slufan13 Posted January 4, 2018 Share Posted January 4, 2018 Both sides are meeting with the hearing officer before an initial decision has been made. It is my understanding that both sides haven't even meet with the hearing officer yet. I could be wrong on that part though. But if that is true, we still have a long way to go. Both sides meet with officer, officer takes an undisclosed time to make a decision, both parties have chance to review and appeal, one (or both) sides appeal, final decision is made. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Billiken Rich Posted January 4, 2018 Share Posted January 4, 2018 20 hours ago, Quality Is Job 1 said: Ah. Excuse my pop-culture ignorance, but what show/movie character is that? I've seen a number of memes involving him, but I don't know who it is. (I'm not a big TV watcher; probably only Old Guy is less hip than I.) Thicks, there was a time in the distant past when I watched college football so that I would have a common frame of reference with my co-workers on Monday morning. You need to watch Anchorman and Anchorman II for this reason...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeSmetBilliken Posted January 4, 2018 Share Posted January 4, 2018 1 hour 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. I suspect that this wouldn’t go well, but it would be fascinating to see how such a complaint would be handled. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Billiken Rich Posted January 4, 2018 Share Posted January 4, 2018 3 hours 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'm still not worried about Ford leaving without some sort of success on the floor. What program would hire a coach that got fired at the Big Ten level and then had 0 winning seasons in the A10? Going to the Valley? Ohio Valley? Not worried at all right now and not worried about finding a replacement if Travis wants to commit career suicide...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quality Is Job 1 Posted January 4, 2018 Share Posted January 4, 2018 24 minutes ago, Billiken Rich said: Thicks, there was a time in the distant past when I watched college football so that I would have a common frame of reference with my co-workers on Monday morning. You need to watch Anchorman and Anchorman II for this reason...... Anchorman! Thanks, Rich! As for watching it: it will probably be a while. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quality Is Job 1 Posted January 4, 2018 Share Posted January 4, 2018 14 minutes ago, Billiken Rich said: I'm still not worried about Ford leaving without some sort of success on the floor. What program would hire a coach that got fired at the Big Ten level and then had 0 winning seasons in the A10? Going to the Valley? Ohio Valley? Not worried at all right now and not worried about finding a replacement if Travis wants to commit career suicide...... Just a quibble, but he was in the Big 12, not Big Ten. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Billiken Rich Posted January 4, 2018 Share Posted January 4, 2018 Just now, Quality Is Job 1 said: Just a quibble, but he was in the Big 12, not Big Ten. Ten....Twelve whatever.....I probably have a Big Eight tee shirt somewhere...... Yes, Big Twelve. Sorry....... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kshoe Posted January 4, 2018 Share Posted January 4, 2018 10 minutes ago, Quality Is Job 1 said: Just a quibble, but he was in the Big 12, not Big Ten. He left a conference that has has 10 teams and is called the Big 12. Billiken Rich incorrectly said he game from the Big 10, which has 14 teams. Got it! cgeldmacher likes this Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kmbilliken Posted January 4, 2018 Share Posted January 4, 2018 1 hour 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. Why do you refer to the hearing officer as a woman. Do know who the hearing officer is? What is her background? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Billiken Rich Posted January 4, 2018 Share Posted January 4, 2018 18 minutes ago, kmbilliken said: Why do you refer to the hearing officer as a woman. Do know who the hearing officer is? What is her background? There's a better chance the Easter bunny is real than the Title IX hearing officer is a man..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JMM28 Posted January 4, 2018 Share Posted January 4, 2018 When you've lost @slu72 fan, ...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2010andBeyond Posted January 4, 2018 Share Posted January 4, 2018 Just now, JMM28 said: When you've lost @slu72 fan, ...... My thoughts exactly. He is not a MBM just griping on the internet Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Billiken Rich Posted January 4, 2018 Share Posted January 4, 2018 1 minute ago, JMM28 said: When you've lost @slu72 fan, ...... He better than Cronkite but I concur Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillIkenFan_Dan Posted January 4, 2018 Share Posted January 4, 2018 I’m just confused how this can drag out 100 days what else is their to investigate how cold it was that very day I mean what are we waiting on it’s been a semester and still nothing they try to act like nothing ever happened and all is good in Pestello land when the 3 men are being falsely portrayed as criminals and no goods but there has been zero evidence they did something as no charges have been pressed for 100 days just because one girl wants the investigation to keep going the fact of the matter is she has nothing on them and even if she did then make a decision so everyone can finally move on that’s just my 2 cents #freethe3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
