Jump to content

Fall 2017 allegations against unnamed players (aka Situation 2)


DoctorB
 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 9k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

5 minutes ago, majerus mojo said:

Yea I had to see it ha. Tweeted at Stu, Ashley Jost, and Ortiz asking what was up with he column. Holding my breath on a rebuttal! The comparisons to those schools are insane 

You'll get blocked by Ortiz before you get a rebuttal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, DeSmetBilliken said:

In some fairness to Ortiz, which I hate giving, the news yesterday was that Goodwin wasn’t found to have violated the sexual assault policy. Who knows if the school policy Goodwin admitted to violating was the Title IX policy or some other generic policy?

I guess what I’m saying is we can’t be sure that Soft Hands Ortiz’s column contains falsities and is libelous.

But nevertheless, I’m pretty sure I wrote better commentaries in college for the University News.

 

It actually contains a falsities and is libelous.  He claims Goodwin acknowledged violating SLU’s Title IX policy.  Goodwin did no such thing and it is clear he read Goodwin’s statement.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, majerus mojo said:

Are these two different things?

I don’t know. In all of the time I’ve spent theorizing about S2, I haven’t read the SLU Title IX policy. Therefore, I don’t know whether it’s possible to violate the Title IX policy without being found to have committed sexual assault. My guess is that there are non-sexual assault offenses in there. With said, we don’t know what policy specifically Goodwin says he violated.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh the irony of ending the article with "accountability matters in life" yet not taking any accountability to do any real research or find out any real facts.  Just assume these kids are guilty instead of taking his own advice and realizing "a quick Google search" will also turn up hundreds of cases of kids winning against schools for ignoring evidence showing they didn't commit assault or even his own papers article in 2015 showing SLU ignored evidence of a kid who was suspended by SLUs Title IX and was overturned later for ignoring evidence.  

But then again that kid wasn't supposed to be "leading the basketball team in scoring" so him being falsely kicked out of school doesn't matter.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

My email to ortiz:

 

I seem to remember you wrote a Goodwin family as the all american family column at the beginning of the season.   Since the situation had already happened, it would seem a good newpaper writer would have already checked out the subjects fit the intended description before that writer wrote such a glowing piece.   Obviously you dont fit the description of good newspaper writer.   There is a HUGE difference between violating Title IX and breaking university rules.   And If all the school was interested was in keeping the star player in school, why was Henriquez who actually was the best player on the team, the first to be shown the door?  Your attack on Coach Ford was beyond defenseless.   My gosh, to insinuate he is just bringing bad character players to the program is so wrong.   But I am sure you checked on the backgrounds of all 4 players in question and found easy proof that they were lacking in character that Coach Ford should have also found right?

 

And how about questioning the character of the girls that filed a false police report and actually initiated the entire party?   Because the players couldn’t read the mind of the girl who had remorse after the even was over, that was a basis for filing charges?  The police obviously didn’t agree.

 

Thanks again for reminding me why I dont subscribe to the Post Dispatch.  I hope Saint Louis University, Coach Ford the Goodwins, and the other players sue the hell out of you for this horrible column.   Well unless you would do the right thing and publically and in print apologize for your horrible and unfair work.   I can rest pretty easily that wont happen.

 

Roy Mueller, Belleville, IL

 

Ortiz responds within seconds:

 

Roy,

 

Thank you for your thoughts. I’ll gladly forward your email for consideration in our letters to the editor section.

 

Have a good day,

JJO

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just read this piece of ßhit. The fact that someone at the PD clearly failed the vetting process of making sure JJdO is capable of crafting a story exceeding that of a fifth grader should be investigated. 

 

I let my wife read the article without my opinion nor revealing the “author”....

 

Quoting her - “who in the hell is this lady...she must really hate men”....pretty much sums it up.  Jesus should now be referred to as “Susie”...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I haven't read the article, but if Ortiz wants to talk about accountability - I suggest he start with Cardinal Law. Ortiz has forfeited all right to accuse others of "looking the other way" when he wrote a glowing remembrance/eulogy of a man who admitted to covering up child rape.

"Except for being a pedophile, he was a great guy..." 

He's a self-righteous, uniformed moron who hides behind the cloak of being a man of God. He's the absolute worst. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Bills_06 said:

Oh the irony of ending the article with "accountability matters in life" yet not taking any accountability to do any real research or find out any real facts.  Just assume these kids are guilty instead of taking his own advice and realizing "a quick Google search" will also turn up hundreds of cases of kids winning against schools for ignoring evidence showing they didn't commit assault or even his own papers article in 2015 showing SLU ignored evidence of a kid who was suspended by SLUs Title IX and was overturned later for ignoring evidence.  

