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

Donate To GopherHole
Block M said:
This committee is under intense pressure to "convict" given Reggie's name has come before them three times. Can you imagine the fallout if his "sentence" is not upheld? No way that happens. He's a goner.

Reggie pulled his crap at the worst possible time that is for damn sure.
Click to expand...

Well... whatever crap he pulled (and he may well have) he pulled in 2016, but it resurfaced at the worst possible time- that's for sure. Not only is Lynch being punished, but the whole team is as a result.
 

Sanford97 said:
This is 100% false. The University, as a government institution enforcing a federal mandate, is obligated by the Constitution to give the accused due process. Lynch could absolutely go before a court and ask for an injunction on the basis that he was denied due process during the EOAA process.

Even a private university would be acting under the color of law in this situation and have a Constitutional obligation.

Pacyga mentioned this in the presser but it may not be a feasible option given financial and time constraints.
Click to expand...

It is highly unlikely that any court in America would prevent a college or university from suspending a student from playing sports if they are allowed to retain their scholarship and can continue to attend classes during the student disciplinary hearing and appeals process. The U has their bases covered this time. Practice makes perfect. Reggie is done playing basketball for the U.
 

Cruze said:
It is highly unlikely that any court in America would prevent a college or university from suspending a student from playing sports if they are allowed to retain their scholarship and can continue to attend classes during the student disciplinary hearing and appeals process. The U has their bases covered this time. Practice makes perfect. Reggie is done playing basketball for the U.
Click to expand...

And i was not denying Reggie having the right to do whatever he wants to contest his case in court. But Cruze is correct when he points out the U being covered by the procedure . Judges like substantial fairness and the U has a procedure that is being handled fairly.
 

builtbadgers said:
And i was not denying Reggie having the right to do whatever he wants to contest his case in court. But Cruze is correct when he points out the U being covered by the procedure . Judges like substantial fairness and the U has a procedure that is being handled fairly.
Click to expand...

I agree that it is unlikely that a court would grant an injunction. I just wanted to point out that the situation is more complicated than an internal policy dispute at a private organization.

If Lynch were my client I'd advise him to withdraw from the U, hire an agent, move to Florida and start training for his pro career.
 

Emil said:
How do you think this would be handled by North Carolina if a star player at UNC was in the same situation as Lynch?
Click to expand...

They'd probably allow sexual misconduct by regular students so that when basketball players do it they can look the other way then too
 



Block M said:
This committee is under intense pressure to "convict" given Reggie's name has come before them three times. Can you imagine the fallout if his "sentence" is not upheld? No way that happens. He's a goner.

Reggie pulled his crap at the worst possible time that is for damn sure.
Click to expand...
Alleged...
It allegedly took place 2 years ago. Tell me if you recall talking to someone in a bar 2 years ago who says you were being a jerk. The problem we have is that no one can prove or disprove an allegation going back two years. All we have is hearsay.
Has Lych done anything unethical over these past two years? We have the words of 3 women from 2 years back and it's being reviewed now.
I cannot say whether Lynch is guilty or not. I can only say that this is old accusations being judged today by a kangaroo court. I doubt any justice will be meted out for anyone, but names will be smeared.
 

MennoSota said:
Alleged...
It allegedly took place 2 years ago. Tell me if you recall talking to someone in a bar 2 years ago who says you were being a jerk. The problem we have is that no one can prove or disprove an allegation going back two years. All we have is hearsay.
Has Lych done anything unethical over these past two years? We have the words of 3 women from 2 years back and it's being reviewed now.
I cannot say whether Lynch is guilty or not. I can only say that this is old accusations being judged today by a kangaroo court. I doubt any justice will be meted out for anyone, but names will be smeared.
Click to expand...

1) Please explain under what circumstances and for what motivation and group of varied women would put themselves through this ordeal. If you try to answer that and you can come up with something more than a wild conspiracy theory I'd like to hear it.

All the doubting of Lynch's actions is bewildering.

2) You or any other commentator do not know what evidence has been brought forward, be it witnesses, social media, direct testimony, written statements, whatever. Unclear why you claim to know the evidence.

Also are you really trying to compare being called a jerk to sexual assault? Head scratcher.
 

Ihatebucky said:
1) Please explain under what circumstances and for what motivation and group of varied women would put themselves through this ordeal. If you try to answer that and you can come up with something more than a wild conspiracy theory I'd like to hear it.

All the doubting of Lynch's actions is bewildering.

2) You or any other commentator do not know what evidence has been brought forward, be it witnesses, social media, direct testimony, written statements, whatever. Unclear why you claim to know the evidence.

Also are you really trying to compare being called a jerk to sexual assault? Head scratcher.
Click to expand...
Do we know what ordeal they are undergoing? Have their names been publicized? What social scrutiny have they faced? All we know is that they made a claim to some unknown individual at the U and presumably some unknown group of people have reviewed what they said.
The lack of transparency is amazing. This is my point. We have no idea what has motivated this process. We have only assumptions to go on. Hence, what we have is a kangaroo court.
 



