Fall 2017 allegations against unnamed players (aka Situation 2)

[SouthSide_Billiken]

54 minutes ago, kappy96 said:

Saw this earlier.  Not the news I was looking for.

If this indeed turns out to be true, it is an absolute disgrace. Even the biggest administration apologists cannot reasonably defend this one. From Day 1, the University has disregarded their own guidelines. In doing so, they hid behind the third party investigator and used the "complexity" of the matter as an excuse. The school has now been in possession of the final report for a week. Yet, they continue to drag their feet and will now use Christmas Break as an excuse for further delays.

Meanwhile, the players continue to be allowed to practice and travel with the team. If the final report indicates that the players will be severely punished, it is baffling that they were allowed to travel to Portland this past weekend. If the final report indicates that the players have already been sufficiently punished, the fact that the players were not in uniform tonight is inexplicable. If the administration has yet to consider the final report, they continue to violate the rights of the young men who have already been denied due process by a system predicated on a presumption of guilt.

#freethe3 #FireFred

[Billiken Rich]

4 minutes ago, Wendelprof said:

You can do as you wish, but the university has to bend over backwards to make it appear they are not being influenced by donors or public pressure.  Chanting "free the three" at a game will probably only put more pressure on the school to punish the players to make it clear they were not subject to outside influences. 

Your call, but I'd advise against it if you really care about the players.  You'll notice that their attorneys have been conspicuously silent throughout the process.  They too realize that while the process is on-going, best to let it run its course without any appearance of outside influence or pressure.  Once it is final, that's when voices can be expressed (and possibly litigation), but I'm not sure you'd be helping the cause to do it now.

No offence who ever you are. It time to end this.  If a few rowdy drunken fans chanting something embarrassing at a basketball game cant solve this then I don't know what can.... 

[keyser soze]

12 minutes ago, Quality Is Job 1 said:

Wha?!

Yeah, the moral authority has spoken!

 

[Wendelprof]

On 12/14/2017 at 1:48 PM, Pistol said:

 

Based on Stu's earlier post, I assume what happened was that the investigator filed a preliminary report last week.  The parties then had 5 day comment period to respond to that preliminary report.  Both sides probably did.  They investigator then had to review those comments and create a final report that now includes a written recommendation, detailing whether there is or is not sufficient information alleged to support a finding that Prohibited Conduct occurred.  This finalized report, including the written recommendation, was just given to the Hearing Officer today it sounds like.  I assume that is what has been reported - that the final report, with recommendation, is now in the Hearing Officer's hands. 

I'm not surprised if the Hearing Officer decides to take the matter under advisement until school re-opens after the first of the year.  It may be that the Hearing Officer has decided that (a) he or she doesn't want to give the impression of a rushed decision, and/or (b) in light of Christmas, the Hearing Officer has decided it is best to wait until after the holidays to issue his or her decision.  I would, however, hope and expect a rather quick decision after school re-opens after the first of the year.

[Old guy]

Just to be obvious again, there has not been a single indication so far that there is any sense of urgency in the way this case has been handled up to date. I think it would be an illusion to assume that there will be any sense of urgency in the way this case is likely to be handled in the future. I expect this matter to continue being handled the way it has been handled up to this day, very slowly. I am not happy about this, but this is what I see going forward.

[TheA_Bomb]

Blah blah blah red tape, blah blah self inflicted problem.  Blah blah blah self important TIX office can't get it done.  Blah blah excuse excuse.

On 12/16/2017 at 12:20 AM, Wendelprof said:

A number of universities recently were sent letters from the federal government that basically put them on notice that the federal government did not think they were in compliance with Title IX, and if they didn't change their Title IX procedures the government might take the school's punishment to the next level.  Those letters have put the fear of the federal government in all universities.  Whether the school received a letter or not, by making an example of those schools the federal government sent a message to all universities it is getting serious.  Moreover, some private groups have used the fact that a school was sent a Title IX compliance letter to bash the school on social media, thereby making it harder for that school to recruit students.  The notion that the federal government is enforcing Title IX is not silly to those in the business of running universities. 

[Billboy1]

Is the hearing officer going to pay for any money lost by the university. There is no reason to wait until after the first of the year! That happens then 'I m done with the school.'

[slufan13]

We are on day 86 of the 60 day investigation. I don't think there's anyone in the world who thinks SLU is being pressured or rushed. I'm sorry, but SLU is being cowardly.

@Wendelprof I appreciate all your insight on this case but there are no more excuses. It's time to make a decision. I understand the significance in getting this case right but more time isn't going to help that. The report is final. There's nothing else to see. Make a confident decision and deal with the backlash (which you will still get even if you extend this another month). 

[cheeseman]

It is my understanding that the real problem here is that one of the women have decided to push this process to the max.  Let me caution you that my source is not 100% certain but has a high degree of confidence in this info.

[3star_recruit]

7 hours ago, Wendelprof said:

You can do as you wish, but the university has to bend over backwards to make it appear they are not being influenced by donors or public pressure.  Chanting "free the three" at a game will probably only put more pressure on the school to punish the players to make it clear they were not subject to outside influences. 

Your call, but I'd advise against it if you really care about the players.  You'll notice that their attorneys have been conspicuously silent throughout the process.  They too realize that while the process is on-going, best to let it run its course without any appearance of outside influence or pressure.  Once it is final, that's when voices can be expressed (and possibly litigation), but I'm not sure you'd be helping the cause to do it now.

Sounds like the argument Anna Kratky put forward to Fred to justify her team taking as long as they want.  

[SLU_Lax]

7 hours ago, Wendelprof said:

I'm not surprised if the Hearing Officer decides to take the matter under advisement until school re-opens after the first of the year.  It may be that the Hearing Officer has decided that (a) he or she doesn't want to give the impression of a rushed decision, and/or (b) in light of Christmas, the Hearing Officer has decided it is best to wait until after the holidays to issue his or her decision.  I would, however, hope and expect a rather quick decision after school re-opens after the first of the year.

You forgot (c) the Hearing Officer just does not care how quickly it is resolved and nobody else in the administration seems to care either. 

Do not act like SLU has a cohesive and overarching strategy. The school has always been weak administratively and this is another example of it. 

[LindellWest]

8 hours ago, Wendelprof said:

You can do as you wish, but the university has to bend over backwards to make it appear they are not being influenced by donors or public pressure.  Chanting "free the three" at a game will probably only put more pressure on the school to punish the players to make it clear they were not subject to outside influences. 

 

Wendel, I guess we are all in luck because bending over seems to be Freds one true talent............

[brianstl]

8 hours ago, Wendelprof said:

Based on Stu's earlier post, I assume what happened was that the investigator filed a preliminary report last week.  The parties then had 5 day comment period to respond to that preliminary report.  Both sides probably did.  They investigator then had to review those comments and create a final report that now includes a written recommendation, detailing whether there is or is not sufficient information alleged to support a finding that Prohibited Conduct occurred.  This finalized report, including the written recommendation, was just given to the Hearing Officer today it sounds like.  I assume that is what has been reported - that the final report, with recommendation, is now in the Hearing Officer's hands. 

I'm not surprised if the Hearing Officer decides to take the matter under advisement until school re-opens after the first of the year.  It may be that the Hearing Officer has decided that (a) he or she doesn't want to give the impression of a rushed decision, and/or (b) in light of Christmas, the Hearing Officer has decided it is best to wait until after the holidays to issue his or her decision.  I would, however, hope and expect a rather quick decision after school re-opens after the first of the year.

I think it is becoming pretty clear that there is no justice for young black males at SLU.  The longer this process drags on just makes it clear that SLU could care less how long these unsubstantiated charges hang over these young men.  SLU is not worried about the permanent damage they are doing to these young men’s earning potential and ability to get a job outside basketball.

This isn’t about basketball.  It is about doing what is right and not being part of perpetuating the worst possible racist myth about young black males

[kmbilliken]

I suspect they are intentionally dragging their feet. Clearly completing it in a timely manner is not a priority. This may be someone's way of showing the university community that sports are just not that important.

[slufan13]

6 minutes ago, kmbilliken said:

I suspect they are intentionally dragging their feet. Clearly completing it in a timely manner is not a priority. This may be someone's way of showing the university community that sports are just not that important.

I agree with that suspicion. Although, they didn't need to go out of their way to show us that athletics aren't that important. They've been doing that for years. 

[JMM28]

11 minutes ago, brianstl said:

I think it is becoming pretty clear that there is no justice for young black males at SLU.  The longer this process drags on just makes it clear that SLU could care less how long these unsubstantiated charges hang over these young men.  SLU is not worried about the permanent damage they are doing to these young men’s earning potential and ability to get a job outside basketball.

This isn’t about basketball.  It is about doing what is right and not being part of perpetuating the worst possible racist myth about young black males

SLU proved this out by hiring someone with only experience in the St Louis prosecutors office. The majority of people that office and Anna Kratky prosecuted were young black guys. 

[BillsBeliever]

I was looking back through SLUs experience with cases of sexual assault. This seems like the norm for SLU to railroad the accused.

