Lynch has appealed suspension, but potentially long process may end his Gopher career

So because you cannot read the details of the report, it’s a witch hunt?

I thought you were concerned about the student’s reputation? You suggest they enforce the code of conduct in a public setting?

Because not one person can outline the EOAA and exactly how they are coming to their conclusions, I call it a witch trial. There is no one on the GH that has any clue and it seems everyone is in the dark. Instead everyone is supposed to take the EOAA at its word with no means for checks and balances. That is a system ripe for corruption and political favor.
I suggest the EOAA and all participants in processing the investigation be revealed. I suggest the protocol and procedure by which each process takes place be public knowledge. I suggest that each investigator be publicly announced and that their personal history be researched and scrutinized for any possible bias. Make the entity of the EOAA open and public knowledge. Try the prosecuter in the court of public opinion just as the alleged perpetrator is being tried in the court of public opinion.
Something seems wrong when the names and identity of the investigators are being withheld. Make it transparent.
 

I don't know if we have to know the exact process, but I understand the concern. I believe the EOAA is relatively new (could be wrong), and I'm sure there are improvements to be made. In this particular case, we'll have to leave that up to Ryan Pacyga to pursue if this system has given Reggie due process, which will be explored in the appeal.

What I am comfortable with is that this process does not have to meet the same criteria as a criminal investigation. You don't have to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that a violation occurred, just that it was more likely than not to have occurred. And while you think it is a kangaroo court, I don't get that impression. If it was, I doubt he would not have been cleared on the first violation.

And where I'll go well beyond you, I appreciate there are processes that can hold someone accountable for this type of behavior beyond the criminal justice system. Our criminal justice system rightfully requires evidence beyond reasonable doubt, and unfortunately, this type of offense is often difficult to prove at that threshold. However, that doesn't mean the offense did not occur.

It also doesn't mean that the offense did occur, which is why this is a kangaroo court.
 

It also doesn't mean that the offense did occur, which is why this is a kangaroo court.

No, it just acts more like a civil court where the thresholds to consider someone guilty are lower.

Technically, a guilty verdict in a criminal trial doesn't mean the offense occurred. It seems like you are only comfortable with decisions made with evidence "beyond a reasonable doubt." In some settings, I believe the preponderance of evidence is sufficient. We fundamentally disagree on that point.
 

Because not one person can outline the EOAA and exactly how they are coming to their conclusions, I call it a witch trial. There is no one on the GH that has any clue and it seems everyone is in the dark. Instead everyone is supposed to take the EOAA at its word with no means for checks and balances. That is a system ripe for corruption and political favor.
I suggest the EOAA and all participants in processing the investigation be revealed. I suggest the protocol and procedure by which each process takes place be public knowledge. I suggest that each investigator be publicly announced and that their personal history be researched and scrutinized for any possible bias. Make the entity of the EOAA open and public knowledge. Try the prosecuter in the court of public opinion just as the alleged perpetrator is being tried in the court of public opinion.
Something seems wrong when the names and identity of the investigators are being withheld. Make it transparent.

I get that your frustrated but the the way it is handled is how it will be. You have zero evidence that everyone involved is less than fair. Sorry for you but this is the procedure.
 

In all fairness, we're up to three separate allegations of some type of sexual misconduct against Lynch, with all three incidents taking place in a span of a few weeks in the Spring of 2016. One may be a misunderstanding. two could be bad luck. But three separate EOAA investigations against the same person - with two of the investigations leading to recommendations for disciplinary action, up to and including expulsion from school?

I'm sorry, but at this point, I think Lynch has about a 1-in-100 chance of being exonerated.

Menno - I get what you are saying about the EOAA. I also have questions about the process. But, I think you need a better standard-bearer for injustice. The more stuff comes out, the harder it is to defend Lynch.
 


Did you mean to quote me? You’re not disagreeing with anything I said...

My apologies, I thought you were suggesting he should be booted before the process occurred. I had two windows open and was responding to a poster with an itchy trigger finger.
 

No, it just acts more like a civil court where the thresholds to consider someone guilty are lower.

Technically, a guilty verdict in a criminal trial doesn't mean the offense occurred. It seems like you are only comfortable with decisions made with evidence "beyond a reasonable doubt." In some settings, I believe the preponderance of evidence is sufficient. We fundamentally disagree on that point.
We disagree that the EOAA is a court at all. It isn't. We don't know what it actually is because there is no transparency.
 

In all fairness, we're up to three separate allegations of some type of sexual misconduct against Lynch, with all three incidents taking place in a span of a few weeks in the Spring of 2016. One may be a misunderstanding. two could be bad luck. But three separate EOAA investigations against the same person - with two of the investigations leading to recommendations for disciplinary action, up to and including expulsion from school?

I'm sorry, but at this point, I think Lynch has about a 1-in-100 chance of being exonerated.

Menno - I get what you are saying about the EOAA. I also have questions about the process. But, I think you need a better standard-bearer for injustice. The more stuff comes out, the harder it is to defend Lynch.

And I'll piggy-back - even if he was cleared - with so much smoke, would we really want him on the team anyhow? It's not just these cases, it's his reputation from two high schools and two colleges. It's a moot point given how the timing will likely work out, but there would have to be some bombshell information for me to even be marginally okay with Lynch playing for us.
 

I get that your frustrated but the the way it is handled is how it will be. You have zero evidence that everyone involved is less than fair. Sorry for you but this is the procedure.

I'm sure the preachers in Salem said the same thing...
 



We disagree that the EOAA is a court at all. It isn't. We don't know what it actually is because there is no transparency.

Okay, court is not the right word, but the function is similar, and processes like this are commonplace. This type of process isn't unique to the U, or university systems.
 

Would you promote the company and encourage others to work there when you were treated unjustly and given a Salem witch trial?

No; but that is hyperbole. Lynch is not being asked to promote the company or refer others to work at the U. No Salem witch trial either.

Any response to the right vs. privilege discussion. Or, doesn’t that fit your narrative?
 





I'm sure the preachers in Salem said the same thing...

Oh, stop with the drama. Very few people would argue the system is perfect, but it's an issue where a "perfect" solution is going to be impossible to find. Environment of thousands of young adults interacting with all the factors involved and things happen. Nobody is being burned at the stake, but there are people, usually co-eds, who are being hurt in situations like this. The University has a duty to provide as safe an environment as possible. This is what has been created. It tries to protect the people who claim they are victims while giving a process to the accuse.

Gets tiresome to see outrage only when the won-lost record is going downhill.
 

Because not one person can outline the EOAA and exactly how they are coming to their conclusions, I call it a witch trial. There is no one on the GH that has any clue and it seems everyone is in the dark. Instead everyone is supposed to take the EOAA at its word with no means for checks and balances. That is a system ripe for corruption and political favor.
I suggest the EOAA and all participants in processing the investigation be revealed. I suggest the protocol and procedure by which each process takes place be public knowledge. I suggest that each investigator be publicly announced and that their personal history be researched and scrutinized for any possible bias. Make the entity of the EOAA open and public knowledge. Try the prosecuter in the court of public opinion just as the alleged perpetrator is being tried in the court of public opinion.
Something seems wrong when the names and identity of the investigators are being withheld. Make it transparent.



You've gone off the deep end. There isn't a conspiracy against U athletics with show trials for political power. It's not like there is one incident involving Lynch with sketchy details, there are now 3 official complaints and rumors of other misdeeds. It's time to cut bait. Quit acting like Lynch is some sort of martyr

I'm reminded of obnoxious Brewer fans who thought MLB was out to get Braun and he was truly innocent.

Sucks for our basketball team Lynch can't take no

The irony is his specialty was preventing other teams from scoring
 

Accusations are nothing.

It isn't ok to publicly ruin someone's life because of non-criminal accusations and findings determined by a flawed kangaroo court.

It is rather scary that so many of you are ok with saying, "well, this person's life is ruined because some people say he did something, and that's ok because school bureaucrats are allowed to slime you in a way that government prosecutors cannot."

Some of you need to get your heads examined.


Correct.

Like people incorrectly calling EOAA a kangaroo court
 

Reggie is not getting a Salem witch trial. What makes you think he did nothing and is being treated unfairly?


Duh, he's a gopher. There are people out to get the gophers.

Refs
U Admin
Crazy Girls

All with a vendetta against Gopher athletics
 

The problem here is that NONE of us and seemingly no one in Minnesota can openly explain the exact means and method of the EOAA court. Such a mysterious and nebulous procedure should warrant extreme skepticism that true justice is being accomplished.

Everything about the EOAA is on the U's website. You should read it sometime. EOAA is not a court. They are the investigative body who interview the alleged victim, the alleged perpetrator, any witnesses, and collect any and all evidence. The EOAA then provides the U with a written report detailing all the interviews and evidence and makes a recommendation as to whether the alleged perpetrator should be punished.

What is EOAA's Process?

The Office of Equal Opportunity and Affirmative Action (EOAA) is not a confidential reporting resource. Once EOAA becomes aware of information that may violate the University’s discrimination, harassment, sexual misconduct, or retaliation policies, we may have an obligation to take some responsive action to prevent further misconduct from occurring. However, we try to work with individuals to discuss a variety of ways to appropriately address the concerns raised.

EOAA is available to meet with individuals who have concerns about their experiences about our processes. We invite you to schedule a preliminary meeting to have a general discussion about our processes before deciding if you want to report specific concerns or initiate an investigation.

We also encourage individuals to consult with confidential resources at the University for support. Click here for available resources. Please consult with these offices individually about their ability to meet with you confidentially.

EOAA’s approach varies depending on the circumstances. Below are examples of how we might typically approach a particular situation.

Consultation
Informal resolution process
Discrimination, harassment, or retaliation investigation
Sexual misconduct investigation relating to employee conduct
Sexual misconduct investigation relating to student conduct

Consultations

EOAA usually begins by meeting with the individual who has requested a consultation to:

Listen to the individual’s concerns and the circumstances surrounding the situation;
Ask questions about the individual’s concerns and the circumstances;
Explore different approaches to addressing the situation;
Determine if EOAA is an appropriate University resource to address the concerns; and/or
Advise the individual of other available University resources for resolution and/or support.


Informal Resolution Process

After an initial consultation, an Equal Opportunity Consultant may be able to address the individual’s concerns without conducting a formal investigation. These efforts may include:

contacting other individuals with relevant information and/or those who have a “need to know” because of the nature of their position;
gathering relevant information;
facilitating or mediating meetings; and/or
exploring other resolutions acceptable to those involved in the situation and to the EOAA representative.

Resolutions may include, but are not limited to, discipline, education, training efforts, and agreements as to future conduct.


Formal Investigation: discrimination, harassment, and retaliation

Depending on the circumstances, a formal investigation may be appropriate, either before or after efforts to resolve the concerns informally. Typical steps in a formal investigation include:

interviewing the individual raising the concerns and other affected parties;
interviewing the individuals with information relevant to the situation;
informing responsible administrators about the concerns and investigation;
interviewing the accused person; and
collecting and reviewing documents and other forms of information from the individual raising the concerns, witnesses, Human Resources, administrators, or other individuals with relevant information.

EOAA Report

At the conclusion of a formal investigation, EOAA will prepare a summary of the investigation and make a conclusion as to whether University policies against discrimination, harassment, or related retaliation were violated.

- EOAA typically sends the report to: the individual(s) who raised the concerns; the accused party(s); and the responsible administrator(s).

- EOAA will also make recommendations for responsive action to the responsible administrator(s). We may provide recommendations to the responsible administrator whether or not there was a violation of policy.

https://diversity.umn.edu/eoaa/process
 

Okay, court is not the right word, but the function is similar, and processes like this are commonplace. This type of process isn't unique to the U, or university systems.

This is the U's process for student code of conduct hearings. It is all laid out on the U's website. The U's student disciplinary process has the reputation as being one of the most fair of any college or university in America. It is considered to be a model for other schools. Recently, a group of lawyers published a law review article recommending changes in college procedures for handling student discipline in order to insure that accused students receive due process before being suspended or expelled from school. Almost every recommendation detailed in the article is already being done by the U.


Student Conduct Code Procedure: Twin Cities

In all cases, hearings on violations of Board of Regents Policy: Student Conduct Code must be fundamentally fair. What constitutes fundamental fairness in a University hearing depends on a number of factors, including the seriousness of the potential penalty. However, a fundamentally fair hearing process usually allows for students or student organizations to:

- be notified in writing of the alleged violation and the underlying factual allegations; the time, date, and place of the hearing; and the range of possible sanctions;
- receive a prompt hearing;
- present their case, including witnesses;
- hear all evidence against them;
- question adverse testimony;
- be confronted by their accusers (subject to reasonable procedures to address concerns for safety or well-being);
- be accompanied or represented by an advocate of their choice;
- be found responsible only if the information as a whole shows that it is more likely than not that the student's conduct violated Board of Regents

Policy: Student Conduct Code;
- receive a written disciplinary decision following the hearing; and
- receive notification of the procedure for a campus-wide appeal of the disciplinary decision.

A formal record, a tape recording, or a transcript of the hearing procedure must be kept for appellate purposes. Board of Regents Policy: Student Conduct Code hearings are not court cases, and court rules of process, procedure, or evidence do not apply.

https://policy.umn.edu/education/stu...uctcode-proc01
 

THIS IS NOT A COURT OF LAW.

If you’re in your job and 3 of your coworkers claim sexual misconduct against you, you’re done. That’s America. We use common sense.

It’s more like Saudi Arabia to make a woman see the person who assaulted her on campus every day.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

So if 3 coworkers don't like you and make up sexual misconduct allegations to get you fired, that's a good system to you? Common sense, indeed.
 

This is the U's process for student code of conduct hearings. It is all laid out on the U's website. The U's student disciplinary process has the reputation as being one of the most fair of any college or university in America. It is considered to be a model for other schools. Recently, a group of lawyers published a law review article recommending changes in college procedures for handling student discipline in order to insure that accused students receive due process before being suspended or expelled from school. Almost every recommendation detailed in the article is already being done by the U.


Student Conduct Code Procedure: Twin Cities

In all cases, hearings on violations of Board of Regents Policy: Student Conduct Code must be fundamentally fair. What constitutes fundamental fairness in a University hearing depends on a number of factors, including the seriousness of the potential penalty. However, a fundamentally fair hearing process usually allows for students or student organizations to:

- be notified in writing of the alleged violation and the underlying factual allegations; the time, date, and place of the hearing; and the range of possible sanctions;
- receive a prompt hearing;
- present their case, including witnesses;
- hear all evidence against them;
- question adverse testimony;
- be confronted by their accusers (subject to reasonable procedures to address concerns for safety or well-being);
- be accompanied or represented by an advocate of their choice;
- be found responsible only if the information as a whole shows that it is more likely than not that the student's conduct violated Board of Regents

Policy: Student Conduct Code;
- receive a written disciplinary decision following the hearing; and
- receive notification of the procedure for a campus-wide appeal of the disciplinary decision.

A formal record, a tape recording, or a transcript of the hearing procedure must be kept for appellate purposes. Board of Regents Policy: Student Conduct Code hearings are not court cases, and court rules of process, procedure, or evidence do not apply.

https://policy.umn.edu/education/stu...uctcode-proc01
Thanks for pulling that up. I doubt it will satisfy Stoa.

Sent from my 2PZC5 using Tapatalk
 

So if 3 coworkers don't like you and make up sexual misconduct allegations to get you fired, that's a good system to you? Common sense, indeed.

I’ll break this down simpler for you. If milk gets spilled on the floor, and 3 of your children say that the fourth child did it. They have no motivation to lie because they know if they are found out, they’ll be scrutinized.
At the end of the day, you know that your child probably spilled the milk. You didn’t see it, but it was probably them, so you make them clean it up.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

I think the EOAA process would begin to change in the face of multiple lawsuits filed by accused individuals who felt the process was unfair or ruinous to them. Being found "guilty" of "sexual misconduct" has a very severe connotation and will be carried like a scarlet letter for that individual for a long time. One would argue that Lynch has not been found "guilty" of anything; but the connotation is that he is a rapist.

