Fall 2017 allegations against unnamed players (aka Situation 2)

[Bills_06]

He was asked about the comparison's to Baylor, MSU, Penn State that he keeps mentioning and just avoided it and showed that he made no effort to even try and talk to Goodwin or his parents.  He is the worse.  He makes up his own facts to fit a story how he wants it and presents it that way.  Everybody at the Post should be embarrassed to be working with him and should call him out on it but silence so far.  

Also, asking questions to SLU Title IX office is not the same as releasing the entire Title IX report.  

[Old guy]

16 minutes ago, billiken_roy said:

can you even say the above (bolded) without feeling deep shame?   my gosh, these 4 players should not have gotten a smidgen of punishment.   i dont care what kind of "deal"  one of them might have gotten.   the situation should never have gotten to that point where slu had to save face for the misdeeds and horrible decisions made by pesty, krafty and stormy.   

I know the other 3 did not get justice, but this lack of justice and morality happens frequently in our society. Very few people are safe against this kind of violation of their rights. I can recognize it, accept it, and adapt to it. I have done it all my life and will continue doing it without feeling a deep sense of shame. It is the way it is, it was not fair, this is true.   

[Pistol]

5 minutes ago, Bills_06 said:

Gee, if only there were someone who could interview him with follow-up questions.

[ACE]

14 hours ago, cheeseman said:

You see what happens when some people are demanding a full scale expose on how the school screwed this whole thing up. You get a guy who neither has the time or interest to do the legwork necessary to do the story.  People today simply are not interested in doing anything in depth.  At this point I am ready to put this whole mess in the rear view mirror. I still believe the salvaging of Goodwin is the rainbow from this storm. You summed it up pretty well. 

I'm at that point too. Time to look ahead.

Regarding Ortiz, I regard him as a patsy. I suspect somebody fed him this story idea designed to make Ford, Goodwin and the bball program look bad. And who wants to make them look bad? The other area programs (SPUMAC and Illinois). Illinois is still bitter about not landing Goodwin. We saw one of their journalists/fanboys recently stirring up this story on social media. And Mizzou has so many fanboy/journalists in the area, it wouldn't surprise me if one of them encouraged Ortiz to pursue this "story." He clearly had a narrative in his head, and had no interest in digging into the particulars. The good news is that Ortiz is irrelevant. Best to move on and look forward to next year.

[JMM28]

https://sportsday.dallasnews.com/college-sports/sportsheadlines/2015/02/14/cleared-by-innocence-project-former-oklahoma-state-star-darrell-williams-this-year-s-least-known-comeback-story

http://newsok.com/article/5417776

 

A couple articles on Darrell Williams. Guy had a possible NBA career ruined by false accusations. But hey, we shouldn't punish liars...

[billikenfan05]

5 minutes ago, JMM28 said:

https://sportsday.dallasnews.com/college-sports/sportsheadlines/2015/02/14/cleared-by-innocence-project-former-oklahoma-state-star-darrell-williams-this-year-s-least-known-comeback-story

http://newsok.com/article/5417776

 

A couple articles on Darrell Williams. Guy had a possible NBA career ruined by false accusations. But hey, we shouldn't punish liars...

Travis FUOKING Ford.

[RiseAndGrind]

7 minutes ago, ACE said:

I'm at that point too. Time to look ahead.

Regarding Ortiz, I regard him as a patsy. I suspect somebody fed him this story idea designed to make Ford, Goodwin and the bball program look bad. And who wants to make them look bad? The other area programs (SPUMAC and Illinois). Illinois is still bitter about not landing Goodwin. We saw one of their journalists/fanboys recently stirring up this story on social media. And Mizzou has so many fanboy/journalists in the area, it wouldn't surprise me if one of them encouraged Ortiz to pursue this "story." He clearly had a narrative in his head, and had no interest in digging into the particulars. The good news is that Ortiz is irrelevant. Best to move on and look forward to next year.

You can kind of tell no one at the Post likes working with him. 

[brianstl]

1 hour ago, ACE said:

I'm at that point too. Time to look ahead.

Regarding Ortiz, I regard him as a patsy. I suspect somebody fed him this story idea designed to make Ford, Goodwin and the bball program look bad. And who wants to make them look bad? The other area programs (SPUMAC and Illinois). Illinois is still bitter about not landing Goodwin. We saw one of their journalists/fanboys recently stirring up this story on social media. And Mizzou has so many fanboy/journalists in the area, it wouldn't surprise me if one of them encouraged Ortiz to pursue this "story." He clearly had a narrative in his head, and had no interest in digging into the particulars. The good news is that Ortiz is irrelevant. Best to move on and look forward to next year.

My guess is it was Weathers that fed him crap.  He keeps on stating that Goodwin was accused of sexual assault.  The Post would make him retract those statements, too, if he didn't have a source. 

The only person that ever accused Goodwin of sexual assault was SLU's hearing officer Catherine Weathers.  The accuser never did.  That is public knowledge now that Mr. Goodwin had his interview with Frank, but Ortiz's comments and article came out before those statements were made.  So the only people that had that knowledge and could have shared that with Ortiz are the Goodwins, lawyers at Rosenblum's firm, the civil rights lawyer and people that work for SLU's Title IX office.  We know the first three weren't Ortiz's source.  That leaves people that work for SLU's Title IX office.  Weathers is the one person that had the most motivation to leak something like that after her findings were found to be incorrect in the appeals process.  So committing a FERPA violation should be added to the reasons Weathers needs to be fired.

[Cowboy]

14 minutes ago, brianstl said:

My guess is it was Weathers that fed him crap.  He keeps on stating that Goodwin was accused of sexual assault.  The Post would make him retract those statements, too, if he didn't have a source. 

The only person that ever accused Goodwin of sexual assault was SLU's hearing officer Catherine Weathers.  The accuser never did.  That is public knowledge now that Mr. Goodwin had his interview with Frank, but Ortiz's comments and article came out before those statements were made.  So the only people that had that knowledge and could have shared that with Ortiz are the Goodwins, lawyers at Rosenblum's firm, the civil rights lawyer and people that work for SLU's Title IX office.  We know the first three weren't Ortiz's source.  That leave's people that work for SLU's Title IX office.  Weathers is the one person that had the most motivation to leak something like that after her findings were found to be incorrect in the appeals process.  So committing a FERPA violation should be added to the reasons Weathers needs to be fired.

-Bang, he got it, could SLU's internal legal team draft an affidavit for her to sign attesting she has not spoken to anyone outside of SLU T9 office or the legal team about the 'investigation', if she can't or won't sign it, she's out? I would like to think the U has interest in protecting their students, faculty and staff and for someone to be leaking untrue, damaging and private information should not be allowed in any way shape or form

[Pistol]

1 hour ago, ACE said:

I'm at that point too. Time to look ahead.

Regarding Ortiz, I regard him as a patsy. I suspect somebody fed him this story idea designed to make Ford, Goodwin and the bball program look bad. And who wants to make them look bad? The other area programs (SPUMAC and Illinois). Illinois is still bitter about not landing Goodwin. We saw one of their journalists/fanboys recently stirring up this story on social media. And Mizzou has so many fanboy/journalists in the area, it wouldn't surprise me if one of them encouraged Ortiz to pursue this "story." He clearly had a narrative in his head, and had no interest in digging into the particulars. The good news is that Ortiz is irrelevant. Best to move on and look forward to next year.

I'm not so sure. He was at Ford's pre-practice presser the day before, asking odd questions with the mic in his face. He was visibly unsatisfied with Ford's answers. I think he asked three questions, and it was clear the angle he wanted to take; his questions were along the lines of "Three of the accused players were recruited by you. What do you do to vet the players you're recruiting?" and "What is the basketball program's responsibility to the student body?" and one other I can't quite remember. Ford sidestepped all of them, and Ortiz looked agitated.

So I think he just dropped back in on a story he'd been ignoring for a few months, thought he had an angle, and slapped together what we saw last week. There wasn't anything resembling information in the article, and what he wrote was mostly just speculation based on his unanswered questions. It was quick and sloppy. I'd like to think that if he were being fed anything, he'd be more focused. No sign of a "source" from what I can tell.

Weathers already deserves to be fired, regardless.

I'm also mostly of the mindset that we can just move on from this. That's one reason I like following the recruiting stuff. It always gives me something to look ahead to, so I don't get bogged down in something that might not be going well in the present.

The only reason I'm still hung up a bit on this case is because I would like to see a few action steps from the school to ensure the Title IX process works better internally in the future. Step 1, fire Weathers. Step 2, very serious look at the internal operations of the Title IX office, including interviews with the whole staff. Step 3, develop a clearer, fairer process for them to follow moving forward. If the school does nothing to improve, that would be disheartening.

[brianstl]

2 minutes ago, Pistol said:

I'm not so sure. He was at Ford's pre-practice presser the day before, asking odd questions with the mic in his face. He was visibly unsatisfied with Ford's answers. I think he asked three questions, and it was clear the angle he wanted to take; his questions were along the lines of "Three of the accused players were recruited by you. What do you do to vet the players you're recruiting?" and "What is the basketball program's responsibility to the student body?" and one other I can't quite remember. Ford sidestepped all of them, and Ortiz looked agitated.

So I think he just dropped back in on a story he'd been ignoring for a few months, thought he had an angle, and slapped together what we saw last week. There wasn't anything resembling information in the article, and what he wrote was mostly just speculation based on his unanswered questions. It was quick and sloppy. I'd like to think that if he were being fed anything, he'd be more focused. No sign of a "source" from what I can tell.

Weathers already deserves to be fired, regardless.

I'm also mostly of the mindset that we can just move on from this. That's one reason I like following the recruiting stuff. It always gives me something to look ahead to, so I don't get bogged down in something that might not be going well in the present.

The only reason I'm still hung up a bit on this case is because I would like to see a few action steps from the school to ensure the Title IX process works better internally in the future. Step 1, fire Weathers. Step 2, very serious look at the internal operations of the Title IX office, including interviews with the whole staff. Step 3, develop a clearer, fairer process for them to follow moving forward. If the school does nothing to improve, that would be disheartening.

He has got to have a source.  The Post already made him correct the Title IX violations line, they wouldn't let Ortiz not correct saying someone was accused of sexual assault and "one of the players originally accused of sexual assault" if he didn't have a source that was confirming these statements.  Those are the kind of false statements of fact that can get newspapers sued unless they have a source for those statements.

[Bills_06]

8 minutes ago, Pistol said:

The only reason I'm still hung up a bit on this case is because I would like to see a few action steps from the school to ensure the Title IX process works better internally in the future. Step 1, fire Weathers. Step 2, very serious look at the internal operations of the Title IX office, including interviews with the whole staff. Step 3, develop a clearer, fairer process for them to follow moving forward. If the school does nothing to improve, that would be disheartening.

This is where I am at too.  I want to see changes in the Title IX office.  Pestello seemed to step aside and let the Title IX process run its course.  Okay, that is over so now he needs to step in and fully evaluate how it was handled.  As we have seen in the MSU, the President will be held responsible for failures in these areas so he should make sure it was handled as fairly as possible.  There is no way you can see the original punishment from the hearing officer and the appeal punishment and say it was fair.  Something went wrong there and this can't happen again.

I also want to see the Ortiz piece taken down because from avoiding all questions on it yesterday, it is clear he created the story he wanted to write and went with it, facts or not.  SLU should be pushing the PD to take it down.  He questioned the safety of the campus because of these kids.  What facts does he have to possibly back that up?  

[slufan13]

If Bishop's punishment was a 2 year suspension and was not reduced, do you let him back on the team in 2 years if he really wanted to sit out and come back to SLU? 

[Pistol]

2 minutes ago, slufan13 said:

If Bishop's punishment was a 2 year suspension and was not reduced, do you let him back on the team in 2 years if he really wanted to sit out and come back to SLU? 

He last played in December 2016, so that would be almost a 4-year hiatus for him. He has 6 years to finish 4 years of eligibility, so he'd have 1 season left in 2020-2021, assuming the NCAA grants additional waivers. He already got the 2016-2017 waiver. Would they grant him any more for this?

Even if they did, I don't see who benefits from this. He'd want to play, and it's not like we can't replace him. When fall 2020 rolls around, SLU isn't going to be hung up on a Crews recruit who last suited up in 2016. I think it's in everyone's interests to move on.

[TRN]

24 minutes ago, slufan13 said:

If Bishop's punishment was a 2 year suspension and was not reduced, do you let him back on the team in 2 years if he really wanted to sit out and come back to SLU? 

There’s no way he would stick around.  There are literally hundreds of other schools he can go play for and get his tuition paid.  

[slufan13]

2 minutes ago, TRN said:

There’s no way he would stick around.  There are literally hundreds of other schools he can go play for and get his tuition paid.  

The only logic I can see is that either way he has to sit out all of next year. But yes I agree with you it would make no sense for him to stay 

[Pistol]

I can't believe we haven't heard yet that Bishop is officially leaving.

[cgeldmacher]

1 hour ago, brianstl said:

My guess is it was Weathers that fed him crap.  He keeps on stating that Goodwin was accused of sexual assault.  The Post would make him retract those statements, too, if he didn't have a source. 

The only person that ever accused Goodwin of sexual assault was SLU's hearing officer Catherine Weathers.  The accuser never did.  That is public knowledge now that Mr. Goodwin had his interview with Frank, but Ortiz's comments and article came out before those statements were made.  So the only people that had that knowledge and could have shared that with Ortiz are the Goodwins, lawyers at Rosenblum's firm, the civil rights lawyer and people that work for SLU's Title IX office.  We know the first three weren't Ortiz's source.  That leaves people that work for SLU's Title IX office.  Weathers is the one person that had the most motivation to leak something like that after her findings were found to be incorrect in the appeals process.  So committing a FERPA violation should be added to the reasons Weathers needs to be fired.

Appears that you came to that conclusion using the famous "process of elimination" which come right out of the Gold Standard playbook.

[billikenfan05]

7 minutes ago, Pistol said:

I can't believe we haven't heard yet that Bishop is officially leaving.

He's got some time to make a decision. Assuming he can't really enroll in a school and catch up this semester.

[SLU_Lax]

2 minutes ago, cgeldmacher said:

Appears that you came to that conclusion using the famous "process of elimination" which come right out of the Gold Standard playbook.

Hey, if they can use it to punish others.... I do not see why others should not be allowed to use it to punish them.  Then again, there may be a special Title IX rule that stipulates the "process of elimination" can only be used against black teenaged males and never against white middle-aged women.

[brianstl]

5 minutes ago, SLU_Lax said:

Hey, if they can use it to punish others.... I do not see why others should not be allowed to use it to punish them.  Then again, there may be a special Title IX rule that stipulates the "process of elimination" can only be used against black teenaged males and never against white middle-aged women.

Plus, we know from the guidance who gets a copy of the report and rulings.  We know who would be not motivated to leak a sexual assault allegation to the press.  It is a little better than the gold standard thinking that all black guys look the same in a video.  

[ACE]

1 hour ago, Pistol said:

I'm not so sure. He was at Ford's pre-practice presser the day before, asking odd questions with the mic in his face. He was visibly unsatisfied with Ford's answers. I think he asked three questions, and it was clear the angle he wanted to take; his questions were along the lines of "Three of the accused players were recruited by you. What do you do to vet the players you're recruiting?" and "What is the basketball program's responsibility to the student body?" and one other I can't quite remember. Ford sidestepped all of them, and Ortiz looked agitated.

So I think he just dropped back in on a story he'd been ignoring for a few months, thought he had an angle, and slapped together what we saw last week. There wasn't anything resembling information in the article, and what he wrote was mostly just speculation based on his unanswered questions. It was quick and sloppy. I'd like to think that if he were being fed anything, he'd be more focused. No sign of a "source" from what I can tell.

Weathers already deserves to be fired, regardless.

I'm also mostly of the mindset that we can just move on from this. That's one reason I like following the recruiting stuff. It always gives me something to look ahead to, so I don't get bogged down in something that might not be going well in the present.

The only reason I'm still hung up a bit on this case is because I would like to see a few action steps from the school to ensure the Title IX process works better internally in the future. Step 1, fire Weathers. Step 2, very serious look at the internal operations of the Title IX office, including interviews with the whole staff. Step 3, develop a clearer, fairer process for them to follow moving forward. If the school does nothing to improve, that would be disheartening.

I saw the presser too and agree it was clearly a guy who already had the story written before he even talked to Ford. It was a hatchet job on Ford and the type of kids he recruits - which is why it leads me to believe that this story angle was pushed on him by somebody with an allegiance to an area school with an agenda to hurt Ford's recruiting.

Totally agree, the opinion piece carried nothing of substance about the case. I don't believe Weathers would feed anything to Ortiz. She's gotta feel pretty good that three of the four are gone. Plus, she'd really be putting her neck on the line with her bosses, who clearly want to bury this story. It just doesn't make sense. So much of the Ortiz column was directed at Ford, which leads me to believe that it was propaganda to hurt recruiting. Ortiz isn't from around here and obviously very easy to manipulate. I can totally see one of the media fanboys using Ortiz as a tool to try to  damage Ford's reputation by suggesting he recruits sketchy characters.

[kshoe]

1 hour ago, brianstl said:

He has got to have a source.  The Post already made him correct the Title IX violations line, they wouldn't let Ortiz not correct saying someone was accused of sexual assault and "one of the players originally accused of sexual assault" if he didn't have a source that was confirming these statements.  Those are the kind of false statements of fact that can get newspapers sued unless they have a source for those statements.

I don't think he has a source. I think he's sloppy with details and doesn't really care about the difference between "As part of a Title IX process, he was found guilty of breaking school rules" and "He was accused of sexual assault as part of the Title IX Investigation." Furthermore, if you are of his mindset and believe SLU lowered the punishment on Goodwin because he was the star player, you likely believe that any punishment that was originally 1.5 or 2 years had to have been for sexual assault. It clearly has never occurred to him that all of the punishments levied by Weathers and Co. are extreme and unfair given the actual circumstances of this incident. 

[ACE]

12 minutes ago, kshoe said:

I don't think he has a source. I think he's sloppy with details and doesn't really care about the difference between "As part of a Title IX process, he was found guilty of breaking school rules" and "He was accused of sexual assault as part of the Title IX Investigation." Furthermore, if you are of his mindset and believe SLU lowered the punishment on Goodwin because he was the star player, you likely believe that any punishment that was originally 1.5 or 2 years had to have been for sexual assault. It clearly has never occurred to him that all of the punishments levied by Weathers and Co. are extreme and unfair given the actual circumstances of this incident. 

Agreed. Ortiz clearly doesn't seem like a guy with a credible "source" close to the case. It reads more like a sloppy opinion piece designed to make Ford and the program look bad.

[Basketbill]

I watched the presser too.  Ford seemed off almost in a state of shock at the time. If he heard the question correctly from Ortiz, then his answer was a dodge, or an outright statement, “I am not going to filet open my mind and let you see what I think”.  Frankly rightfully so.  There is a time and place for introspection by Ford, and he gets to decide when and how much.