All Things EOAA, Investigation, Suspension, Overturned Etc. Thread: UPDATED 1 Thread

Donate To GopherHole
Ozzy&Ray said:
It's people like you that totally miss the point. Reuse clearly said there were five involved. It was totally flawed in how it brought those now exonerated into the mix. If one of those guys was your son, and had never even been there, you would be furious. The point is who was unjustly accused. Just because some were involved, doesn't make it ok to have treated the four now exonerated the way they were. We should have higher expectations of an office of our university.

Also, from what I have heard at the university, Williams will likely be back on the team.


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

Don't respond and let the little one hijack the thread. Oh, and since he's not a real person, just a troll on the internet, then he couldn't have kids.

Though bet some of his other monikers have them. :D
 

the young woman during or after became traumatized, but the EOAA report authorized by Hewitt did drag through the muck the reputations of at least four players who were not involved to a degree that required discipline.

The sources I was using for the Dec. 20 information said this:

Antonio Shenault was involved in no way. Antoine Winfield Jr. went to the room to retrieve the recruit who had somehow heard about what was going on and left to join in. Seth Green never entered the room.

The discipline against those three was overturned Friday, along with that of Kobe McCrary, after a university hearing. That left four players expelled and two with a one-year suspension.

The suspension that still stands against Mark Williams is said by his defenders to have little merit and they are hoping to have it overturned in an appeal to the university provost.

As for Kimberly Hewitt, if the 82-page EOAA report was her idea of a fair finding for the accuser and all of the accused, then her departure is not only Johns Hopkins’ gain but also the University of Minnesota’s.
 

GopherHomer said:
So - I looked them up just right now and I will award you the point...at least for those two. I agree that they both are really not doing society any favors. I still think, though, that there is quite a large space that exists between those two and a sensible discussion on possibility of 'rape culture.'

Found plenty on them, though, that I disagree with so point taken...it is possible to take it too far.
Click to expand...

A real rape culture does not exist in the United States.

Our society does not trivialize sexual assault or abuse. It is, rightfully, one of the worst offenses.

There are pockets of American society that might have a rape culture (some of the LDS sects in the west, prison culture (people laugh about rape to people in prison)), however, in mainstream American culture, it is probably considered the most vile act one can commit. Even between criminals, rapists and molesters are the lowest of the low.

It is so vile that people who are even accused of this behavior are severely impacted. That is why groups like the EoAA are so repulsive.
 

Trisuper said:
The report was so "flawed" that after initial appeals, the most serious charges against the majority of players were upheld by a panel of their peers. All of those players will be expelled from school (most permanently) unless the Provost rules otherwise or a Federal Court intervenes. This latter possibility is highly unlikely to occur and, in all probability, six Gopher football players will soon no longer be students there.
Also, has anyone ever thought that if Djam had not sent a video of himself and the recruit having sex with the cheerleader, that all ten players might have never gotten involved in this sordid affair? In fact, if Djam had not lured the recruit away from his host A. Winfield, none of this might ever have happened. Obviously, those occurrences are the fault of the EoAA.
Click to expand...

I don't know if you are capable of comprehending what is really going on here.

That article that you keep pointing to shows all of the horrible cases of injustice. It details cases where ordinary sane people should be sickened at the injustice that is happening. And you are pointing to that article as proof that the EoAA did a good job? You're a truly horrific person. You want these young men to face unjust punishment rather than be wrong about the EoAA. It's sickening.
 

Trisuper said:
The report was so "flawed" that after initial appeals, the most serious charges against the majority of players were upheld by a panel of their peers. All of those players will be expelled from school (most permanently) unless the Provost rules otherwise or a Federal Court intervenes. This latter possibility is highly unlikely to occur and, in all probability, six Gopher football players will soon no longer be students there.
Also, has anyone ever thought that if Djam had not sent a video of himself and the recruit having sex with the cheerleader, that all ten players might have never gotten involved in this sordid affair? In fact, if Djam had not lured the recruit away from his host A. Winfield, none of this might ever have happened. Obviously, those occurrences are the fault of the EoAA.
Click to expand...

Go away UpNorth.
 


TruthSeeker said:
She sees the writing on the wall. She is getting out before she would have been grilled and fired. Now she can get a new job before she is permanently tarnished.
Click to expand...
Well, my kid is not going to Johns Hopkins as long as she is there.

Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk
 

WHB Brewer said:
Even the biggest Reusse bashers on the site have to admit this is good detail. Well done Patrick.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
+1

Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk
 

GopherWeatherGuy said:
For as many times as you play lawyer on this site, I'd hope you've read what they broke in the student code of conduct by now. Much different than just whether the sex was consensual or not.
Click to expand...

No, I am a lawyer. I don't play one.

That said, my post had nothing to do with being a lawyer. I will go around my office tomorrow and see how many of them have read the U of MN student code of conduct. LOL. I should write the bar and demand that the U of MN Student Code of Conduct be added! This is a vital part of being a lawyer.

Your post was truly idiotic.

Someone said they are kicked out for sexual assault and you felt the need to idiotically chime in and say "no, it was a violation of the student code of conduct".

Because using a law as an example of how stupid your post was, we'll use other examples.

It's like if someone was saying "my dad was eating an orange" and you idiotically chimed in with "no, your dad was eating food".
It's like if someone was saying "XCel Energy Center is in Saint Paul" and you idiotically chimed in with "no, it's in Minnesota".

Get this, the student code of conduct has subdivision that. . . wait for it. . . specify certain behaviors that are violations. One of the subdivisions CITED BY THE EOAA was "sexual misconduct" and the provision of the student code of conduct that were accused of violating is titled "Sexual Assault, Stalking, and Relationship Violence".

So yeah, even though I'm a lawyer and this has NOTHING to do with being a lawyer and your post was idiotic.
 




Great Plains Gopher said:
Just in the job description you can see the growth of bureaucratic power at the local level, but originating in the federal government. Congress goes along, the public does nothing.
Click to expand...

Not fair. Local governments in Waco, TX, Chapel Hill, NC and Tallahasse, FL have done all they could to make sure that Baylor, North Carolina and Florida State have been protected from outside interference. :rolleyes:
 

TruthSeeker said:
Your ignorance is showing.

You're actually debating about how the system works with Bob and me. We're both attorneys, and you think you know better than us. You can't make this stuff up folks.
Click to expand...

He stayed at a Holiday Inn Express last night............so he has that going for him.
 

I would hope that Lee Hutton and the other lawyers have named her in there suit. She is the source of the report with no taped interviews. She gave the training to the panel. And she testified before the panel. To my estimate by naming the suspended students, and tying them to an unsupportable charge she is guilty of defamation. Its a civil charge and it travels very well. Whether it is criminal or civil, she can run but she cannot hide. The same charge could be leveled at Coyle and Kaler.
 

TruthSeeker said:
Your ignorance is showing.

You're actually debating about how the system works with Bob and me. We're both attorneys, and you think you know better than us. You can't make this stuff up folks.
Click to expand...

Criminal, trial, or some other kind of lawyer?. Some background on your kind of experience would be helpful. I dont have a specific issue with you orBob but I know a few attorneys that went to a criminal law setting from a non-criminal setting and have almost no clue what they are doing but do have a general understanding of how law works. Not saying you or Bob have no clue but I may take what either of you have to say with a grain of salt if you dont have a criminal law background.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

#coacheslivesmatter
 



Stuart Taylor is a well respected author who just wrote a book about this issue. Here is a short interview with him:
 


Bob_Loblaw said:
No, I am a lawyer. I don't play one.

That said, my post had nothing to do with being a lawyer. I will go around my office tomorrow and see how many of them have read the U of MN student code of conduct. LOL. I should write the bar and demand that the U of MN Student Code of Conduct be added! This is a vital part of being a lawyer.

Your post was truly idiotic.

Someone said they are kicked out for sexual assault and you felt the need to idiotically chime in and say "no, it was a violation of the student code of conduct".

Because using a law as an example of how stupid your post was, we'll use other examples.

It's like if someone was saying "my dad was eating an orange" and you idiotically chimed in with "no, your dad was eating food".
It's like if someone was saying "XCel Energy Center is in Saint Paul" and you idiotically chimed in with "no, it's in Minnesota".

Get this, the student code of conduct has subdivision that. . . wait for it. . . specify certain behaviors that are violations. One of the subdivisions CITED BY THE EOAA was "sexual misconduct" and the provision of the student code of conduct that were accused of violating is titled "Sexual Assault, Stalking, and Relationship Violence".

So yeah, even though I'm a lawyer and this has NOTHING to do with being a lawyer and your post was idiotic.
Click to expand...

Then you should know that the violations of the student code of conduct in the EOAA report were not just limited to 'consent' which is exactly what my point is.
 

Great Plains Gopher said:
Just in the job description you can see the growth of bureaucratic power at the local level, but originating in the federal government. Congress goes along, the public does nothing.
Click to expand...
In the case of the Dear Colleague Letter they didn't even get the acquiescence of Congress. The Dept of Education didn't go through formal rule the formal rule making process. There is a Supreme Court decision that because it was a guidance letter it doesn't have the force of law. The standard of 'Preponderance of Evidence' in the guidance, is contradicted by Supreme Court decisions that require 'Substantial Evidence', in two different school cases. If the DOE had tried to go through the normal rule making process, that would have to have been changed, to conform to the previous SCOTUS rulings. I believe that the guidance letter format was chosen to deliberately sidestep the established standard.
 

Not saying it's good that some men got their names 'dragged through the mud' but I don't believe this will affect them in the future in the pursuit of truth. In a couple years, this will be forgotten. When they are applying for jobs in the next handful of years, this story will be largely forgotten. If it is for a large corporate job, they will probably be vetted by a conservative, white male who would be largely sympathetic to their 'strife.' Their race will be a larger hindrance to their employment than their participation in this incident. If these guys were not athletes at a public university, I feel like there would be a lot less sympathy for their struggle.
 

GopherHomer said:
Not saying it's good that some men got their names 'dragged through the mud' but I don't believe this will affect them in the future in the pursuit of truth. In a couple years, this will be forgotten. When they are applying for jobs in the next handful of years, this story will be largely forgotten. If it is for a large corporate job, they will probably be vetted by a conservative, white male who would be largely sympathetic to their 'strife.' Their race will be a larger hindrance to their employment than their participation in this incident. If these guys were not athletes at a public university, I feel like there would be a lot less sympathy for their struggle.
Click to expand...

I don't know the societal breakdown but every HR manager I've ever met has been female save for a gay male and he was most definitely not conservative. None of which has anything to do with whether men ought to have their transcripts branded with the rapist label based on a bafflingly amateurish and inadequate school disciplinary process that is appalling to any fair-minded person, liberal, conservative, gay or straight.
 

GopherHomer said:
Not saying it's good that some men got their names 'dragged through the mud' but I don't believe this will affect them in the future in the pursuit of truth. In a couple years, this will be forgotten. When they are applying for jobs in the next handful of years, this story will be largely forgotten. If it is for a large corporate job, they will probably be vetted by a conservative, white male who would be largely sympathetic to their 'strife.' Their race will be a larger hindrance to their employment than their participation in this incident. If these guys were not athletes at a public university, I feel like there would be a lot less sympathy for their struggle.
Click to expand...

One of the more ignorant posts I've seen on this topic. I've worked with and for many Fortune 500 companies. Not only are their HR departments highly professional and well-trained, they also tend to be more heavily populated by extremely competent, intelligent females. They take their jobs seriously and don't take kindly to issues that could put their company at risk from a financial or reputational standpoint. All hires are significantly vetted. This situation will absolutely dog anyone that is involved.
 

If Djam had not taken and SENT the video (illegally, at that, because it was without the cheerleaders permission or even knowledge) Bufford would not have gone to "see what was up" from his apartment in South Minneapolis, miles away from the scene. When Bufford met Hardin on the way to the same destination, Hardin confirmed with him that he and Johnson were there for the same reason Bufford was--Djam's video.
You can read all of this in the EoAA's "flawed" report.
Djam's video cleared Djam alone of sexual assault. Why he has not been criminally prosecuted for sending the video, I'll never know. If Vandy thinks Djam is the hero in all of this, he is as mistaken as Reusse about the overall situation.
 

You mean that Williams will be back on the team once his one year suspension has been completed?
 

Trisuper said:
If Djam had not taken and SENT the video (illegally, at that, because it was without the cheerleaders permission or even knowledge) Bufford would not have gone to "see what was up" from his apartment in South Minneapolis, miles away from the scene. When Bufford met Hardin on the way to the same destination, Hardin confirmed with him that he and Johnson were there for the same reason Bufford was--Djam's video.
You can read all of this in the EoAA's "flawed" report.
Djam's video cleared Djam alone of sexual assault. Why he has not been criminally prosecuted for sending the video, I'll never know. If Vandy thinks Djam is the hero in all of this, he is as mistaken as Reusse about the overall situation.
Click to expand...

There are not hero's here. There are just people. Again, if video evidence had not been available, shedding considerable doubt on the accusers implications that the entire event was a non consensual or in other words a "gang rape", this whole thing would likely have turned out much worse ... from a criminal standpoint. And if you do not believe this, even to a degree, I cannot reason with you.
 

Does Reusse's article say that the players charged with sexual assault plus Djam were unfairly treated? They appealed the report's findings and a panel of the players' peers agreed with the report and not the players. Due process was followed and these players are not banished from the U.
Bob wrote recently that the EoAA at the U of M is unconstitutional. I disagree. The U did what most Universities would have done and Baylor sure wishes it had done. A female student filed a complaint with the EoAA and that office came down on ten players. The PROCESS allowed for appeals and a panel of the students' peers found four of the ten shouldn't be punished. Justice was served for them--just as it is in our deeply, deeply flawed criminal justice system when wrongfully convicted individuals are exonerated. But justice was also served when the rest of the players were found guilty of violating behavior codes found within the student handbook.
Disagreeing with Reusse hardly makes me a sick individual. He talks out of both sides of his mouth all of the time. That's why he is hated here.
 

Why did Hutton advise his players to give up their rights to sue the cheerleader in civil court if he is so interested in their legal welfare? He also filed an appeal in the matter involving the restraining order and was laughed out of court. The U of M legal department must be shaking in its boots thinking about opposing Hutton
 

Where have I EVER said that I want those exonerated to face unjust punishment? Where? You're the attorney. Review the facts. If your a man, you'll admit you are wrong and apologize. I have defended the process and it has worked as well as our flawed criminal process except that more people were exonerated in the Gopher matter than wrongfully convicted criminals ever are. As an attorney, you know that is true as well. Whether you'll ever admit it is another matter.
But, then again, I'm not "capable of comprehending what is really going on here." Only those that agree with you are, apparently.
 

If Reusse admits the cheerleader was probably traumatized by the whole affair. EVEN the EoAA cleared Djam of sexual assault, probably because of the tape. That tape provided very little or no evidence that others that had sex with the cheerleader with her consent. The tape did bring at least three of the players subsequently kicked out of the U to the apartment, however. That is a fact. No tape, no Bufford, Hardin or Johnson. How else would they have known what was going on so far away from where they lived?
 

Bob Loblaw requested that I make responses of substance. That is what I've tried to do. The fact that people disagree with me is understandable. The accusation that I am trying to hijack this thread is false.
 

Trisuper said:
Does Reusse's article say that the players charged with sexual assault plus Djam were unfairly treated?...
Click to expand...

You'd know if you read the link and didn't want to just want to hijack the thread. :blah::blah::blah:

Hey, but you got a response, albeit because of an error on your part, but still you got that response....
 

GopherHomer said:
Not saying it's good that some men got their names 'dragged through the mud' but I don't believe this will affect them in the future in the pursuit of truth. In a couple years, this will be forgotten. When they are applying for jobs in the next handful of years, this story will be largely forgotten. If it is for a large corporate job, they will probably be vetted by a conservative, white male who would be largely sympathetic to their 'strife.' Their race will be a larger hindrance to their employment than their participation in this incident. If these guys were not athletes at a public university, I feel like there would be a lot less sympathy for their struggle.
Click to expand...

Truly naive. I had a loud party misdemeanor which was ultimately dismissed, and it showed up on background checks my past two jobs and I was asked to explain it. A noise complaint. Sexual assault allegations and you don't even get to talk to that HR person. They just move on to the 'lower risk' next candidate.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom