Definitely not.... Don't forgot about the origins of Christmas. One could argue, it is closer to the "true meaning" of Christmas than the modern attributions.
Edit to Note: Somewhat in jest, but also somewhat true.
Hutton to the Minnesota Daily: There are plans to sue ‘everyone.’
- Thread starter BleedGopher
- Start date
Definitely not.... Don't forgot about the origins of Christmas. One could argue, it is closer to the "true meaning" of Christmas than the modern attributions.
Edit to Note: Somewhat in jest, but also somewhat true.
You do know that one does not need a registered account just to read, right? I've been "read only" for a little over 2 years.
The fact that you don't think the tone of this discussion could cause a previously silent observor to feel the need to speak up, is partly why things are acrimonious.
Sent from my SM-G360V using Tapatalk
Gogogopher
Member
- Joined
- Dec 8, 2015
- Messages
- 325
- Reaction score
- 3
- Points
- 18
Yeah, I think the fact that most everyone else in the world looked at the report and concluded it was well done and there was an assault really angers some folks. So when they see anyone disagreeing with them they get testy. I have seen people disparaged in all sorts of ways. I myself was prescribed meds by a gopherholer (must be mentally ill if I don't agree). Most people don't have the time or energy to deal with all the negativity. Thanks for chiming in and...
Merry Christmas!!!
unless you don't celebrate then Happy Holidays!!!
The issue here isn't whether the report was well done or even whether there was an assault. The issue is whether the accused have been given a fair opportunity to defend themselves regardless of how strong the evidence against them is. I elsewhere, and others here, have pointed out some of the deficiencies in the EOAA's standard of proof and procedures, such as a preponderance of the evidence standard without the opportunity for discovery or cross examination. Thus far the accused have not had a hearing at which they have been given a meaningful opportunity to rebut the charges against them. Two investigations are not a hearing.
Given the information we do have concerning the September 2nd incident, I have no problem with suspending the players involved until there has been a hearing, which, I understand has been scheduled for sometime in January. But I do think it was egregious for the University to identify them as potential sexual predators prior to that hearing, especially those who had not previously been identified in connection with the incident. Precisely, what, if any role, those additional players had is unclear to me, and at least one, apparently contends he wasn't there.
PMWinSTP
Well-known member
- Joined
- Oct 11, 2015
- Messages
- 15,557
- Reaction score
- 5,132
- Points
- 113
Along with the lack of due process (bet many parents don't realize their kids "sign away" constitutional rights under the guise of a "contract"), there are 5 others involved whose participation/guilt is highly suspect. There is a very good possibility the EOAA and the U overreached and overstepped...and the "thoroughness" of the volume of the report has opened them up, in quite possibly a very big way.
I've posted a quote from the Chair of the BoR on this very situation multiple times in several threads. He has real concern about the lack of due process and said he has discussed many times in the past with Kaler about the need to change. Well, it might be too late, and I think he knows it.
Here's his bio from the Uof M website, I think he knows his stuff...https://regents.umn.edu/meet-regents/dean-e-johnson