Reggie Lynch is seemingly not an individual you want associated with your college basketball team, but the EOAA should not be in the sex assault business.
 

I’ll break this down simpler for you. If milk gets spilled on the floor, and 3 of your children say that the fourth child did it. They have no motivation to lie because they know if they are found out, they’ll be scrutinized.
At the end of the day, you know that your child probably spilled the milk. You didn’t see it, but it was probably them, so you make them clean it up.

First of all, don't attempt to condescend to me - I am much, much smarter than you.

In your scenario, you said nothing about an investigation. You said, quote, "3 of your coworkers claim sexual misconduct against you, you’re done." No investigation needed, you have claims against you - you're fired. Simple as that. Without an investigation, there's no way for them to be scrutinized, because there is no gathering of evidence or finding of fact.

Perhaps you're starting to see why you're so wrong. The full process needs to play out before guilt is determined. Accusations by themselves are evidence of nothing.

One day, you'll grow up and realize that casting stones isn't so great when you're the one on the receiving end.
 

I guess there is a chance Pitino (and the school) think Reggie might have this suspension overturned and they don't need to kick people off the team until they know for sure. There is no harm in Reggie practicing. 2% of people know/care.

I agree with this. If they thought he was 100% gone they wouldn't be letting him practice. Don't think anyone should freak out about him practicing while the process plays out.
 

Oh, stop with the drama. Very few people would argue the system is perfect, but it's an issue where a "perfect" solution is going to be impossible to find. Environment of thousands of young adults interacting with all the factors involved and things happen. Nobody is being burned at the stake, but there are people, usually co-eds, who are being hurt in situations like this. The University has a duty to provide as safe an environment as possible. This is what has been created. It tries to protect the people who claim they are victims while giving a process to the accuse.

Gets tiresome to see outrage only when the won-lost record is going downhill.
W-L is irrelevant. Trial by public opinion is no different than the Salem witch trials.
Lynch's attorney will speak today. We'll see if anything gets cleared up or if the EOAA will continue to work in the shadows.
 

You've gone off the deep end. There isn't a conspiracy against U athletics with show trials for political power. It's not like there is one incident involving Lynch with sketchy details, there are now 3 official complaints and rumors of other misdeeds. It's time to cut bait. Quit acting like Lynch is some sort of martyr

I'm reminded of obnoxious Brewer fans who thought MLB was out to get Braun and he was truly innocent.

Sucks for our basketball team Lynch can't take no

The irony is his specialty was preventing other teams from scoring
Name a non-black male whom the EOAA has tried and expelled. Tick, tock, tick, tock...
 

I’ll break this down simpler for you. If milk gets spilled on the floor, and 3 of your children say that the fourth child did it. They have no motivation to lie because they know if they are found out, they’ll be scrutinized.
At the end of the day, you know that your child probably spilled the milk. You didn’t see it, but it was probably them, so you make them clean it up.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

If the other 3 children all spilled a little Milk, they sure would have motivation to blame the 4th child in your poorly thought out example.

I have an example for you...let's use a Fraternity(don't think I am picking on you, I was in a fraternity and support them). Lets say you have a party and the next day, or maybe 6 months after that party a girl goes to the University and complains she was sexually assulted at your house. The U opens an investigation and will report findings, but you will have a chance to appeal their ruling either way.

In the meantime, which would you prefer...the U immediately kicks you off campus and forces all members to move out and find new housing that day

or... The U says you can be on social probation and members can live in the house til the findings are comleted, if you are proven guilty then you must move out of the house and disband your chapter. This is the scenario that more closely fits what Lynch's status with the team is now.
 

Everything about the EOAA is on the U's website. You should read it sometime. EOAA is not a court. They are the investigative body who interview the alleged victim, the alleged perpetrator, any witnesses, and collect any and all evidence. The EOAA then provides the U with a written report detailing all the interviews and evidence and makes a recommendation as to whether the alleged perpetrator should be punished.

What is EOAA's Process?

The Office of Equal Opportunity and Affirmative Action (EOAA) is not a confidential reporting resource. Once EOAA becomes aware of information that may violate the University’s discrimination, harassment, sexual misconduct, or retaliation policies, we may have an obligation to take some responsive action to prevent further misconduct from occurring. However, we try to work with individuals to discuss a variety of ways to appropriately address the concerns raised.

EOAA is available to meet with individuals who have concerns about their experiences about our processes. We invite you to schedule a preliminary meeting to have a general discussion about our processes before deciding if you want to report specific concerns or initiate an investigation.

We also encourage individuals to consult with confidential resources at the University for support. Click here for available resources. Please consult with these offices individually about their ability to meet with you confidentially.

EOAA’s approach varies depending on the circumstances. Below are examples of how we might typically approach a particular situation.

Consultation
Informal resolution process
Discrimination, harassment, or retaliation investigation
Sexual misconduct investigation relating to employee conduct
Sexual misconduct investigation relating to student conduct

Consultations

EOAA usually begins by meeting with the individual who has requested a consultation to:

Listen to the individual’s concerns and the circumstances surrounding the situation;
Ask questions about the individual’s concerns and the circumstances;
Explore different approaches to addressing the situation;
Determine if EOAA is an appropriate University resource to address the concerns; and/or
Advise the individual of other available University resources for resolution and/or support.


Informal Resolution Process

After an initial consultation, an Equal Opportunity Consultant may be able to address the individual’s concerns without conducting a formal investigation. These efforts may include:

contacting other individuals with relevant information and/or those who have a “need to know” because of the nature of their position;
gathering relevant information;
facilitating or mediating meetings; and/or
exploring other resolutions acceptable to those involved in the situation and to the EOAA representative.

Resolutions may include, but are not limited to, discipline, education, training efforts, and agreements as to future conduct.


Formal Investigation: discrimination, harassment, and retaliation

Depending on the circumstances, a formal investigation may be appropriate, either before or after efforts to resolve the concerns informally. Typical steps in a formal investigation include:

interviewing the individual raising the concerns and other affected parties;
interviewing the individuals with information relevant to the situation;
informing responsible administrators about the concerns and investigation;
interviewing the accused person; and
collecting and reviewing documents and other forms of information from the individual raising the concerns, witnesses, Human Resources, administrators, or other individuals with relevant information.

EOAA Report

At the conclusion of a formal investigation, EOAA will prepare a summary of the investigation and make a conclusion as to whether University policies against discrimination, harassment, or related retaliation were violated.

- EOAA typically sends the report to: the individual(s) who raised the concerns; the accused party(s); and the responsible administrator(s).

- EOAA will also make recommendations for responsive action to the responsible administrator(s). We may provide recommendations to the responsible administrator whether or not there was a violation of policy.

https://diversity.umn.edu/eoaa/process
Do you see how nebulous the EOAA is? Re-read what you copied and marvel at how they reveal nothing with so many words. You come away from that and realize it's straight from Orwell's book, 1984, and his presentation of "doublespeak."
We are living out 1984 in real life and people are blind to it.
 

No, it just acts more like a civil court where the thresholds to consider someone guilty are lower.

Technically, a guilty verdict in a criminal trial doesn't mean the offense occurred. It seems like you are only comfortable with decisions made with evidence "beyond a reasonable doubt." In some settings, I believe the preponderance of evidence is sufficient. We fundamentally disagree on that point.

It acts NOTHING like a civil court. In a civil court you have discovery. Where you can demand documents, conduct depositions, challenge evidence, etc., etc., etc..

The only similarity is that they have a lower threshold of proof. Of course, in Civil Court the defendent has FAR more rights granted to them to try and establish that proof is not there.

In fact, if it DID actually act more like a civil court, many of the due process concerns would go away, just like it worked out in the OJ trial. But this is classic hysteria: "But it's SEXUAL ASSAULT! <Gasp> We gotta do SOMETHING!!!"

OJ almost certainly gets away with freaking murder, and no one starts suggesting that we need to create a new new adjudication process. Child molesters get away with crimes in court and no one says, "It's so hard prove, we need another system where it's easier to punish them", but Sexual Assault of White Women? We gotta run around with hair on fire, screaming, waving hands in air and throw all those formerly liberal principles that protect the accused (both criminal and civil) out the window.
 




Top Bottom