Fall 2017 allegations against unnamed players (aka Situation 2)

[dlarry]

20 minutes ago, brianstl said:

Will someone that hasn’t been blocked by Ortiz ask him if he feels like at least admitting he screwed up bigly?

Sorry I got blocked after his baseball hall of fame article. He stated he wouldn't vote for Chipper because he thought he was a jerk but had no problem voting for Bonds and Clemens. 

I reminded him that his idol and all around good guy, Roger Clemens, cheated on his wife with a 15 year old Mindy Mcready.

When I think about this now it adds to his hypocrisy.  knowing people who had group sex = bad. Banging out a minor = no big deal.

What a buffoon. 

[billikenfan05]

SLU called. I mentioned Pestello and how the basketball team was Treated. Sounds like they have a scripted response now 

[aj_arete]

12 hours ago, Bills_06 said:

Except your theory seems to be wrong from the comments from the accuser's lawyer.  Rosenblum said everything was out in the open video/picture wise and the girls lawyer then was basically confirming this by saying realizing you are being filmed is not the same as giving consent to film.  This was a group sex act and there was a camera broken out. If you want to blame the players for participating in group sex fine but then you have to blame the girls the exact same way and how you arrive at kicking them off campus and accusing them of making the campus dangerous as Ortiz implied in his article is beyond me. Yes, the article you linked it does sound weird to record it secretly in case of being accused of rape but that doesn't seem to apply at all in this case from reading the accuser's statement.  

You don't have a problem with the outcome even though one of the girls told the hearing officer that Goodwin wasn't involved and she used "process of elimination" to determine he was and then you don't have a problem with Ortiz basically accusing the kid of extending the investigation to play (which again he never knew he was investigated from Frank) and being a danger to the campus?  

OK, I'm puzzled now. I thought the girls had filed a false police report. Is that true or not? If so, are you saying it wasn't a rape allegation?

[Billiken82]

7 hours ago, TheOne said:

Guys,

It is hurting me that many on this board are hoping that SLU’s administration will get “burned to the ground”.  

This is a university we all share a passion and a bond over, otherwise we wouldn’t be posting on this board. I understand where these frustrations are coming from, but calling for full blown federal investigations and saying wildly immature things on Twitter will badly damage our university - potentially forever. The pursuit of justice is never to be overlooked, but as affiliates and representatives of SLU we must handle ourselves maturely. There is a way to express your feelings the right way.

While most are not pleased with the process or the outcome of S2, we need to be supportive of SLU. We need to be at every game, cheering on our remaining Billikens.  We need to be enouraging Goodwin that there is a light at the end of the tunnel, that we cannot wait for him to return to the floor, and that he can change this program forever. We owe it to the program, we owe it to Coach, and we owe it to Jordan for honoring his commitment and returning to SLU after his suspension.

There is a bright day ahead of us, we just need to see it through.

I actually hope it all gets burnt to the ground.  It’s a lot easier to rebuild from nothing than 20%.

[kappy96]

1 hour ago, cheeseman said:

He softened because Smallman pointed out that she really needed to know more about the situation before she was going to venture any opinion - actually, she made the smartest comment in the whole segment.  He really had very little idea about what he was talking about other than what he read from Ortiz and a little of Stu's stuff which we all know doesn't tell us that much.  Smallman's position was refreshing given that she is the age and gender of who this kind of thing is happening to.  She clearly understood that this type of story is complicated and you can not take one person's point without knowing the entire story.

I honestly don’t think Bernie pays much attention to anything outside of Cardinals and the NFL anymore and has lost a bit of his relevance in the STL landscape.  Combine that with only doing radio (which he’s not particularly good at) and writing for 101.1 sports which no one reads and he’s been forced to try to ramp up his game (now writing for the Athletic) and bring in Smallman to try to help the flow and appeal of his radio show.  He doesn’t care about SLU and is using the Majerus relationship as a crutch.

[AGB91]

You couldn't be more right.

Bernie ceased being relevant years ago.

[Quality Is Job 1]

22 minutes ago, aj_arete said:

OK, I'm puzzled now. I thought the girls had filed a false police report. Is that true or not? If so, are you saying it wasn't a rape allegation?

We're not privy to the details of what happened that night in September, but it's believed that the young women did, some time after completing the sexual encounter, went to the St. Louis Police to report that they had been sexually assaulted.  That occurred before any university-led Title 9 investigation began.

[Quality Is Job 1]

35 minutes ago, billikenfan05 said:

SLU called. I mentioned Pestello and how the basketball team was Treated. Sounds like they have a scripted response now 

Care to share what the scripted response is?

[billikenfan05]

4 minutes ago, Quality Is Job 1 said:

Care to share what the scripted response is?

Paraphrasing: I know that the title IX investigation has been frustrating for a lot of people and there were controversial opinions on the matter etc...I said if i ever donate it will go right to athletics, she said I could earmark that money to athletics, I said I don’t trust a Pestello run organization to make sure my money goes there.

 

[Adman]

8 hours ago, billiken_roy said:

you are so right.   it was hard to watch and not get, mad, sad, and confused.   the goodwins sit in front of me and they dont know me.  dont even know my name.  yet every game they pause and say something nice and happy to acknowledge me.   they seem to be the nicest people and you just know that they did right raising their son.   fast forward to the interview last night, and you see the anger and fear in their faces as they calmly answered very tough questions because you know they love and are very proud of their son.   

Mr goodwin said the defining  statement when he remarked, (and i assume this isnt exact) " i thought we lived in a country where you were innocent until proven guilty, not guilty until proven innocent"".   

then mrs goodwin states how this will never be over for their son.  it will follow him forever.  

little miss cheerleader, krafty, pesty, and stormy..........i hope you are all so proud of yourselves.   you ruined four young men's lives with your horrible process that only protected the real problem.  the lying little cheerleader who set up the whole assorted affair.  

roy, i'll go one further. the title ix people hide behind title ix itself, saying, in effect, we have to play by the Fed Gvmt's rules, we're limited in what we can do, if it's unfair to the accused, can't be helped, our policy must be consistent with guidance, etc. this is utter nonsense. there are a couple reasons why.

no one is forcing the university to make an unfair decision, a decision weighted against the men. let's not be silly. trump and devos aren't going to march into grand & lindell and pull their funding. if anything, the trump administration - like them or not - leans the other direction and is beginning reform.

even more amazing, in the 2017 title ix guidance from the fed gvmt, universities were offered the option of making rulings based on the "clear and convincing evidence standard" -- a medium-level burden of proof of requiring 70-75% confidence -- rather than the existing "preponderance of the evidence standard" -- a low-level 50.1% likely burden of proof. i don't have to tell you which option slu chose to implement in its Policy. given that title ix already eliminates some basic rights of the accused which are hallmarks of our legal system, and this would have, you know, added a modicum of fairness, it is particularly troublesome. they chose to keep it unbalanced. 50.1% likely? GUILTY.  

but it gets worse. for a moment, forget title ix. let's focus only on the other parts of the SLU Student Handbook/Code of Conduct; the non-sexual assault parts, the parts actually NOT under the fed gvmt's thumb. to slu's great credit, there is a huge "Community Standards" section which prohibits all kinds of behavior unbecoming in a Catholic, Jesuit university. things like bias, hate crimes, theft, filing false or misleading complaints, cheating, alcohol, drugs, assaults and lots more. these are slu's rules, underscoring their mission and values. slu has wide latitude to throw the book at students in these areas. (apparently it is in this area that mr goodwin received his two months for something.)

with a caveat that few know the complete story of this situation -- yet much has been reported via various and multiple credible sources -- there are at least 4 areas of the Community Standards likely or highly likely violated by one or more of the women complainants. These areas include Indecent Conduct, Inappropriate Conduct, Abusive Behavior, Filing a false or misleading complaint, and if a false police report was filed, Violation of Law and the University Community Standards. These charges can be brought in the form of a student complaint, or as I read it, the University can initiate this on its own when they become aware of bad behavior and believe it risk to community.

Planning and executing an orgy in a dorm room? "2.7.21 Indecent Conduct... Engaging in sexual acts in a residence hall while others are present will be a violation under this community standard." A good attorney would argue that organizing an orgy in the dorm room of a Catholic university is at least as unbecoming as posting and quickly deleting a non-consensual video. This or less got three students expelled or suspended for 1.5 to 2 years. Would we say they're 50.1% likely to have violated the code? GUILTY.

So I ask: will the University actually punish the women for planning, organizing and executing an orgy? Office of Diversity: it's section 2.7.21 in case you didn't see above. Did they make misleading statements, later recanted? This is your chance to actually lay down the law about this kind of behavior on campus -- like you did against the men. Your chance to authentically and fairly underscore slu's jesuit, catholic mission. Higher Purpose. Greater Good.

Highly doubtful. Because of student confidentiality - a good thing - we won't know officially. But we will. Next game, let's see who if cheer team has full squad.

One last thing. This is NOT a defense of the men. Only a diatribe on how disappointed I am about my University's BIAS. Sadly, bias they are largely in control of. 

[Adman]

1 hour ago, dlarry said:

Sorry I have no idea how to find that. It might be on the Website tomorrow.

He started off saying how Ortiz wrote a good article about it. That was his biggest mistake. 

Then he basically said I was friends with Majerus so I'm not a SLU hater.

He then went on to say how it just doesn't look good for the school when 3 guys get expelled but the local star is allowed back. He said he wasn't sure that sent the right nessage. 

Michelle Smallman talked a lot and she said she had no problem with him coming back. He then softened his stance a bit. 

He just kept saying something seems fishy and with college sports if it seems fishy something usually isn't right.

He talked for about 5 minutes around 7:30.

 

Thanks a lot for the summary. He clearly didn't do his homework. He's usually better than this. But since he doesn't like basketball or pay attention to us...

[Bills_06]

52 minutes ago, aj_arete said:

OK, I'm puzzled now. I thought the girls had filed a false police report. Is that true or not? If so, are you saying it wasn't a rape allegation?

No I think they did say that but I was pointing out from what we know why I don't buy the girls didn't know they were being video taped like you mentioned, big part being statement from accuser's attorney.  Plus, going back to the article from September with comments from the lawyers, they said the girls gave inconsistent statements so I would think it's more along what 05 said.  Girls participated in group sex, knew pictures were being taken.  Later that night when they heard other people saw it, got concerned and went to police to say it was sexual assault.  They didn't plan it so statements were inconsistent which is big reason no criminal charges.  That would also explain why 2 of them stopped participating in investigation, they came to regret it.  

[Old guy]

28 minutes ago, billikenfan05 said:

Paraphrasing: I know that the title IX investigation has been frustrating for a lot of people and there were controversial opinions on the matter etc...I said if i ever donate it will go right to athletics, she said I could earmark that money to athletics, I said I don’t trust a Pestello run organization to make sure my money goes there.

 

They were giving you a dose of damage control done by the book, pure and simple

[kappy96]

Add me to list of people Ortiz blocked. Must have been this one that put him over the edge. I must say, if I was going to get blocked I would have liked to have gotten my money’s worth.  I thought I was pretty civil honestly.  

[HoosierBilliken]

2 hours ago, billikenfan05 said:

Paraphrasing: I know that the title IX investigation has been frustrating for a lot of people and there were controversial opinions on the matter etc...I said if i ever donate it will go right to athletics, she said I could earmark that money to athletics, I said I don’t trust a Pestello run organization to make sure my money goes there.

 

They mean like male people and non-white people.  I need to move on from this travesty of justice, but I don't know how to give SLU a pass on this.

[DeSmetBilliken]

28 minutes ago, kappy96 said:

Add me to list of people Ortiz blocked. Must have been this one that put him over the edge. I must say, if I was going to get blocked I would have liked to have gotten my money’s worth.  I thought I was pretty civil honestly.  

I can’t explain it. I’ve questioned him yesterday about his column, commented about it a few times today, even called him a lazy journalist who doesn’t care if he gets facts right. Not blocked. I kind of feel left out.

[majerus mojo]

5 hours ago, dlarry said:

Sorry I have no idea how to find that. It might be on the Website tomorrow.

He started off saying how Ortiz wrote a good article about it. That was his biggest mistake. 

Then he basically said I was friends with Majerus so I'm not a SLU hater.

He then went on to say how it just doesn't look good for the school when 3 guys get expelled but the local star is allowed back. He said he wasn't sure that sent the right nessage. 

Michelle Smallman talked a lot and she said she had no problem with him coming back. He then softened his stance a bit. 

He just kept saying something seems fishy and with college sports if it seems fishy something usually isn't right.

He talked for about 5 minutes around 7:30.

 

Again, it is amazing that SLU has allowed themselves to be butchered on BOTH sides of this situation. There’s our side (obviously, the right one), and then there’s the side with zero idea what is happening, the side that 4 months ago saw, “SEXUAL ASSUALT ALLEGATIONS”, never read another thing about the investigation, and are now ripping the school for somehow showing the players favoritism. 

2 hours ago, kappy96 said:

Add me to list of people Ortiz blocked. Must have been this one that put him over the edge. I must say, if I was going to get blocked I would have liked to have gotten my money’s worth.  I thought I was pretty civil honestly.  

Ortiz blocked a dozen people for merely asking why he (incorrectly) stated Goodwin violated the Title IX policy. It gave me comfort today hearing that apparently his colleagues consider him to be a joke as well. A guy who hides behind, “well it’s an opinion column” and then blocks folks for stating their own opinions (facts). Get bent 

[aj_arete]

7 hours ago, Bills_06 said:

No I think they did say that but I was pointing out from what we know why I don't buy the girls didn't know they were being video taped like you mentioned, big part being statement from accuser's attorney.  Plus, going back to the article from September with comments from the lawyers, they said the girls gave inconsistent statements so I would think it's more along what 05 said.  Girls participated in group sex, knew pictures were being taken.  Later that night when they heard other people saw it, got concerned and went to police to say it was sexual assault.  They didn't plan it so statements were inconsistent which is big reason no criminal charges.  That would also explain why 2 of them stopped participating in investigation, they came to regret it.  

OK, that makes sense. Sounds like a very muddled situation. Certainly, I see where this would fall way short of meeting the standard for a criminal charge. However, the standard for a civil claim is much lower. That puts the university in a tough situation. In this #MeToo environment, there's going to be less leeway in circumstances involving student-athletes. I suggest reading Jeff Benedict, who has written a number of books documenting sexual violence against women on college campuses. He talks about colleges turning a blind eye toward allegations. Those days are over and university and athletic administrators need to be proactive in addressing it, along with training student-athletes of the dangers of engaging in irresponsible, promiscuous sex.  While it might seem unfair that your typical college student won't have the same spotlight hovering over them as a regular student, that's the price you pay when accepting a scholarship and the opportunity to play in front of millions.

Overall, I'm a fan of Ortiz and don't have serious problems with his article. However, I will say that many of the posters made some good points about only focusing on the athlete rather than the victim. The problem is victim shaming is one reason why women are reluctant to share their stories of sexual violence and with me being a father of two daughters, that's concerning to me. 

Link: https://www.amazon.com/Jeff Benedict/e/B001HCYRB8/ref=la_B001HCYRB8_pg_2?rh=n%3A283155%2Cp_82%3AB001HCYRB8&page=2&sort=author-pages-popularity-rank&ie=UTF8&qid=1518774110

[JohnnyJumpUp]

2 hours ago, aj_arete said:

 

Overall, I'm a fan of Ortiz and don't have serious problems with his article. However, I will say that many of the posters made some good points about only focusing on the athlete rather than the victim. The problem is victim shaming is one reason why women are reluctant to share their stories of sexual violence and with me being a father of two daughters, that's concerning to me. 

 

In this case, it can't be considered victim shaming, since there was no victim. There was no sexual violence, it was consensual sex. So while these things worry you as a father of two daughters, this situation should actually worry you for a different reason, that which your daughters could actually ruin innocent male student lives with false accusations.

[slufanskip]

2 hours ago, aj_arete said:

OK, that makes sense. Sounds like a very muddled situation. Certainly, I see where this would fall way short of meeting the standard for a criminal charge. However, the standard for a civil claim is much lower. That puts the university in a tough situation. In this #MeToo environment, there's going to be less leeway in circumstances involving student-athletes. I suggest reading Jeff Benedict, who has written a number of books documenting sexual violence against women on college campuses. He talks about colleges turning a blind eye toward allegations. Those days are over and university and athletic administrators need to be proactive in addressing it, along with training student-athletes of the dangers of engaging in irresponsible, promiscuous sex.  While it might seem unfair that your typical college student won't have the same spotlight hovering over them as a regular student, that's the price you pay when accepting a scholarship and the opportunity to play in front of millions.

Overall, I'm a fan of Ortiz and don't have serious problems with his article. However, I will say that many of the posters made some good points about only focusing on the athlete rather than the victim. The problem is victim shaming is one reason why women are reluctant to share their stories of sexual violence and with me being a father of two daughters, that's concerning to me. 

Link: https://www.amazon.com/Jeff Benedict/e/B001HCYRB8/ref=la_B001HCYRB8_pg_2?rh=n%3A283155%2Cp_82%3AB001HCYRB8&page=2&sort=author-pages-popularity-rank&ie=UTF8&qid=1518774110

Focusing on the athlete rather than the victim? What were the girls victims of? They organized and planned an orgy. They realized there were pictures/video being taken. Again, how the f..k were they victims? If what we believe to be true is in fact true the girls would deserve a larger punishment than the guys

[dlarry]

6 hours ago, majerus mojo said:

Again, it is amazing that SLU has allowed themselves to be butchered on BOTH sides of this situation. There’s our side (obviously, the right one), and then there’s the side with zero idea what is happening, the side that 4 months ago saw, “SEXUAL ASSUALT ALLEGATIONS”, never read another thing about the investigation, and are now ripping the school for somehow showing the players favoritism. 

Ortiz blocked a dozen people for merely asking why he (incorrectly) stated Goodwin violated the Title IX policy. It gave me comfort today hearing that apparently his colleagues consider him to be a joke as well. A guy who hides behind, “well it’s an opinion column” and then blocks folks for stating their own opinions (facts). Get bent 

Do tell.

[Bills_06]

3 hours ago, aj_arete said:

Overall, I'm a fan of Ortiz and don't have serious problems with his article. However, I will say that many of the posters made some good points about only focusing on the athlete rather than the victim. The problem is victim shaming is one reason why women are reluctant to share their stories of sexual violence and with me being a father of two daughters, that's concerning to me. 

This is what I have the biggest problem with.  Oritz's article was trash.  He focused on Goodwin and made accusations towards him and Ford for which he has no basis for.  Now per Frank, Goodwin was never even accused of sexual assault by the girls and one girl actually even said Goodwin didn't do it.  Yet reading the article, Ortiz made it seem like Goodwin only is still there and played because he was a top rated recruit, not because of the fact the kid was never accused of sexual assault.  Can somebody who says that explain to me why SLU would suspend 3 of it's better players, one of which was supposed to be the top scorer so they could have a mediocre season with their top recruit up until the last few games?  If they had this much control of the situation as Ortiz suggested, why not redshirt Goodwin, he serves the two months now and comes back next year with 4 years of eligibility with a full roster?  It's because they had no control of the situation which is why Ortiz again wrote a trash, factually incorrect article. 

If the basketball team and Goodwin were the ones that extended the process as Ortiz suggested (not the external firm that actually did the investigation and took 60+ days which is the real reason), why wouldn't they drag it out another month?  It's because it was the Title IX office that screwed up the process.  Focus your article on that, not on Goodwin.  

He said Ford needs to do a better job of looking into these kids before he brings them on campus.  How did he come to that conclusion?  What did any of these kids do in the past that would indicate they are dangerous?  Does Ford have a history of bringing in dangerous kids in his years of coaching that I missed and Ortiz didn't feel the need to point out if it's actually a pattern?  Or was Ortiz just making another baseless allegation?  Yep I will go with that.  

These girls aren't victims.  They are accusers. As a father you should be upset about the fact girls falsely accused guys therefore in a time when people are taking these allegations seriously finally, instances like this put a question mark on the whole situation.

Ortiz's article was at best irresponsible journalism, at worst a borderline racist article that just said these young black men must be guilty since they were accused.  

[SLU_Lax]

So the Title IX office accepts and welcomes uninvolved third parties to file complaints per their policy. Title IX is set to look at any gender inequality (either male or female). Hearsay from a third party is considered a legitimate foundation to start an investigation. 

So why haven’t we begun to file Title IX complaints against Kratky and Weathers?  At a minimum, it would be fascinating to see how it is handled and it would potentially help those suing the school if enough information contrasting their self-investigation to this investigation came out. It’d be great if it became a third party investigation. And yes, I know that almost nothing would be heard after filing a complaint. 

To be clear, I am not recommending frivolous complaints be filed. I have legitimate concerns spanning over their handling of multiple cases and their creation of a hostile and biased environment. 

[Quality Is Job 1]

@aj_arete, I hope you're reading and considering the above responses to your post.  I have defended you from those here who continually impugn your character and intentions, but it would be very hard for me to continue to do so if you don't acknowledge these posts' valid points in a manner that demonstrates you haven't read Ortiz's story (like Miklasz) and cast off all open-mindedness about the issue.

[Tilkowsky]

9 hours ago, HoosierBilliken said:

They mean like male people and non-white people.  I need to move on from this travesty of justice, but I don't know how to give SLU a pass on this.

Yet you and everyone else on this board are giving the players a pass.

Everyone is just worried about how it affects the basketball teams wins/losses.

Again is this the type of behavior you want SLU basketball players to be known for?

All four players are responsible for the situation they currently find themselves in.

No one else. Not Kratky. Not Weathers. Not Pestello. Not Ortiz.

Sad that NO ONE will answer the question - Is this the type of behavior SLU students should be engaged in?