Who leaked the report?

Donate To GopherHole
S

Some guy

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 1, 2014
Messages
22,576
Reaction score
11,797
Points
113
If it was a U of M employee of any sort this thing will cost millions if not tens of millions of dollars.
 

Some guy said:
If it was a U of M employee of any sort this thing will cost millions if not tens of millions of dollars.
Click to expand...

Hard to know entirely. Some say a player that was served with the accusations and expulsion or suspensions letter leaked it, at least a portion of the letter in a tweet to a KSTP radio personality. Would have been pretty useless for one of the accused players to have leaked it.
Some claim to have seen it from individuals that worked in athletics and employees of the U from the media. Most of us believe it was an affected player from the suspensions that leaked the report to the press. KSTP knows, not sure if they are obligated to share, depends on the means of how they obtained the report and the consent given.
 

Seems like more rumors than fact and KSTP 5 probably isn't going to reveal their source. It seems like the admin or alleged victim had more to gain by releasing it but I can also see a scenario where one of the newly named players that was peripheral to the incident wanted to clarify what their involvement was to the world. However, the report made his teammates look far worse to the angry mob so I'm not sure that makes sense.

Unless someone owns up to it well probably never know. Proponents of the U and the witch hunts will say it was the players.
 

The report should have been released some 24-36 hours earlier.

That would have allowed the team to decide whether to "boycott" at all.

The boycott rests on Kaler and Coyle for not being more open on what was in play. We now know they could have released more...at least to the team...than they did. Clearly covering their asses on that.

I still blame the most senior player there for not shutting it down. If he was part of the original 4...gone. If he was part of the next 6...gone. If he received a tweet about what was going on and did nothing...gone. Zero tolerance. Period.

The tide seems to be shifting against the Administration. They were the ones who embraced the Title IX box. The University would have been better served if they'd tried to tell the team more than they did.

And yes, if the guys didn't do whatever happened...we'd be talking about something else...like maybe the bowl game match-ups.
 

Pompous Elitist said:
It seems like the admin or alleged victim had more to gain by releasing it
Click to expand...

Players had nothing to gain by releasing it. They were best served by the police report which basically says there was consensual sex as proven by video. So I don't see them unless they or their lawyers are truly stupid. Without the EOAA report, I think the players would have passed on the bowl. I don't think the content of the report changed any of the players' minds, but it changed public perception and they didn't want to be painted as rape apologists. As mentioned previously on the Gopher podcast - if they were not willing to go 100% in the boycott, they never should have done it in the first place.
 


Class_of_99 said:
Players had nothing to gain by releasing it. They were best served by the police report which basically says there was consensual sex as proven by video. So I don't see them unless they or their lawyers are truly stupid. Without the EOAA report, I think the players would have passed on the bowl. I don't think the content of the report changed any of the players' minds, but it changed public perception and they didn't want to be painted as rape apologists. As mentioned previously on the Gopher podcast - if they were not willing to go 100% in the boycott, they never should have done it in the first place.
Click to expand...

I agree with you.
 

I think, given the cover letter on the report, it looks as if it was an Accused Player, A Family Member of an Accused Player, or Hutton. The only other people who had access were the EOAA, and the Administration, both of which I don't think would have a particular benefit in releasing it.
 

Taji34 said:
I think, given the cover letter on the report, it looks as if it was an Accused Player, A Family Member of an Accused Player, or Hutton. The only other people who had access were the EOAA, and the Administration, both of which I don't think would have a particular benefit in releasing it.
Click to expand...

I think in the absence of clarity of who released it, it will hurt the U of M and drive settlements upwards
 

BilldGopher said:
The tide seems to be shifting against the Administration. They were the ones who embraced the Title IX box. The University would have been better served if they'd tried to tell the team more than they did.
Click to expand...

Yeah, that's not the case at all, outside of the fanboys on Gopherhole (who are dangerously close to reaching Penn State apologist level). The tail between their legs backtrack on the boycott sealed public opinion.

If by "embracing the Title IX box", you mean not discussing the investigation, thereby not committing a felony, then yes, the U embraced those pesky federal privacy laws.
 




Taji34 said:
I think, given the cover letter on the report, it looks as if it was an Accused Player, A Family Member of an Accused Player, or Hutton. The only other people who had access were the EOAA, and the Administration, both of which I don't think would have a particular benefit in releasing it.
Click to expand...

All parties involved get CC'd and all of them have people around them with access so not sure the cover letter tells us anything. Usually in a situation like this you would look to who benefits. I think that points to the EOAA office or a small subset of the players. Good arguments against them both too - all speculation and I doubt we ever know.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

Some guy said:
If it was a U of M employee of any sort this thing will cost millions if not tens of millions of dollars.
Click to expand...

An even better question? Who decided to only release 82 of the 100 pages and why?
 

Circumstances would point to an EOAA member. I think some day we will know. Some of these player not of NFL caliber may get an NFL level settlement.
 



Maximus said:
Yeah, that's not the case at all, outside of the fanboys on Gopherhole (who are dangerously close to reaching Penn State apologist level). The tail between their legs backtrack on the boycott sealed public opinion.

If by "embracing the Title IX box", you mean not discussing the investigation, thereby not committing a felony, then yes, the U embraced those pesky federal privacy laws.
Click to expand...

Public opinion was made up long before the report was released. Comments about the 10 rapists were everywhere.

This is not even close to the Penn St. level. There many Penn St fans saying Paterno did nothing wrong. In this case, virtually everyone has agreed that there was some wrongdoing by the players.
 

I leaked it.

Somehow I ended up on every distribution list at the U.... so I get a lot of email.
 

Taji34 said:
I think, given the cover letter on the report, it looks as if it was an Accused Player, A Family Member of an Accused Player, or Hutton. The only other people who had access were the EOAA, and the Administration, both of which I don't think would have a particular benefit in releasing it.
Click to expand...

Wouldn't that be a convenient copy for the U to leak....
 


I'm sure one of the players leaked it, hi mom, good right up on my first week of school, love you, take care.
 

This is the multiple perhaps 10s of millions of dollars question that nobody can answer.


The entity that published it does not have any legal responsibility and will not be able to remain silent on the issue when asked under oath? Or will they? I do not even know.
 

You can answer most questions with a simple "who benefitted".


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

I'm sure other have heard rumblings but I saw mention of it on social media that it was one of the five faced with expulsion. It was floating in the terrible cloud of Tyrone Carter tweets on Sunday.
 

WorkingMyTailOff said:
I'm sure other have heard rumblings but I saw mention of it on social media that it was one of the five faced with expulsion. It was floating in the terrible cloud of Tyrone Carter tweets on Sunday.
Click to expand...

I have seen multiple people say it was one of the players facing expulsion based on the fact that the cover letter was clearly written to one of them. Even on here I have seen people use that logic. It, of course, neglects that anyone in the EOAA office had copies of it as well as both the victim and U admin were CC'd on all letters sent out. So, in fact, that doesn't give any insight. Unless the rumblings you heard are based on something else.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

Maximus said:
Yeah, that's not the case at all, outside of the fanboys on Gopherhole (who are dangerously close to reaching Penn State apologist level). The tail between their legs backtrack on the boycott sealed public opinion.

If by "embracing the Title IX box", you mean not discussing the investigation, thereby not committing a felony, then yes, the U embraced those pesky federal privacy laws.
Click to expand...

Why do you believe the backtrack on the boycott sealed their fate? From how I read the situation, the boycott was instituted because they did not understand why their teammates were being suspended. And felt they were being railroaded. Likely based on accounts from the players involved as they would have nothing else to go on. Subsequently, the report is leaked, the players met with Kaler which added clarity to the situation and how the process would play out. Thus, they received what they had wanted. Based on the details leaked in the report, it would have been suicide to continue with the boycott. Frankly, ending the boycott and the statement that was read by the players is, to this point, the only positive to come from this mess. If MC and EK would have found a way to properly communicate this entire issue, or manage it appropriately from the start, we would be in a much better place than we are now.
 


Spoofin said:
I have seen multiple people say it was one of the players facing expulsion based on the fact that the cover letter was clearly written to one of them. Even on here I have seen people use that logic. It, of course, neglects that anyone in the EOAA office had copies of it as well as both the victim and U admin were CC'd on all letters sent out. So, in fact, that doesn't give any insight. Unless the rumblings you heard are based on something else.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

You could be on to something.

I think without public opinion on their side, the case (report) fails prima facie.

They realize they set the players on the team up to walk, and they are pissed. Out it goes to KSTP. Puts U in unenviable position.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom