Fall 2017 allegations against unnamed players (aka Situation 2)

[moytoy12]

8 hours ago, Wendelprof said:

Keyser,

No where do I mention expelling students.  Moreover, 75% of student "fooling around" does not result in one of the parties filing a Title IX claim shortly after they are done.  When the video was posted apparently one or more of the women felt violated.  I don't think 75% of the university is engaging in the particular conduct that has been alleged here.  

In the law we often speak of a "question of first impression" - where the facts are so different from any previous case that the ruling will set precedent that will be followed by all parties involved moving forward.  I think it safe to say that this is a question of first impression.  SLU is appropriately concerned about setting the proper precedent and sending the proper message to its students.  What will that message be?  Let the process run its course.

 

 

If you only know what has been said on this board and haven’t seen the video, then how do you know this is a question of first impression?  Sounds to me like a law firm milking hours and convincing the school that the situation is way more complicated than it actually is.  

Regarding consent, and it has been brought up on here before, if all parties were drinking (and I don’t know if that is the case), then how could anyone give effective consent to anything? 

[billiken_roy]

6 minutes ago, cheeseman said:

Roy, the only thing I would disagree with here is that of course rules were broken.  The problem is these rules are broken all the time - in fact I would be comfortable saying every weekend and more at SLU and virtually every other campus in the country this happens.  I have raised this point before, if SLU has not dealt with each and every offender in the past in the same way they find themselves in a bit of a pickle.  I feel safe in saying that sometime at SLU someone representing the school turned their backs on or was willfully ignorant of these rule breakers.  This is the biggest dilemma the school faces - how to avoid appearing to be selective in these matters.  I know some people do not want to admit that SLU is like all schools - kids do nasty things all the time and they do not all get expelled.  The school is going to get blasted no matter what they decide to do so trying to wait this out makes no sense - it only makes more people pissed off over the appearance of  foot dragging.  This is one of those times where you just have to hold your nose and take your medicine.  The only constant here is the DA - if the DA is not going to charge the students then SLU needs to just drop the matter for the reasons I gave above or risk being sued and my guess losing.  If by some chance they win then they will still be dirtied by the entire affair - no pun intended.

cheeseman, i dont even care which way the decision goes.   just make a decision.  the fact this continues to drag out only hurts the program regardless of the verdict by this committee.  the crime of this whole ordeal is taking months to make a decision that literally should have been made in a week or two.   no one has presented a timeline that justifies this going beyond the 60 day mark.   we get all the elite liberals telling us to let it run it's course blah blah blah.   this should be done.  

make a decision

[David King]

This may have been discussed somewhere in the previous 90 pages on this topic, but is there anyway to get a copy of the police report? I do recall reading the police report from Situation 1.0, but I believe it wasn't until many months after the incident occurred.

[almaman]

8 hours ago, BillIkenFan_Dan said:

This one means stop messing around and just let them play in a sense stop playing=stop messing around The eyes=look out and the ball means basically just basketball 

so really nothin positive or that infers this BS about over?

[Pistol]

6 minutes ago, David King said:

This may have been discussed somewhere in the previous 90 pages on this topic, but is there anyway to get a copy of the police report? I do recall reading the police report from Situation 1.0, but I believe it wasn't until many months after the incident occurred.

I'm guessing it's not available yet, as it isn't officially "closed" on their end.

[Tilkowsky]

21 minutes ago, billiken_roy said:

cheeseman, i dont even care which way the decision goes.   just make a decision.  the fact this continues to drag out only hurts the program regardless of the verdict by this committee.  the crime of this whole ordeal is taking months to make a decision that literally should have been made in a week or two.   no one has presented a timeline that justifies this going beyond the 60 day mark.   we get all the elite liberals telling us to let it run it's course blah blah blah.   this should be done.  

make a decision

Don't ask for just a decision.

You may not like it.

Ask for justice to be served for the players and accusers.

 

[Pistol]

On ‎12‎/‎1‎/‎2017 at 5:06 PM, HoosierPal said:

I agree this works really well.  I have four on Ignore, well actually three as one uses two names, and the board is much better for me without those 4 (3). 

Oh, by the way, I think you mentioned that you have me on Ignore, so you won't read my complimentary post.  I'm okay with that.

I'm reading this, so you must not be.

[NH]

11 hours ago, brianstl said:

Has the school took actions that led to the identity of the females being revealed?  Has the school leveled any kind of interim suspension against the females? 

That’s ridiculous and you know it.

[billiken_roy]

6 minutes ago, NH said:

That’s ridiculous and you know it.

why is that ridiculous?   i dont think Brian necessarily wants the girls identity revealed or suspended.  However, if the rumors are true that the girls were every bit the consensual players in the evening in question if not the actual agressors, and the fact that players are without a doubt indirectly identified by their suspensions and absences from public games and appearances, does appear to be an unfair double standard in the big picture that the players will never recover from in lost reputation.     

[Clock_Tower]

9 hours ago, Wendelprof said:

Keyser,

No where do I mention expelling students.  Moreover, 75% of student "fooling around" does not result in one of the parties filing a Title IX claim shortly after they are done.  When the video was posted apparently one or more of the women felt violated.  I don't think 75% of the university is engaging in the particular conduct that has been alleged here.  

In the law we often speak of a "question of first impression" - where the facts are so different from any previous case that the ruling will set precedent that will be followed by all parties involved moving forward.  I think it safe to say that this is a question of first impression.  SLU is appropriately concerned about setting the proper precedent and sending the proper message to its students.  What will that message be?  Let the process run its course.

 

 

Why does it appear that SLU has much higher standards than the rest of college basketball?  

[Bills_06]

10 hours ago, Wendelprof said:

Brian,

I share your frustrations, but I'm not sure you understand how academics and universities work (not that people should).  They are not companies per se.  They are governed by different laws than companies.  I'm not an expert in this area, but I'm pretty sure that under FERPA, universities are prohibited from commenting on student matters, and violations of FERPA can result in a university losing its right to receive federal funding (i.e., student loan money).  If SLU were to lose its right to receive student loan money, SLU would have to close its doors pretty quickly.  Unfortunately, this is about something much more important than just the basketball players and the basketball program.  Moreover, once the Title IX investigation starts, at most universities the principal parties are faculty members, not administrators.  Many faculty members have mixed feelings about athletic programs.  Most faculty members tolerate the athletic programs but do not see any reason to give student-athletes are different treatment than any other student.  And most faculty members have tenure, so the President of the University really cannot fire the faculty member if he or she decides to take his or her time to investigate, hear, and decide a difficult matter as he or she deems appropriate.  

It is understandable that the fans are frustrated, the athletic program is frustrated, and the players are frustrated - but that's how academics and universities act.  And for the record, once a decision is reached, the university again cannot comment on it.  The only reason we'll hear anything is if the players decide to disclose whatever they want.  Under FERPA the University cannot make any specific comment about the matter.  So the universities will always lose the PR battle, but FERPA dictates that it should not be a PR matter.  Just as a university cannot publicly comment on a student's academic performance, a university cannot comment on a student's disciplinary matter.

We can vent all we want, but it isn't going to change anything.  The process has to run its course.  

I don't know if that will help any, but I also think it is a bit unfair the criticism that the university has taken on this one.  It is simply following FERPA and Title IX rules, and as a Catholic institution, even if no crime has been committed, it is unlikely that this is conduct that the university finds acceptable.  The video itself evidences conduct that is likely to warrant disciplinary action.  And while I have not seen the video and know only what has been reported here, there are potentially serious issues with the question of consent.  If any of the women involved had consumed alcohol or other substances that might have affected their ability to give consent, the current position in most student handbooks is that any consent must be "effective" consent or something to that effect, giving the university grounds for taking action even if the women gave consent if the hearing board decides the consent was not truly effective but the women were acting with diminished capacity.