But then again that kid wasn't supposed to be "leading the basketball team in scoring" so him being falsely kicked out of school doesn't matter.  

This. Well said. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, billikenfan05 said:

I forgot the main pillar of journalism “make assumptions based on rumor and innuendo.“

Here here. According to Jezebel, journalism’s number one goal is to “expose the hypocrisy of the elite.” Nevermind that journalism is the fourth estate. Ortiz’s columns should hang in the stalls at Chaifetz in lieu of single ply. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, billiken_roy said:

 

My email to ortiz:

 

I seem to remember you wrote a Goodwin family as the all american family column at the beginning of the season.   Since the situation had already happened, it would seem a good newpaper writer would have already checked out the subjects fit the intended description before that writer wrote such a glowing piece.   Obviously you dont fit the description of good newspaper writer.   There is a HUGE difference between violating Title IX and breaking university rules.   And If all the school was interested was in keeping the star player in school, why was Henriquez who actually was the best player on the team, the first to be shown the door?  Your attack on Coach Ford was beyond defenseless.   My gosh, to insinuate he is just bringing bad character players to the program is so wrong.   But I am sure you checked on the backgrounds of all 4 players in question and found easy proof that they were lacking in character that Coach Ford should have also found right?

 

And how about questioning the character of the girls that filed a false police report and actually initiated the entire party?   Because the players couldn’t read the mind of the girl who had remorse after the even was over, that was a basis for filing charges?  The police obviously didn’t agree.

 

Thanks again for reminding me why I dont subscribe to the Post Dispatch.  I hope Saint Louis University, Coach Ford the Goodwins, and the other players sue the hell out of you for this horrible column.   Well unless you would do the right thing and publically and in print apologize for your horrible and unfair work.   I can rest pretty easily that wont happen.

 

Roy Mueller, Belleville, IL

 

Ortiz responds within seconds:

 

Roy,

 

Thank you for your thoughts. I’ll gladly forward your email for consideration in our letters to the editor section.

 

Have a good day,

JJO

 

 

Thanks for emailing him. What a douçhe. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, billiken_roy said:

 

My email to ortiz:

 

I seem to remember you wrote a Goodwin family as the all american family column at the beginning of the season.   Since the situation had already happened, it would seem a good newpaper writer would have already checked out the subjects fit the intended description before that writer wrote such a glowing piece.   Obviously you dont fit the description of good newspaper writer.   There is a HUGE difference between violating Title IX and breaking university rules.   And If all the school was interested was in keeping the star player in school, why was Henriquez who actually was the best player on the team, the first to be shown the door?  Your attack on Coach Ford was beyond defenseless.   My gosh, to insinuate he is just bringing bad character players to the program is so wrong.   But I am sure you checked on the backgrounds of all 4 players in question and found easy proof that they were lacking in character that Coach Ford should have also found right?

 

And how about questioning the character of the girls that filed a false police report and actually initiated the entire party?   Because the players couldn’t read the mind of the girl who had remorse after the even was over, that was a basis for filing charges?  The police obviously didn’t agree.

 

Thanks again for reminding me why I dont subscribe to the Post Dispatch.  I hope Saint Louis University, Coach Ford the Goodwins, and the other players sue the hell out of you for this horrible column.   Well unless you would do the right thing and publically and in print apologize for your horrible and unfair work.   I can rest pretty easily that wont happen.

 

Roy Mueller, Belleville, IL

 

Ortiz responds within seconds:

 

Roy,

 

Thank you for your thoughts. I’ll gladly forward your email for consideration in our letters to the editor section.

 

Have a good day,

JJO

 

 

well stated, thanks for sharing.........

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, billiken_roy said:

 

My email to ortiz:

 

I seem to remember you wrote a Goodwin family as the all american family column at the beginning of the season.   Since the situation had already happened, it would seem a good newpaper writer would have already checked out the subjects fit the intended description before that writer wrote such a glowing piece.   Obviously you dont fit the description of good newspaper writer.   There is a HUGE difference between violating Title IX and breaking university rules.   And If all the school was interested was in keeping the star player in school, why was Henriquez who actually was the best player on the team, the first to be shown the door?  Your attack on Coach Ford was beyond defenseless.   My gosh, to insinuate he is just bringing bad character players to the program is so wrong.   But I am sure you checked on the backgrounds of all 4 players in question and found easy proof that they were lacking in character that Coach Ford should have also found right?

 

And how about questioning the character of the girls that filed a false police report and actually initiated the entire party?   Because the players couldn’t read the mind of the girl who had remorse after the even was over, that was a basis for filing charges?  The police obviously didn’t agree.

 

Thanks again for reminding me why I dont subscribe to the Post Dispatch.  I hope Saint Louis University, Coach Ford the Goodwins, and the other players sue the hell out of you for this horrible column.   Well unless you would do the right thing and publically and in print apologize for your horrible and unfair work.   I can rest pretty easily that wont happen.

 

Roy Mueller, Belleville, IL

 

Ortiz responds within seconds:

 

Roy,

 

Thank you for your thoughts. I’ll gladly forward your email for consideration in our letters to the editor section.

 

Have a good day,

JJO

 

 

I hope you CC’d his superiors 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ortiz's column is awful, but this quote from Chris May is pretty bad too: “We have training that we train student athletes in many different areas, and we train annually,” May said. “It’s all part of what we do.”

The athletic department does indeed offer training on sexual assault and I wish May would have provided him with a full list of the previous trainings so that way he could have poked a major hole in Ortiz's presumptuous column. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, BrockL said:

Ortiz's column is awful, but this quote from Chris May is pretty bad too: “We have training that we train student athletes in many different areas, and we train annually,” May said. “It’s all part of what we do.”

The athletic department does indeed offer training on sexual assault and I wish May would have provided him with a full list of the previous trainings so that way he could have poked a major hole in Ortiz's presumptuous column. 

How do we know he didn’t though? Ortiz has the luxury of picking and choosing what he wants to include. This is where we are in the world of journalism 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, billikenfan05 said:

I hope you CC’d his superiors 

i wont have to cc anyone, ortiz is going to make sure it is in the letter to the editors.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, BrockL said:

Ortiz's column is awful, but this quote from Chris May is pretty bad too: “We have training that we train student athletes in many different areas, and we train annually,” May said. “It’s all part of what we do.”

The athletic department does indeed offer training on sexual assault and I wish May would have provided him with a full list of the previous trainings so that way he could have poked a major hole in Ortiz's presumptuous column. 

you feel confident in a column with one lie, and misstatement and out of context points, that the above is 100% accurate and complete?     

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, billiken_roy said:

you feel confident in a column with one lie, and misstatement and out of context points, that the above is 100% accurate and complete?     

I don't like the column anymore than you guys. And I do feel that Ortiz could have manipulated the info he was given by Chris May to fit his own narrative. At the same time, I don't have a lot of faith in Chris May. And based on my own experiences of hearing May speak in past, I've noticed he has a habit of providing glib remarks like that quote in Ortiz's column. That's just my opinion and observation though. But the bigger issue is that Ortiz is making assumptions on things he's not right about.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm sure everyone is fully aware of this but Ortiz doesn't care whether or not you like him or his writing. He (and the Post) just want clicks. And he gets them. Reminds me of the scene in Private Parts where they discover that the average Stern hater listens twice as long as the average Stern lover. "Most common answer: they want to see what he'll say next."

Can you imagine going to lunch with Ortiz and Tilk? Good god.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Damn, hate the mainstream media.  The man does not know the facts.  He is doing what media does ........ speculating and throwing dirt.  He should apologize to Jordan for dragging his name in dirt when he knows none of the facts.

I prefer to trust the lawyer who said the young men did nothing wrong.  He knows the facts. 

And I wonder, did the women involved get any punishment? Surely they were partying as well until they got "buyers remorse".  This whole situation smells.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Box and Won said:

You'll get blocked by Ortiz before you get a rebuttal.

No kidding. I tweeted a reply to him and he blocked me in less than a minute!

My problems with the article:

-University violations and Title IX violations are not the same thing. He says twice that Goodwin acknowledged Title IX violations, which is not true.

-He relies on baseless assumptions about why Goodwin got a lesser penalty instead of stating that he might not have had the same level of involvement as the others.

-He relies on baseless assumptions to get in Goodwin's head.

-He's making shameless appeals to the fear of potential parents - "If you have a daughter at SLU..." - and there's a big unspoken racial component to that. Local news in particular has operated this way since it's been around.

-He compares SLU to Baylor, Penn State, and Michigan State as schools that "look the other way to protect the program", when it's the opposite. SLU threw the hammer down on a situation that was murky at best. The other three schools swept years of serious crimes under the rug. It's literally the opposite thing.

-He insinuates that Ford and his staff don't look into the background of their recruits - which is false, of course - without acknowledging that Henriquez, Bishop, Goodwin, and Graves had no prior blemishes.

Lastly, he accuses Ford of being sincere but tone deaf, as if he were describing his own piece. This is what happens when a lazy writer looking for clicks drops in on a situation he's not familiar with and isn't willing to do the work, but decides to write about anyway.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share


×
×
  • Create New...