juniorbill76 Posted January 4, 2018 Share Posted January 4, 2018 Someone give that man a period. DirtyRican and JohnnyJumpUp like this Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Billboy1 Posted January 4, 2018 Share Posted January 4, 2018 Hope that wasn't sexual harrasment Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Billiken Rich Posted January 4, 2018 Share Posted January 4, 2018 4 minutes ago, BillIkenFan_Dan said: I’m just confused how this can drag out 100 days what else is their to investigate how cold it was that very day #freethe3 Could be some serious shrinkage due to the cold leading to mistaken identity. Obviously this depends on other factors such as the position...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Billikenbooster Posted January 4, 2018 Share Posted January 4, 2018 1 hour ago, Billiken Rich said: Could be some serious shrinkage due to the cold leading to mistaken identity. Obviously this depends on other factors such as the position...... ahhh, the 'Friends' reference! mhg Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wendelprof Posted January 4, 2018 Share Posted January 4, 2018 2 hours ago, slufan13 said: Both sides are meeting with the hearing officer before an initial decision has been made. It is my understanding that both sides haven't even meet with the hearing officer yet. I could be wrong on that part though. But if that is true, we still have a long way to go. Both sides meet with officer, officer takes an undisclosed time to make a decision, both parties have chance to review and appeal, one (or both) sides appeal, final decision is made. My impression - but pure speculation - is that some of the people who post on the board have more inside information about the status of the matter than they are letting on but they are not in a position to publicly disclose it (keyser soze's quick response to my last post that yes, the players' attorney was in possession of the investigator's report is only one of several posts I'd point to). I'm fine with that, sometimes we have to keep information confidential. But based on a number of different posts my assumption is that what is frustrating some people is that it is probably one of the accusers (and/or her attorney) who is stringing out the process. A number of people have reported that one of the accusers is aggressively pursuing the matter. That makes me think that her attorney is doing likewise, asking for continuances to bring forth additional information and/or arguments. The school, in the interest of due process (and no doubt wanting to minimize the risk of any follow-up litigation) has decided to grant the attorney's requests. My guess is that's what's dragging the decision-making process out at this point - and because some people who post on the blog know it, it is contributing to their frustrations. If that's the case, is that fair? Tough call. From a legal perspective, requests for additional time are almost always granted the first time requested. After that, a judge typically becomes stinger about granting one. But if granting one means the players miss a few more games but it will increase significantly the likelihood that there will be no follow-up litigation, I'm in favor of that so long as the players are permitted to return to school and the team. If the likely outcome is the players are not permitted to return to school and the team, I stand by my earlier statement that the best thing to do would be to issue the decision in time for the players to transfer if they wish. If, however, the outcome is going to be a positive one for the players - the players are permitted to return to school and the team, if granting the accuser and her attorney a little more time in the interest of due process and closure, I'm OK with that even if it means the players miss another game or two. Pure speculation, but there are some posts that arguably support this view of the current situation. I'm sure many of you disagree with this post, but in ripping me, I'd be curious, do you disagree with my assessment of the situation or with my position that this is OK so long as the students are permitted to return to school and the team (and it doesn't extent too much longer into the new semester)? In addition, if this is why the matter is being strung out, I think some of the anger directed at the school has been unfair (again, I'm sure that will get some replies). It isn't really the school that is dragging it out, it is the lawyers (particularly, the lawyer for the accused). "The wheels of justice turn slowly" is an old, old saying - and this matter is but further evidence of that maxim. Interesting, with respect to situation 1, the school was ripped for not providing enough due process to the parties (lack of attorneys for the players). With respect to situation 2, the school is being ripped for providing too much due process to the parties (too much investigation; too much legal haggling by the attorneys for one of the parties). Can't win either way. Have at it. Just one view of the situation from afar ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moytoy12 Posted January 4, 2018 Share Posted January 4, 2018 12 minutes ago, Wendelprof said: My impression - but pure speculation - is that some of the people who post on the board have more inside information about the status of the matter than they are letting on but they are not in a position to publicly disclose it (keyser soze's quick response to my last post that yes, the