Fall 2017 allegations against unnamed players (aka Situation 2)

[brianstl]

The biggest problem with the process is the interim suspension of the players.  That is what associated their names with the charges.  That Pestello had to sign off on and isn't part of the the Title IX process.

[Wendelprof]

4 hours ago, moytoy12 said:

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? 

Moytoy,

Fair enough, I'm making something of an assumption that this is a case of first impression.  So let's check my assumptions.  How many people who regularly read this board have engaged in some form of group sex (it is my understanding that is part of the claim here)?  And those of you who have, how many of you have posted it on the internet in some form?

I agree with your point more and more kids these days appear to be thinking such behavior might be fun and with trying, but I'm still willing to bet this is probably the first such complaint at SLU - but SLU realizes that in today's social media world, it isn't likely the last.  They need to set the right precedent.  Let the process play itself out.

[billiken_roy]

20 minutes ago, Wendelprof said:

Clock_Tower,

As I mentioned, I'm not an expert on Title IX, and I'm not sure how much you want to read, but here's an academic perspective of Title IX:

https://www.aaup.org/file/TitleIXreport.pdf

I didn't read it all, but it appears to do a pretty good job of describing how Title IX has changed over the years, including a discussion of how it has become one of the principal tools used now to fight sexual misconduct.

As for your questions, (1) because I don't work at SLU I'm not familiar with their procedures and handbooks, nor am I familiar with the details of Situation 1 (other than what I read on this board inasmuch as I live out of town).  But my guess - only a guess - is that the tribunal hearing that occurred was their Title IX process.  And the Student Code of Conduct/Housing regulations are often a part of such proceedings because they set forth the standards to which the university has stated it holds its students.  If a student has violated those standards, another student can invoke the standards in seeking disciplinary action against the student.

As for question 2, any student can file a Title IX complaint against any other student within the university.  The reason one might think that Title IX complaints only involve athletes is that such complaints are the only ones that the media bothers to discuss or that "outsiders" hear about.  But Title IX complaints can involve any student, athlete or non, male or female.

As for question (3), the report I linked above gives a history of Title IX, and it acknowledges that it has evolved over time and is still evolving (as is how universities are responding to it).  Although it is based in statute, as the courts read and construe it, and grant implied rights and conditions, the scope and understanding of Title IX is constantly evolving.

You mentioned that "The vibes I am receiving is that our Men's baketball players, due to their high profile nature, appear to be subject to far greater scrutiny than SLU nont -student athletes."  Your instincts are good, but let me offer an alternative explanation for why that might be the case.  Title IX is primarily about prohibiting discrimination based on sex.  The concern with respect to athletes is that universities might have an incentive to "discount" claims of sexual misconduct because punishing the athlete could have financial consequences for the institution.  One need not look too far to find evidence to support such an argument.  I don't know if you are familiar with the situation down at Baylor, but one of the accusations is/was that the university failed to properly handle claims of sexual misconduct involving some of the football players because they were football players, and because they were football players, male athletes were being favored over female students who did not bring money and attention to the school.  The whole purpose of Title IX is to make sure that all students are treated equally, whether male or female, whether athlete or non-athlete.  The risk is that universities will succumb to pressures from donors and fans and treat their athletes differently than other students for the greater good of the university.  That is not fair to the student who has brought the complaint.  All students must be treated equally, and that is what is at the heart of the Title IX process.  Let the process play itself out.  There is a lot at stake (no less than Ken Starr lost his job as President of Baylor because the university's mishandling of the Title IX complaints occurred on his watch).  Let the process play itself out.  If there had been criminal or civil charges, we would still be months away from a trial.  In the world of dispute resolutions, investigating, hearing, deciding, and leaving time for appeals takes time.  60 days is not much time at all in the world of disputes.

their time is out.  make a decision.

[Wendelprof]

2 hours 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.

Again, I want to clarify I do not work for SLU.  I am not a professor at SLU.  Some of you are so frustrated with what is going on that you can only see this from the worst possible perspective.  I thought it might be helpful to post some information about how universities act and think to help you understand why this is a tougher situation than I think some are giving it credit.  Instead people are just twisting my comments to try to make the university look worse.  

I know it is hard because we don't really know the facts, but it usually is best to stick to the facts (not assumptions, which is what people are jumping to).  I'm not a faculty member paid by the school.  I'm just trying to give some perspective.  I am an alum who is a fan of both the basketball program and the university.  It is possible to be both, but I agree it can be frustrating in this current situation.

[Wendelprof]

34 minutes ago, 615Billiken said:

Yeah @Wendelprof, leave Keyser alone!

He graduated as valedictorian of SLUH before graduating laude from SLU. He had perfect attendance to all home game while he was a student, and was president of the SLUnatics during his junior and senior year. He has clocked over 100,000 miles on his Chevy Tahoe traveling to Billiken games across the country, and that’s not including his frequent flier miles on his Billiken card.

He has two sons, both named after Biondi. His sons attend SLUH and will be at SLU in the coming years. 

When this guy poops, Billiken bobble heads come out. His made his wife change her name to Billie, something that she gladly did. He owns a company called Billiken Fanworks, LLC. 

He breathes, sweats, and bleeds Billikens. 

You know nothing Wendelprof.

 

615Billiken,

Thank you, I got a good laugh out of that.

   

 

[moytoy12]

15 minutes ago, Wendelprof said:

Moytoy,

Fair enough, I'm making something of an assumption that this is a case of first impression.  So let's check my assumptions.  How many people who regularly read this board have engaged in some form of group sex (it is my understanding that is part of the claim here)?  And those of you who have, how many of you have posted it on the internet in some form?

I agree with your point more and more kids these days appear to be thinking such behavior might be fun and with trying, but I'm still willing to bet this is probably the first such complaint at SLU - but SLU realizes that in today's social media world, it isn't likely the last.  They need to set the right precedent.  Let the process play itself out.

I think your assumption is flawed as this board is not representative of the SLU student body. I suspect that whatever happened in this incident occurs more regularly on SLU's campus than what you believe. 

I also agree with @brianstlthat the interim suspensions are problematic. 

[brianstl]

1 minute ago, Wendelprof said:

Again, I want to clarify I do not work for SLU.  I am not a professor at SLU.  Some of you are so frustrated with what is going on that you can only see this from the worst possible perspective.  I thought it might be helpful to post some information about how universities act and think to help you understand why this is a tougher situation than I think some are giving it credit.  Instead people are just twisting my comments to try to make the university look worse.  

I know it is hard because we don't really know the facts, but it usually is best to stick to the facts (not assumptions, which is what people are jumping to).  I'm not a faculty member paid by the school.  I'm just trying to give some perspective.  I am an alum who is a fan of both the basketball program and the university.  It is possible to be both, but I agree it can be frustrating in this current situation.

You have actually put forth a decent case for SLU here. Much better than any other presented so far. I disagree on some issues, but SLU should have took this approach themselves far earlier in the process.  The institution would be smart to emulate your approach.

Your handle got you lumped in with a faculty member that does post here.  That wasn't fair.  You have done a much better job of making the school's case here than he ever did.

[Wendelprof]

2 hours 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. 

Willie,

Thank you for your kind comments, but now that my identity has been disclosed, probably best if I go back into just reading the board.  Best to all.

Go Bills!

[cheeseman]

33 minutes ago, Wendelprof said:

Cheeseman,

Title IX, in part, is in response to your statement that "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."  Maybe at some universities in the old days that happened, but not now.  Not since Title IX has taken its current form.  University administrators have been fired for less (perceived failure to properly handle such complaints), and universities are being sued right and left by students who believe that they were not treated properly in such proceedings.  Title IX is a land-mine these days, with some schools being accused of being too soft when presented with such complaints, and some schools being accused of being too hard when presented with such complaints.  But one thing you cannot do any more is assume that whatever you do in-house (inside the university) will be the end of the matter.  More and more it is just the start of the matter, with the dispute then moving to the civil courtrooms with the university now being sued. 

You have no idea who may not have reported an infraction violation.  I get your point that if they got caught they would be fired but if the school is going to say that they will deal with a 100% of all infractions violators then they are being naive.  

[cheeseman]

2 hours ago, Old guy said:

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?

I would think not since the NCAA is not the suspending organization.  As long as SLU says they could play and did not violate any NCAA rules then they would be good to go until they are not.

[cheeseman]

1 hour ago, billiken_roy said:

you dont call those manifesto posts by wendelprof and doctorb lecturing? 

imo they both were the among the most if not the most elitest liberal academia lectures ever seen on billikens.com.  im hoping we never hear from either ever again after those written beatdowns.  i have spent some time now thinking i wish i was as smart as either one of them, but that only further diminishes my self worth.  

I am not trying to be smart guy here but one could say that your posts are just a conservative elitists non academia lectures - just saying.

[cheeseman]

40 minutes ago, Wendelprof said:

Moytoy,

Fair enough, I'm making something of an assumption that this is a case of first impression.  So let's check my assumptions.  How many people who regularly read this board have engaged in some form of group sex (it is my understanding that is part of the claim here)?  And those of you who have, how many of you have posted it on the internet in some form?

I agree with your point more and more kids these days appear to be thinking such behavior might be fun and with trying, but I'm still willing to bet this is probably the first such complaint at SLU - but SLU realizes that in today's social media world, it isn't likely the last.  They need to set the right precedent.  Let the process play itself out.

Well the internet did not exist then.

[Old guy]

Cheeseman that is not what I am trying to find out, and thanks for the response. I am sure they can play as soon as SLU says they can. What I would like to know is this: Suppose that there is a chance that these players could be expelled after the whole mess is  over. If the University allowed them to play a few games and then went ahead and expel them, would they lose a year of eligibility?  I want to know if the fact that the kids are not playing despite the fact that the investigation is ongoing may mean that someone is trying to save them from losing a full year of eligibility if they played only a few games before being expelled. 

8 minutes ago, cheeseman said:

I would think not since the NCAA is not the suspending organization.  As long as SLU says they could play and did not violate any NCAA rules then they would be good to go until they are not.

 

[slufan13]

46 minutes ago, brianstl said:

The biggest problem with the process is the interim suspension of the players.  That is what associated their names with the charges.  That Pestello had to sign off on and isn't part of the the Title IX process.

This is my biggest issue as well. 

[JMM28]

Mixing government and academia has led to this strange new reality apparently. I am shocked. Two groups that are a bastion of efficiency. 

Seemingly an accuser would need 0 proof of anything to destroy someones life in this strange world. Shockingly terrible. 

[Pistol]

16 minutes ago, JMM28 said:

Mixing government and academia has led to this strange new reality apparently. I am shocked. Two groups that are a bastion of efficiency. 

Seemingly an accuser would need 0 proof of anything to destroy someones life in this strange world. Shockingly terrible. 

Title IX was passed into law in 1972. Federal education-related laws predate Title IX by many decades. These things obviously evolve, but this is nothing new.

1 hour ago, brianstl said:

The biggest problem with the process is the interim suspension of the players.  That is what associated their names with the charges.  That Pestello had to sign off on and isn't part of the Title IX process.

How would these suspensions have been determined? The internal investigation committee basically recommended "suspensions pending investigation" and the school administration approved?

I'm guessing Pestello would need extremely compelling reasons to go against the wishes of the committee, assuming this was the process. I can't imagine what such reasons would be, and injecting himself in the process by overruling their very first decision probably isn't a good look, and furthermore could factor into their ultimate decision detrimentally. I don't think he had much of a choice but to sign off and let it play out.

[Westy03]

When are exams?

[brianstl]

1 minute ago, Pistol said:

 

How would these suspensions have been determined? The internal investigation committee basically recommended "suspensions pending investigation" and the school administration approved?

I'm guessing Pestello would need extremely compelling reasons to go against the wishes of the committee, assuming this was the process. I can't imagine what such reasons would be, and injecting himself in the process by overruling their very first decision probably isn't a good look, and furthermore could factor into their ultimate decision detrimentally. I don't think he had much of a choice but to sign off and let it play out.

The compelling reason would to be to follow the Title IX guidance  when it comes to interim measures.  Reading through all the different Title IX guidance on this issue all interim measures involve what are deemed reasonable measures to protect the person reporting the assault.  They include items like changes in housing, campus escorts, increased security, restriction of contact, etc.  School suspension is even named as a reasonable measure.  At no time is a restriction from a school sponsored team only during game day activities mentioned.  I don't even know how anyone could determine that would protect the person making the complaint.  

 

[juniorbill76]

6 minutes ago, Westy03 said:

When are exams?

Dec. 13-19.

[Billboy1]

We can have all the talk on here about what is right and what is wrong.  The fact is it is not helping move the decision along. More pressure needs to come from the boosters and donors before this season is lost.

[cheeseman]

2 hours ago, Wendelprof said:

I disagree, there is plenty of room between expelling the students or letting them play.  My guess is that is one of the big hold-ups.  I'd be surprised if the students are not disciplined, but I have to think at least some members of the hearing tribunal will think that expelling them is too harsh.  So what's the punishment the tribunal can agree on?  Very difficult decision for even a secular university; even tougher for a Catholic institution.

Not so in Situation #1

[Tilkowsky]

1 hour ago, brianstl said:

The biggest problem with the process is the interim suspension of the players.  That is what associated their names with the charges.  That Pestello had to sign off on and isn't part of the the Title IX process.

Again the players put themselves in that position.

[teamarete]

1 minute ago, Tilkowsky said:

Again the players put themselves in that position.

How do you know?

[cheeseman]

Someone - I am sorry I do not remember who - posted that if drinking was involved then the girls could not give consent.  I get the idea that if someone is not in full control of their faculties that they can agree to something.  My question is if this is true for the girls then why not for the boys?  If they were drinking how could they consent to taking part in the action.  I know if you are very drunk and get in your car and drive and then hit somebody and even kill them, you will be tried but at a much lesser charge then simply murder.  The idea being that you were not capable of knowing what you were doing or in control of your decision making.  Often these people get 6 months or a year and probation.  What I am asking is could the boys who were drinking not be of sound mind regarding their actions?

[Bizziken]

Throughout this entire process, Pestello's primary concern should be to promote and preserve the integrity of the University. No matter the ultimate decision, THAT is not a moving target. The end result of this investigation should serve to reinforce that integrity by either levying some sort of punishment, or not. 

I understand the many nuances involved in a Title IX investigation (including privacy and transparency requirements), however, to date I don't think the administration has handled it that well, especially from a PR perspective.

To me, ensuring the integrity of the university means being as forthcoming as legally possible with information and updates, reinforcing the fact that SLU is a safe and welcoming environment for students, and making it clear that justice will be served in a timely manner.

Providing some degree of detail about the process itself would at least eliminate some of the guesswork involved. Giving a generic 'timeline update' (something to the effect of: 'this will take longer than previously thought') would go a long way towards deflecting some of the negative commentary. Instead, it seems as if SLU has boarded up the windows and doors with regard to releasing any sort of statement.