoBills73]

1 minute ago, slufan13 said:

Pestello actually comes across as a little bit of a d.ick in his reply. 

No doubt he does. A smart a.ss reply 

[slufan13]

 

[Pistol]

28 minutes ago, Bills_06 said:

Did the reasoning for appeal change in the past couple years?  Guess I just keep going back to the 2015 Post article and it said, "The man appealed, claiming the process was unfair, the penalty was too harsh and information provided didn’t match the disciplinary board’s conclusion."

Wonder if the documents the Post obtained contained the hearing officers name.  

I don't know whether it has changed or not recently, but SLU's guidance on why you can appeal seems extremely narrow to me: just new information that could have impacted the outcome, or that SLU mishandled the process. Dissatisfaction with the penalty is not grounds for an appeal. In your example above, he claimed the process was unfair and information provided didn't match the conclusion, so he may have had grounds to appeal. The "penalty was too harsh" part may not have been considered.

26 minutes ago, Cowboy said:

-is there any way to pressure the city police to close the file so it can become public before the appeal ruling is delivered? if the police report is so lacking in damages and tells the truth, that may then get pressure from someone to radically reduce the punishments or step in/override and reduce them

-I will say, however, whoever posted the video, they jumped into a different category of punishment from my pov

I doubt it. There is likely an incident report and nothing more, and it seems unlikely they'd release it between now and the appeal outcome.

22 minutes ago, brianstl said:

I want to know what was up with the delay in SLU getting the investigator's report and SLU getting that report to Rosenblum.  Did SLU decide to extend the investigation because they didn't like what Holland came back with?

I've had this question all along, and I don't know the answer. Why did SLU take a few weeks to pass it on to Rosenblum? Are they required to give him the entire report as-is, or can they, say, withhold the recommendation section? It seems like doctoring it in any way could set the school up for some legal action, but again, I don't know.

20 minutes ago, Quality Is Job 1 said:

I think what we have to hope is that the two women who did not cooperate decide to come forward with the "new information" that they didn't provide during the investigation, now that they see how unduly and unjustly damaging their friend's vindictiveness has become, and that that helps the appeal.

I think this is highly unlikely. I guess anything is possible, but a plaintiff - even one who has largely checked out of the process as others continue - having a change of heart is rare.

15 minutes ago, slufan13 said:

Does Pestello have any power over the hearing officer's punishment? I would assume no direct influence/power but he's still the President of the school so I would think he has some kind of power. I just have a hard time believing that Weathers (or any hearing officer) could do whatever they wanted and never have to answer to Pestello (or any superior). 

Probably not. He has taken himself out of the process from the beginning and I don't see him stepping in just to influence the hearing officer's decision. Furthermore, I'd find it extremely hard to believe that Pestello, no matter what you think of him, would have wanted this specific outcome. It would be like shooting his foot off. If a president is going to mess with the hearing officer's process, he's going to want something more favorable in the big picture. I really think that this is indeed a situation where a single individual has an incredible degree of power, and I think the press is starting to recognize this major flaw within the Title IX process. The process is constantly changing, the pendulum is always swinging, and right now schools are leaving themselves vulnerable to lawsuits by letting one individual decide really important, complicated cases. They can do all the due diligence they want but if the fate of students in tough situations comes down to a single individual - or, at best, 3 people in an appeal - that's something that needs to change.

[slusam]

The Duke LaCrosse case really starting changing after one of the players had a press conference and pointed out what was really going on. He was a very well spoken and confident young man. If the appeal goes bad I hope the players have a press conference and expose the whole process. That might make it a national issue.

[DeSmetBilliken]

8 minutes ago, slufan13 said:

Pestello actually comes across as a little bit of a d.ick in his reply. 

Reminds me of the time I emailed him to complain about Jim Crews being a terrible basketball coach. Part of the response included him cc’ing Chris May because he was the AD. In case I didn’t know.

[billikenfan05]

Re: Pestello recusing himself from title 9 process

It wouldn't surprise me in the least that Pestello hasn't seen any documentation besides the initial claim and the final ruling by weathers against the 4.  

[JohnnyJumpUp]

2 hours ago, slufan13 said:

 

 

All of this makes me think that the report was pretty good for the players and the 3rd party investigators recommendation was light. So I wonder if that helps with an appeal or does that fall under the grounds of "dissatisfaction with the punishment"

I think this lends to the theory that Weathers either went rogue with a harsh punishment (perceived biases could come into play) or that SLU purposely appointed Weathers as the hearing officer knowing that they would get a harsh punishment. 

I spoke with someone who works at SLU last night who pretty much said this happened. They stated the investigation saw nothing that warranted a harsh punishment but the hearing officer chose to go against the recommendations. I don't know it as fact, just heard it from an employee who is familiar with the situation.

[GoBills73]

3 minutes ago, JohnnyJumpUp said:

I spoke with someone who works at SLU last night who pretty much said this happened. They stated the investigation saw nothing that warranted a harsh punishment but the hearing officer chose to go against the recommendations. I don't know it as fact, just heard it from an employee who is familiar with the situation.

 

Reading this makes me incredibly angry!!!