players' attorney was in possession of the investigator's report is only one of several posts I'd point to). I'm fine with that, sometimes we have to keep information confidential. But based on a number of different posts my assumption is that what is frustrating some people is that it is probably one of the accusers (and/or her attorney) who is stringing out the process. A number of people have reported that one of the accusers is aggressively pursuing the matter. That makes me think that her attorney is doing likewise, asking for continuances to bring forth additional information and/or arguments. The school, in the interest of due process (and no doubt wanting to minimize the risk of any follow-up litigation) has decided to grant the attorney's requests. My guess is that's what's dragging the decision-making process out at this point - and because some people who post on the blog know it, it is contributing to their frustrations. If that's the case, is that fair? Tough call. From a legal perspective, requests for additional time are almost always granted the first time requested. After that, a judge typically becomes stinger about granting one. But if granting one means the players miss a few more games but it will increase significantly the likelihood that there will be no follow-up litigation, I'm in favor of that so long as the players are permitted to return to school and the team. If the likely outcome is the players are not permitted to return to school and the team, I stand by my earlier statement that the best thing to do would be to issue the decision in time for the players to transfer if they wish. If, however, the outcome is going to be a positive one for the players - the players are permitted to return to school and the team, if granting the accuser and her attorney a little more time in the interest of due process and closure, I'm OK with that even if it means the players miss another game or two. Pure speculation, but there are some posts that arguably support this view of the current situation. I'm sure many of you disagree with this post, but in ripping me, I'd be curious, do you disagree with my assessment of the situation or with my position that this is OK so long as the students are permitted to return to school and the team (and it doesn't extent too much longer into the new semester)? In addition, if this is why the matter is being strung out, I think some of the anger directed at the school has been unfair (again, I'm sure that will get some replies). It isn't really the school that is dragging it out, it is the lawyers (particularly, the lawyer for the accused). "The wheels of justice turn slowly" is an old, old saying - and this matter is but further evidence of that maxim. Interesting, with respect to situation 1, the school was ripped for not providing enough due process to the parties (lack of attorneys for the players). With respect to situation 2, the school is being ripped for providing too much due process to the parties (too much investigation; too much legal haggling by the attorneys for one of the parties). Can't win either way. Have at it. Just one view of the situation from afar ... My biggest issue is the interim suspension, which seems to be a fairly rare step. Further, it seems the players are able to otherwise enjoy most all other rights and privileges of a student-athlete. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slufanskip Posted January 4, 2018 Share Posted January 4, 2018 I wonder if a drunk person jumps off the Empire State Building and dies if they get to come back to life since they obviously were not able to actually consent to jumping. Girls and guys if you don' t want to do stupid when drunk, dont drink. You shouldn't get to take it back cause you were drunk. I need a time machine there are a couple of incidents I could have used the I was drunk so I'm not responsible defense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JMM28 Posted January 4, 2018 Share Posted January 4, 2018 15 minutes ago, Wendelprof said: Interesting, with respect to situation 1, the school was ripped for not providing enough due process to the parties (lack of attorneys for the players). With respect to situation 2, the school is being ripped for providing too much due process to the parties (too much investigation; too much legal haggling by the attorneys for one of the parties). Can't win either way. I think it is lack of due process in both scenarios. Kwamain, et al got royally screwed. Add in a component of big booster throwing his weight around. These guys are losing time they will never get back doing the thing that they came to SLU to do. That is not due process. It really is no different than what happened in S1 except it has some fancy name to it now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quality Is Job 1 Posted January 4, 2018 Share Posted January 4, 2018 Wendel, I suspect few, if any, posters would object to the length of due process (Yosemite Sam to Bugs Bunny: "Shut up, shuttin' up!") if not for the interim suspensions, which many or most deem unjustified. They certainly have robbed the accused of anonymity and presumption of innocence in the public eye. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slufanskip Posted January 4, 2018 Share Posted January 4, 2018 5 hours 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. Bingo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keyser soze Posted January 4, 2018 Share Posted January 4, 2018 Wendel, you’d make Mrs. Silence Dogood blush.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts