Fall 2017 allegations against unnamed players (aka Situation 2)

[kmbilliken]

I can imagine the report sitting in a pile on someone's desk who is reading the paper and thinking I probably should get to that at some point, but I'm too busy this month.

[DirtyRican]

2 minutes ago, kmbilliken said:

I can imagine the report sitting in a pile on someone's desk who is reading the paper and thinking I probably should get to that at some point, but I'm too busy this month.

Can we ask "The Dude" to step in and do something?  I think it is time.

[brianstl]

44 minutes ago, The Wiz said:

Thought this might be a good time to bring back this post from 76  pages ago....The study results indicate that this is now an average case from a time perspective.

I think the fact that there are videos of the incident makes this different from an average case.  It makes it much easier to establish what happened.  It removes much of the he said/she said aspect and makes it much easier to ascertain if the people involved were sober enough to give consent. This should have been done a month ago at a minimum.

[moytoy12]

38 minutes ago, The Wiz said:

Thought this might be a good time to bring back this post from 76  pages ago....The study results indicate that this is now an average case from a time perspective.

I know the information isn't likely available, but it would be interesting to know how many of those cases involved (1) student athletes and (2) interim suspensions and of those cases involving (1) and (2), what was the average time to resolve the case.  

[slu72]

Anyone else getting a little concerned about the effect Sit 2 is having on Travis Ford's future at SLU? Someone pointed out that his hands are pretty tied right now when he looks toward next season. Not saying he's giving up on this year, but am sure he's concerned what his roster may look like going into next year. He really can't recruit anyone since he doesn't know what openings he'll have available to him. Plus, he probably doesn't want to confuse the Sit three by bringing in recruits for their scholarships.  He might very well be worried he's going to have a short roster again next season.

What scares me a little if he gets a call at the end of the year from what he perceives is a more committed admin to their hoops team, he may jump at the opportunity. And, just like that, our 3 incoming FR could ask to be released from their commitments. The ramifications of Sit 2 go well beyond just this season.

[brianstl]

1 hour ago, Westy03 said:

This will not be finalized before the end of the basketball season 

I think the intentional foot dragging is being done with the hope the players will transfer.  That way SLU can avoid having a result becoming public that will piss people off either way.  The only problem with SLU's thought process is that the players involved have used a redshirt year.  The only chance they could get immediate eligibility at another school is if the NCAA grants them a waiver and the only way that happens is if SLU expels the players. If the players want to play at the D1 level next season, they can't go to another school until SLU does something.

[brianstl]

4 minutes ago, slu72 said:

Anyone else getting a little concerned about the effect Sit 2 is having on Travis Ford's future at SLU? Someone pointed out that his hands are pretty tied right now when he looks toward next season. Not saying he's giving up on this year, but am sure he's concerned what his roster may look like going into next year. He really can't recruit anyone since he doesn't know what openings he'll have available to him. Plus, he probably doesn't want to confuse the Sit three by bringing in recruits for their scholarships.  He might very well be worried he's going to have a short roster again next season.

What scares me a little if he gets a call at the end of the year from what he perceives is a more committed admin to their hoops team, he may jump at the opportunity. And, just like that, our 3 incoming FR could ask to be released from their commitments. The ramifications of Sit 2 go well beyond just this season.

Even if S2 wasn't going on, Ford should be recruiting like he has multiple rosters spots open for next season.  You would have the normal transfer situations and you would have the possibility of three guys having the graduate transfer option available to them.

 

[kshoe]

9 minutes ago, slu72 said:

Anyone else getting a little concerned about the effect Sit 2 is having on Travis Ford's future at SLU? Someone pointed out that his hands are pretty tied right now when he looks toward next season. Not saying he's giving up on this year, but am sure he's concerned what his roster may look like going into next year. He really can't recruit anyone since he doesn't know what openings he'll have available to him. Plus, he probably doesn't want to confuse the Sit three by bringing in recruits for their scholarships.  He might very well be worried he's going to have a short roster again next season.

What scares me a little if he gets a call at the end of the year from what he perceives is a more committed admin to their hoops team, he may jump at the opportunity. And, just like that, our 3 incoming FR could ask to be released from their commitments. The ramifications of Sit 2 go well beyond just this season.

I can't imagine Ford getting a call at the end of this season based on his two years here to-date. Down the road if he turns this around this season and the screw job from Pestello will be a factor, but that's at least a year away.

[Billikenbooster]

18 minutes ago, slu72 said:

Anyone else getting a little concerned about the effect Sit 2 is having on Travis Ford's future at SLU? Someone pointed out that his hands are pretty tied right now when he looks toward next season. Not saying he's giving up on this year, but am sure he's concerned what his roster may look like going into next year. He really can't recruit anyone since he doesn't know what openings he'll have available to him. Plus, he probably doesn't want to confuse the Sit three by bringing in recruits for their scholarships.  He might very well be worried he's going to have a short roster again next season.

What scares me a little if he gets a call at the end of the year from what he perceives is a more committed admin to their hoops team, he may jump at the opportunity. And, just like that, our 3 incoming FR could ask to be released from their commitments. The ramifications of Sit 2 go well beyond just this season.

This 

 

mhg

[slufan13]

15 minutes ago, kshoe said:

I can't imagine Ford getting a call at the end of this season based on his two years here to-date. Down the road if he turns this around this season and the screw job from Pestello will be a factor, but that's at least a year away.

I agree with this. I could see a smaller school maybe giving Ford a call but I doubt he is listening to anything below an A10 level school. But yes, Ford was always going to be hard to keep if he had a lot of success down the line and this is only making it harder. 

[Clock_Tower]

24 minutes ago, brianstl said:

I think the fact that there are videos of the incident makes this different from an average case.  It makes it much easier to establish what happened.  It removes much of the he said/she said aspect and makes it much easier to ascertain if the people involved were sober enough to give consent. This should have been done a month ago at a minimum.

Brian.  But, again, you are looking at this from a common sense standpoint or even from a judicial proceeding involving consent.  If the fantasyland Title IX rules say that ANY drinking by the girls renders them unable to provide consent, then the video will help from a common sense standpoint and will help Rosenblum from a criminal/judiciary standpoint, but not with regard to Title IX.  And because of the past actions by men against women since the beginning of time, colleges have felt the need to make campuses more safe for women (over 51% of the students) arising with the push to eliminate "date rape" and "No means No" from the 1980's and 1990's to our current Title IX climate.  I suggest that colleges/SLU have created an unworkable, unconstitutional and anti-male system (Title IX) in which the pendulum has swung too far in the opposite direction but which President Fred is now presiding over.  I suspect that the liberal elites/Kratky have no concern the pendulum has swung so far in the opposite direction in order to continue to "right" the "wrongs" which have been prevalent since the beginning of time.

[Bobby Metzinger]

1 minute ago, slufan13 said:

I agree with this. I could see a smaller school maybe giving Ford a call but I doubt he is listening to anything below an A10 level school. But yes, Ford was always going to be hard to keep if he had a lot of success down the line and this is only making it harder. 

guarantee you that school will not be under the auspices of the Catholic Church either. Good riddance. 

[JMM28]

Happy 100 Days everyone. 

 

 

[brianstl]

21 minutes ago, Clock_Tower said:

Brian.  But, again, you are looking at this from a common sense standpoint or even from a judicial proceeding involving consent.  If the fantasyland Title IX rules say that ANY drinking by the girls renders them unable to provide consent, then the video will help from a common sense standpoint and will help Rosenblum from a criminal/judiciary standpoint, but not with regard to Title IX.  And because of the past actions by men against women since the beginning of time, colleges have felt the need to make campuses more safe for women (over 51% of the students) arising with the push to eliminate "date rape" and "No means No" from the 1980's and 1990's to our current Title IX climate.  I suggest that colleges/SLU have created an unworkable, unconstitutional and anti-male system (Title IX) in which the pendulum has swung too far in the opposite direction but which President Fred is now presiding over.  I suspect that the liberal elites/Kratky have no concern the pendulum has swung so far in the opposite direction in order to continue to "right" the "wrongs" which have been prevalent since the beginning of time.

That is not what the SLU Title IX policy or code of conduct actually says.  They both have the exact same language and this is what they say:

Quote

 

An individual who is incapacitated cannot communicate Effective Consent to sexual activity. Incapacitation is the inability, temporarily or permanently, to give consent or communicate unwillingness, because an individual is mentally and/ or physically helpless, unconscious, asleep or unaware that the sexual activity is occurring.

Evaluating incapacitation requires an assessment of how the consumption of alcohol and/or drugs affects an individual's: decision-making ability; awareness of consequences; ability to make informed judgments; capacity to appreciate the nature and the quality of the act; or level of consciousness.

A person is considered incapacitated, or unable to give consent, if they cannot understand the when, where, why, how or who of the sexual encounter. Where alcohol or other drugs are involved, incapacitation may result from rapid or excessive consumption (voluntarily or involuntarily).  The impact of alcohol and other drugs varies from person to person. Waming signs that a person may be so impaired by alcohol and/or drugs that they no longer have the capacity to give Effective Consent may include, but is not limited to:

•     Difficulty walking, stumbling or falling down;

•     Being unable to stand or walk without assistance;

•     Slurred speech or an inability to communicate clearly;

•     Inability to focus or confusion about what is happening;

•     Urinating, defecating or vomiting; or

•     Combativeness, emotional volatility or other marked change in demeanor.

The test of whether an individual should know about another's incapacitation is whether a reasonable, sober person in the same position would know or should have been aware of the Reporting Party's incapacitation. An Accused Party cannot rebut a charge of Prohibited Conduct merely by asserting that they were drunk or otherwise impaired and, as a result did not know that the other person was incapacitated. Alcohol, drugs or other intoxicants do not negate or diminish the responsibility of an individual to obtain Effective Consent.

 

 

[Pistol]

1 hour ago, slu72 said:

Anyone else getting a little concerned about the effect Sit 2 is having on Travis Ford's future at SLU? Someone pointed out that his hands are pretty tied right now when he looks toward next season. Not saying he's giving up on this year, but am sure he's concerned what his roster may look like going into next year. He really can't recruit anyone since he doesn't know what openings he'll have available to him. Plus, he probably doesn't want to confuse the Sit three by bringing in recruits for their scholarships.  He might very well be worried he's going to have a short roster again next season.

What scares me a little if he gets a call at the end of the year from what he perceives is a more committed admin to their hoops team, he may jump at the opportunity. And, just like that, our 3 incoming FR could ask to be released from their commitments. The ramifications of Sit 2 go well beyond just this season.

Yes. He'll be gone as soon as he gets a good offer somewhere else. Whether that's this spring, who knows.

I can barely comprehend the frustration he must be feeling. His job has been borderline impossible for over three months now.

[moytoy12]

10 minutes ago, brianstl said:

The test of whether an individual should know about another's incapacitation is whether a reasonable, sober person in the same position would know or should have been aware of the Reporting Party's incapacitation. An Accused Party cannot rebut a charge of Prohibited Conduct merely by asserting that they were drunk or otherwise impaired and, as a result did not know that the other person was incapacitated. Alcohol, drugs or other intoxicants do not negate or diminish the responsibility of an individual to obtain Effective Consent.

This is just nutso. On the one hand:

"test whether an individual should know about another's incapacitation is whether a reasonable, sober person in the same position would know or should have been aware of the Reporting Party's incapacitation."

On the other hand:

"An Accused Party cannot rebut a charge of Prohibited Conduct merely by asserting that they were drunk or otherwise impaired and, as a result did not know that the other person was incapacitated. Alcohol, drugs or other intoxicants do not negate or diminish the responsibility of an individual to obtain Effective Consent."

[moytoy12]

2 minutes ago, moytoy12 said:

This is just nutso. On the one hand:

"test whether an individual should know about another's incapacitation is whether a reasonable, sober person in the same position would know or should have been aware of the Reporting Party's incapacitation."

On the other hand:

"An Accused Party cannot rebut a charge of Prohibited Conduct merely by asserting that they were drunk or otherwise impaired and, as a result did not know that the other person was incapacitated. Alcohol, drugs or other intoxicants do not negate or diminish the responsibility of an individual to obtain Effective Consent."

If I were the players and everyone was drinking and this really was a case of regret by one or more of the accusers, I would have submitted a counter sexual assault complaint against the accusers.

[brianstl]

1 minute ago, moytoy12 said:

If I were the players and everyone was drinking and this really was a case of regret by one or more of the accusers, I would have submitted a counter sexual assault complaint against the accusers.

The SLU policy is just asking for everyone who is accused of sexual assault to make a counter claim of sexual assault.  

That said, I think the videos in this case should be able to establish if the girls has the capicity to provide consent according to SLU's own established policies.  In this case just claiming you didn't have capacity to consent shouldn't be enough.

 

[moytoy12]

7 minutes ago, brianstl said:

The SLU policy is just asking for everyone who is accused of sexual assault to make a counter claim of sexual assault.  

That said, I think the videos in this case should be able to establish if the girls has the capicity to provide consent according to SLU's own established policies.  In this case just claiming you didn't have capacity to consent shouldn't be enough.

 

I suspect you're right on all fronts, which would lead me to believe that the main issue is the distribution of any videos via social media.  If that is the case, then this is really focused on a narrow issue and should have been completed already.  

[GoBills73]

2 minutes ago, moytoy12 said:

I suspect you're right on all fronts, which would lead me to believe that the main issue is the distribution of any videos via social media.  If that is the case, then this is really focused on a narrow issue and should have been completed already.  

Completely agree here. In which case there was likely only one player who would be in line for punishment, ie the exploitation. In which case I don't understand WTF this is taking so long and I'm growing increasingly pissed off at each passing day.

[slu72 fan]

22 minutes ago, moytoy12 said:

I suspect you're right on all fronts, which would lead me to believe that the main issue is the distribution of any videos via social media.  If that is the case, then this is really focused on a narrow issue and should have been completed already.  

Let me start by saying that I can't believe the hearing officer didn't make her determination before she left for Christmas break. In my opinion, a total lack of respect for all of our students involved. Further,, I don't understand how our President allowed this to happen. I don't agree with all of the criticisms of him on the Board, but he should have put his foot down and insisted on an initial decision before leaving for Christmas.

I have no inside information, but it's not this simple. There are numerous exhibits to the report, I've heard close to 400. If one interview of someone at the party says that one of the girl's was drunk and another says she was sober, and knew what she was doing, who do you believe? I don't know how many people were at this party, but they each could have interpreted what they saw differently.

A video may show the alleged victims, and one person may think they are drunk, another person may not. There is a ton of gray in this. Add, aggressive lawyers and a hearing officer who may have her own biases, and this becomes a mess.

I'm really hopeful that this is over in the next couple of days. Assuming the initial decision has been communicated, it will take about a week to get through the appeal process, as I understand it. Anyone know who is on the Appeal Panel? In the end, seems like that group is the one that will decide this.

Really hard being a Billiken Fan.

[dlarry]

7 minutes ago, slu72 fan said:

Let me start by saying that I can't believe the hearing officer didn't make her determination before she left for Christmas break. In my opinion, a total lack of respect for all of our students involved. Further,, I don't understand how our President allowed this to happen. I don't agree with all of the criticisms of him on the Board, but he should have put his foot down and insisted on an initial decision before leaving for Christmas.

I have no inside information, but it's not this simple. There are numerous exhibits to the report, I've heard close to 400. If one interview of someone at the party says that one of the girl's was drunk and another says she was sober, and knew what she was doing, who do you believe? I don't know how many people were at this party, but they each could have interpreted what they saw differently.

A video may show the alleged victims, and one person may think they are drunk, another person may not. There is a ton of gray in this. Add, aggressive lawyers and a hearing officer who may have her own biases, and this becomes a mess.

I'm really hopeful that this is over in the next couple of days. Assuming the initial decision has been communicated, it will take about a week to get through the appeal process, as I understand it. Anyone know who is on the Appeal Panel? In the end, seems like that group is the one that will decide this.

Really hard being a Billiken Fan.

Seeing how this has played out so far and reading Kratky's BS I'm guessing it's the carrot top lady from Mi$$ery

 

[STL Hoops Insider]

11 hours ago, JohnnyJumpUp said:

I'm not sure, I wasn't able to watch the game, maybe someone else can answer that. Looking at the box score, he had the highest usage percentage of any player from either team, by a large margin. His player efficiency was not very good.

Luckiest walk-in in program history. Free the 3

[STL Hoops Insider]

2 hours ago, brianstl said:

Even if S2 wasn't going on, Ford should be recruiting like he has multiple rosters spots open for next season.  You would have the normal transfer situations and you would have the possibility of three guys having the graduate transfer option available to them.

 

Exactly

[Littlebill]

9 minutes ago, STL Hoops Insider said:

Exactly

But recruiting to replace the ninth guy in the rotation is a lot different than recruiting to replace a guy like Henriquez, who many thought would be the team's leading scorer this season.