This is a much more complicated matter than most on this board appreciate.  Let the process run its course.

I hope that helps put the complexity of the matter in a better light.

 

 

The process defined by SLU is supposed to last 60 days.  I think when it's well past that point and the only information on it that is released is a complaint from the lawyers representing the athletes, I think it's reasonable for people to question how well SLU is following their process.  

[JohnnyJumpUp]

5 minutes ago, billiken_roy said:

why is that ridiculous?   i dont think Brian necessarily wants the girls identity revealed or suspended.  However, if the rumors are true that the girls were every bit the consensual players in the evening in question if not the actual agressors, and the fact that players are without a doubt indirectly identified by their suspensions and absences from public games and appearances, does appear to be an unfair double standard in the big picture that the players will never recover from in lost reputation.     

 Good Post

[slufan13]

Interesting article from a few months back where SLU indicates that the new title IX policies that do not require you do be done in 60 days will not necessarily be adopted by SLU right away.

http://unewsonline.com/35091/news/slu-contemplates-title-ix-adjustments/ 

  Anna Kratky, SLU’s Title IX coordinator, said that even though there have been proposed changes to Title IX guidelines, schools are unlikely to see any certain guidelines changes for another nine to 18 months. 

....

 Another proposed change to the Title IX guidelines is the removal of a fixed time period in which schools must respond and complete a Title IX investigation. During the Obama administration, the amount of time schools had to complete investigations was 60 days, prompting quick responses from institutions. Under the new guidelines, schools would not have a specified time to complete an investigation, but are simply urged to work promptly. McCormick said that this change is not necessarily good nor bad, but depends on the school.  
    Making the process longer not only makes it harder to prove guilt, says McCormick, but it makes life harder both parties. “If the process takes a long time, the accuser might still have to live on campus with the person who assaulted them or sit next to that person in class,” said McCormick. Similarly, the accused parties do not get a remedy until the process is over either. “If an accused student is eventually found not guilty, they won’t know they are off the hook until the whole process is over.”

[brianstl]

27 minutes ago, NH said:

That’s ridiculous and you know it.

Why is it ridiculous?  I was responding to post that stated the process must be applied equally to both the accused and the accusers.  The process has not been applied equally to both sides.

The school has enacted measures that have revealed the identities of students accused of sexual assault.   Permanently staining these individuals for life and permanently damaging their job prospects. These are accusations that have been recanted by one of the accusers and there is video of the incident.  The police and the prosecutor's office have decided not to move forward with criminal charges.  

I don't want the accusers identified, but the process has clearly not been applied equally to both sides.  Pointing that out is in no way ridiculous.  

[Bobby Metzinger]

3 minutes ago, brianstl said:

Why is it ridiculous?  I was responding to post that stated the process must be applied equally to both the accused and the accusers.  The process has not been applied equally to both sides.

The school has enacted measures that have revealed the identities of students accused of sexual assault.   Permanently staining these individuals for life and permanently damaging their job prospects. These are accusations that have been recanted by one of the accusers and there is video of the incident.  The police and the prosecutor's office has decided not to move forward with criminal charges.  

I don't want the accusers identified, but it the process has clearly not been applied equally to both sides.  Pointing that out is in no way ridiculous.  

Hard to believe the puppetmaster of all this is Fred Pestello. If anyone was at the 200-yr anniversary mass, he gave a speech and thanked Rev. Biondi for his service to the university; it might have been the most awkward exchange of glances in recorded history. 

[brianstl]

This whole process is BS.  We now have faculty paid by the school coming on this board to defend the school actions and using the school's code of conduct and FERPA as a shield to protect the school from criticism.  I would have no problem with the players getting in trouble for violating the code of conduct if that was what they were accused of originally.   The fact is they were accused of sexual assault and not some non criminal violations of SLU's code of conduct.  The sexual assault charges are still the banner that hangs over this entire process.

SLU has a duty to act in way that does not unfairly hurt their students.  SLU's actions have allowed three of the young men in their charge to be labeled sexual predators.  SLU, to this point, has completely failed these young men.

[2010andBeyond]

I would have no problem with the timeline at all if they hadn’t decided to preemptively suspend the guys while the investigation was going on. 

[willie]

Wendelprof I assume you take your screen name after the great George Wendel. A great teacher and huge billiken fan. My all time  favorite. Thanks for outlining the process. Also someone said there is either let the kids play or expulsion. There is a third option which I would probably bet on. Suspension for the first semester. Since today is December 4th that wouldn't be a bad outcome. 

[cheeseman]

1 hour ago, David King said:

This may have been discussed somewhere in the previous 90 pages on this topic, but is there anyway to get a copy of the police report? I do recall reading the police report from Situation 1.0, but I believe it wasn't until many months after the incident occurred.

I believe once the police are finished with an investigation and DA has decided not to charge anybody the arrest report is public knowledge.  How you get them - good guess.

[GoBills73]

So I thought the statement from the players' attorney was fine with the exception that it was a tweet by a 590 employee and wasn't picked up by any major local media. I would have liked to have seen a small blurb at least on stltoday.com

[JohnnyJumpUp]

42 minutes ago, brianstl said:

This whole process is BS.  We now have faculty paid by the school coming on this board to defend the school actions and using the school's code of conduct and FERPA as a shield to protect the school from criticism.  I would have no problem with the players getting in trouble for violating the code of conduct if that was what they were accused of originally.   The fact is they were accused of sexual assault and not some non criminal violations of SLU's code of conduct.  The sexual assault charges are still the banner that hangs over this entire process.

SLU has a duty to act in way that does not unfairly hurt their students.  SLU's actions have allowed three of the young men in their charge to be labeled sexual predators.  SLU, to this point, has completely failed these young men.

Good Post

[Old guy]

Someone please provide clarification of NCAAB rules. If a player plays a single game in a season or a few games in a season and then is removed for causes other than medical, does this count as a full year of eligibility?

[HenryB]

42 minutes ago, willie said:

Wendelprof I assume you take your screen name after the great George Wendel. A great teacher and huge billiken fan. My all time  favorite. Thanks for outlining the process. Also someone said there is either let the kids play or expulsion. There is a third option which I would probably bet on. Suspension for the first semester. Since today is December 4th that wouldn't be a bad outcome. 

If that were the case the players and lawyers would have been told that.  No one knows what is going on because the administration continues to put its head in the sand and stone wall. 

[keyser soze]

I think that Stu and Frank C. need to be made aware that SLU employees/faculty are snooping on billikens.com and lecturing we the uneducated fans on the importance of a most thorough and lengthy investigation even if it's borderline incompetent...

For the faculty, in the real world, this would be a major HR incident, people would then be fired real fast.... apparently in the academic bubble students can violate the honor code/handbook, fall into a grey purgatory of a title XI investigation and sit in limbo for 3+ months and have to put their lives on hold.  If they broke rules, expel or suspend and then move on, or most importantly let the students move on.... 

What is happening now?  Our AD is getting into pi$$ing contests with donors/fans.  Faculty lecturing fans/donors/alumni...  wow!!!

[slufan13]

54 minutes ago, willie said:

Wendelprof I assume you take your screen name after the great George Wendel. A great teacher and huge billiken fan. My all time  favorite. Thanks for outlining the process. Also someone said there is either let the kids play or expulsion. There is a third option which I would probably bet on. Suspension for the first semester. Since today is December 4th that wouldn't be a bad outcome. 

Suspension for the first semester is kind of what I'm betting on too. But if that's the case, why not announce it? 

I think at this point an at-large bid is out of the question for this team. If we get the players back after the first semester, I hope they gel quickly and I hope the tank isn't completely empty for those who have had to log ridiculous minutes/burden so far. The season isn't lost but unfortunately it's probably not as simple as just getting the players back and expecting a turnaround from week 1 (the second part of this post isn't directed at anyone in particular...just my usual rambling).