Heres an example:

https://www.google.com/amp/www.stltoday.com/news/local/education/slu-case-highlights-the-gray-areas-of-campus-sex-assault/article_160c1a40-03c7-5db7-bb9d-ab23b1ca858e.amp.html

[slufan13]

I don't think we've talked enough about how absurd it is that the players are only suspended from gameday activities. I don't understand that decision even if the rumors of a cheerleader being involved are true. However, only being suspended from gameday activities tells me that there is not overwhelming evidence against the players. The problem with this is that I think there is a "guilty until proven innocent" mentality going on here. I think that Pestello/Kratky have the mindset that the players are guilty and the investigation has to prove them innocent. I agree with Brian that the administration is giving into a myth/false stereotype about young black males. Race is playing an issue in this situation.

The delay of this process proves to me that SLU's priority level in all parties' interests goes like this.

1. Themselves

2. The women

3. The athletes

[majerus mojo]

9 hours ago, Wendelprof said:

You can do as you wish, but the university has to bend over backwards to make it appear they are not being influenced by donors or public pressure.  Chanting "free the three" at a game will probably only put more pressure on the school to punish the players to make it clear they were not subject to outside influences. 

Your call, but I'd advise against it if you really care about the players.  You'll notice that their attorneys have been conspicuously silent throughout the process.  They too realize that while the process is on-going, best to let it run its course without any appearance of outside influence or pressure.  Once it is final, that's when voices can be expressed (and possibly litigation), but I'm not sure you'd be helping the cause to do it now.

This guy’s entire spiel is let the fair and defensibly thorough process play out for as long as it takes... and now a chant by 3 drunk guys at a basketball game is going to sway the school into handing down a stiffer punishment... got it 

#freethe3 

[Billiken Rich]

1 minute ago, majerus mojo said:

This guy’s entire spiel is let the fair and defensibly thorough process play out for as long as it takes... and now a chant by 3 drunk guys at a basketball game is going to sway the school into handing down a stiffer punishment... got it 

#freethe3 

Do we have a fourth?

[slufan13]

3 minutes ago, majerus mojo said:

This guy’s entire spiel is let the fair and defensibly thorough process play out for as long as it takes... and now a chant by 3 drunk guys at a basketball game is going to sway the school into handing down a stiffer punishment... got it 

#freethe3 

I agree with you but the school doesn't care about athletics and they will use any opportunity than can find to prove that point. If you want to pressure the school to make a decision, you have to attack them on points that they actually care about. 

[NextYearBill]

#freethe3

[SLU_Nick]

On ‎12‎/‎8‎/‎2017 at 3:51 PM, slufan13 said:

As Pistol said, this investigation/situation is 100% in SLU's court as of Wednesday. Any delay in the process at that point is 100% on SLU. A couple of thoughts on that point:

- If the ruling is in favor of the players and the women appeal, the players should be allowed to play during the appeal process. Not doing so would be ridiculous in my opinion.

- If SLU decides to pause the process during Christmas break, I think all hell would break loose and rightfully so.

 

Just going back to an earlier point above.  Does anyone really expect for "all hell to break loose"?.  It seems like the administration genuinely doesnt care that the arena is <10% full. 

This could keep dragging on and Pestello will just keep tweeting about Christmas Lights. 

[Bills_06]

9 hours ago, Wendelprof said:

Based on Stu's earlier post, I assume what happened was that the investigator filed a preliminary report last week.  The parties then had 5 day comment period to respond to that preliminary report.  Both sides probably did.  They investigator then had to review those comments and create a final report that now includes a written recommendation, detailing whether there is or is not sufficient information alleged to support a finding that Prohibited Conduct occurred.  This finalized report, including the written recommendation, was just given to the Hearing Officer today it sounds like.  I assume that is what has been reported - that the final report, with recommendation, is now in the Hearing Officer's hands. 

I'm not surprised if the Hearing Officer decides to take the matter under advisement until school re-opens after the first of the year.  It may be that the Hearing Officer has decided that (a) he or she doesn't want to give the impression of a rushed decision, and/or (b) in light of Christmas, the Hearing Officer has decided it is best to wait until after the holidays to issue his or her decision.  I would, however, hope and expect a rather quick decision after school re-opens after the first of the year.

No, that is unacceptable and embarrassing.  Waiting until after the holiday's so they don't have to work?  I'm sorry but the kids are missing games so they owe it to the kids to make a decision.  That is completely ridiculous that the school will just sit there punishing kids so they can sit around during break.  I haven't been outspoken on much of this but this would anger me to an extreme extent that they will just take their time while they are punishing students.  If the students deserve to be punished, then make that decision but if not, then decide that.  THEY HAVE THE INFORMATION NOW!!!  Ridiculous to even try and defend sitting on that while kids are being punished.  

[Billboy1]

7 minutes ago, slufan13 said:

I agree with you but the school doesn't care about athletics and they will use any opportunity than can find to prove that point. If you want to pressure the school to make a decision, you have to attack them on points that they actually care about. 

How about money