Ihatebucky said:
1) Please explain under what circumstances and for what motivation and group of varied women would put themselves through this ordeal. If you try to answer that and you can come up with something more than a wild conspiracy theory I'd like to hear it.

All the doubting of Lynch's actions is bewildering.

2) You or any other commentator do not know what evidence has been brought forward, be it witnesses, social media, direct testimony, written statements, whatever. Unclear why you claim to know the evidence.

Also are you really trying to compare being called a jerk to sexual assault? Head scratcher.
Click to expand...

It’s not that difficult.

If you listen to Ryan Pacyga’s’s press conference he stated there were text conversations a day and a week after the alleged rape and the woman was telling what bar she would be at, etc. Odd behavior for an assault victim. Then, the 18 month gap. Then, possible discussions amongst the women, possibly Abby Honold (inference) due to the timing.

Memories are malleable, suggestible particularly with the passage of time. Couple that with activists calling certain behaviors “assault” that are not legally considered assault (eg lack of affirmative consent or simply going along silently) and the current political climate it’s not hard to see how these situations develop after drunken encounters.

None of this is to suggest sexual assault doesn’t happen or is at all acceptable but there is a huge gray area and there still needs to be a preponderance of evidence, even for a guy like Reggie that has apparently rubbed a lot of people the wrong way over the years. But, even some of that seems like simple rumors and hearsay rather than personal knowledge.
 


Pompous Elitist said:
It’s not that difficult.

If you listen to Ryan Pacyga’s’s press conference he stated there were text conversations a day and a week after the alleged rape and the woman was telling what bar she would be at, etc. Odd behavior for an assault victim. Then, the 18 month gap. Then, possible discussions amongst the women, possibly Abby Honold (inference) due to the timing.

Memories are malleable, suggestible particularly with the passage of time. Couple that with activists calling certain behaviors “assault” that are not legally considered assault (eg lack of affirmative consent or simply going along silently) and the current political climate it’s not hard to see how these situations develop after drunken encounters.

None of this is to suggest sexual assault doesn’t happen or is at all acceptable but there is a huge gray area and there still needs to be a preponderance of evidence, even for a guy like Reggie that has apparently rubbed a lot of people the wrong way over the years. But, even some of that seems like simple rumors and hearsay rather than personal knowledge.
Click to expand...

Why only believe Pacyga who is being paid to present only one side of the story? And he couldn't have done a worse job doing it. Now let's hear from the other side before we make up our minds about what happened. That is what due process and fundamental fairness is all about. Alleged victims have rights too.
 

We've been awfully quick to forget the Duke Lacrosse rape case. And that was a criminal case with a DA swept up in the momentum of mob outrage. Who knows what motivates a false accusation, but they do happen, too. With the burden of proof so low in university processes (they only have to believe the story of the accuser more than that of the accused) would the chances of a false accusation go up?
College campuses in the 60s were places where "free love" was being promoted with a breaking away from social rules and expectations, and this is where we ended up: please sign the dating contract so I feel safe in hooking up with you.
 



Cruze said:
Why only believe Pacyga who is being paid to present only one side of the story? And he couldn't have done a worse job doing it. Now let's hear from the other side before we make up our minds about what happened. That is what due process and fundamental fairness is all about. Alleged victims have rights too.
Click to expand...

What did you object to? Can you present a list of grievances? Serious question. Seemed reasonable to me.
 

MennoSota said:
Alleged...
It allegedly took place 2 years ago. Tell me if you recall talking to someone in a bar 2 years ago who says you were being a jerk. The problem we have is that no one can prove or disprove an allegation going back two years. All we have is hearsay.
Has Lych done anything unethical over these past two years? We have the words of 3 women from 2 years back and it's being reviewed now.
I cannot say whether Lynch is guilty or not. I can only say that this is old accusations being judged today by a kangaroo court. I doubt any justice will be meted out for anyone, but names will be smeared.
Click to expand...

If someone sexually assaulted me 2 years ago I'm pretty sure I would remember. Lynch not remembering is likely part of the problem why he continues to act inappropriately. He probably doesn't think or realize what he is doing is wrong even if people are telling him it is, so he keeps doing it. Or he does know it's wrong and he's addicted to it.
 

bottlebass said:
If someone sexually assaulted me 2 years ago I'm pretty sure I would remember. Lynch not remembering is likely part of the problem why he continues to act inappropriately. He probably doesn't think or realize what he is doing is wrong even if people are telling him it is, so he keeps doing it. Or he does know it's wrong and he's addicted to it.
Click to expand...

If you weren't simply lying. Second, you wouldn't wait 2 years to tell anyone.
You are making assumptions by using the terms, "likely" and "probably", and then forcing them to be "actually."
The biggest problem is that there is no transparency.
 

MennoSota said:
The biggest problem is that there is no transparency.
Click to expand...

You are correct. There is very little transparency in student disciplinary proceedings. And that is exactly what the U.S. Congress and most people in America want (see below). Get over it. You are NEVER going to know all you want to know if your favorite Gopher athlete is suspended from the team or expelled from school. And that is NEVER going to change.

The following link is to the American Bar Association Task Force on College Due Process Rights and Victim Protections - https://www.americanbar.org/content...e-Recommendations-and-Report.authcheckdam.pdf. Their report was released in June, 2017, and their recommendations for changes include just about everything the U is already doing with their student disciplinary process. It is not a coincidence the U was not sued for violating the due process rights of any of the ten football players last year. The federal courts have been deluged by Title IX lawsuits from students at other schools. But not from the U.

The Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA)

This is a federal law that protects the privacy interests of students. It affords parents the right to access and amend their children’s education records, and gives them some control over the disclosure of the information in these records. FERPA generally prevents an education agency or institution from sharing student records, or personally identifiable information in these records, without the written consent of a parent.

A “parent” is defined as a natural or adoptive parent, a legal guardian, or an individual acting as a parent in the absence of the parent or guardian. When students reach the age of 18, or attend a post secondary institution at any age, they are considered “eligible students” and all of the rights afforded by FERPA transfer from the parents to the students. (34 CFR § 99.3)
 


MennoSota said:
Do we know what ordeal they are undergoing? Have their names been publicized? What social scrutiny have they faced? All we know is that they made a claim to some unknown individual at the U and presumably some unknown group of people have reviewed what they said.
The lack of transparency is amazing. This is my point. We have no idea what has motivated this process. We have only assumptions to go on. Hence, what we have is a kangaroo court.
Click to expand...

If you don't understand what a sexual assault victim goes through there are plenty of documentaries and books out there. Educate yourself would be my suggestion. The chance that three women would come forward, in addition to the other discussion about previous HS incidents, etc has got to be as close to 0% as possible. Wake up bro.
 

Ihatebucky said:
If you don't understand what a sexual assault victim goes through there are plenty of documentaries and books out there. Educate yourself would be my suggestion. The chance that three women would come forward, in addition to the other discussion about previous HS incidents, etc has got to be as close to 0% as possible. Wake up bro.
Click to expand...
You are ignoring that we have no idea if these women were assaulted by Lynch. What we know is that these women have made accusations that are nearly two years removed from what allegedly happened. Please educate yourself regarding the Constitution where people are innocent until proven guilty.
 

MennoSota said:
You are ignoring that we have no idea if these women were assaulted by Lynch. What we know is that these women have made accusations that are nearly two years removed from what allegedly happened. Please educate yourself regarding the Constitution where people are innocent until proven guilty.
Click to expand...

How many ways will it be told that not all rules are under the constitution. The U is following a procedure that has a lower standard than proof for a criminal process. Your simply not allowed the information you want and if you ever had a family member that has suffered from a sexual assault you would understand high trauma. I am not saying he is guilty of sexual assault but there is the possibility that he is in violation of the student code of conduct.
 

Ihatebucky said:
If you don't understand what a sexual assault victim goes through there are plenty of documentaries and books out there. Educate yourself would be my suggestion. The chance that three women would come forward, in addition to the other discussion about previous HS incidents, etc has got to be as close to 0% as possible. Wake up bro.
Click to expand...

Well, one of the allegations was already disbelieved by the EOAA suggesting there was overwhelming physical evidence supporting Lynch. Pacyga has suggested there are texts that tend to undermine another allegation. A person of Lynch’s status very likely has more access and success with women that the vast majority of college men. There is probably a sizable sample size of partners.

When you’re referring to psychological residual, are you talking about a victim of violent forcible rape like Honold, or someone that was drunk, and may not have communicated she didn’t want sex, and/or exchanged apparently friendly texts afterward, and/or later appears to have decided it was assault because she can’t believe believe she would have agreed to have sex even if intoxicated. I believe there is a distinction there whether that makes you uncomfortable to say so or not. One is clearly illegal while the latter is not (yet, at least).

An institution can pretend lack of affirmative consent is sexual assault but that doesn’t mean it necessarily is in legal terms. The student code of conduct may have been violated in terms of not having evidence of affirmative consent. No crime was proven, unlike in Honold’s case, even if the EOAA ruled as such.
 

When I was sexually exploited by women while at the University, I can’t say that I always enjoyed it, but I would normally just man up and take it lying down. :mad:
 

builtbadgers said:
How many ways will it be told that not all rules are under the constitution. The U is following a procedure that has a lower standard than proof for a criminal process. Your simply not allowed the information you want and if you ever had a family member that has suffered from a sexual assault you would understand high trauma. I am not saying he is guilty of sexual assault but there is the possibility that he is in violation of the student code of conduct.
Click to expand...

How many ways will it be told that the EOAA is acting like a kangaroo court at a witch trial? Remember Salem? Remember Senator McCarthy?
Without transparency we have no ability to honestly determine whether justice is prevailing or whether injustice is taking place.
There is a possibility that every University student has violated the student code of conduct. Possible doesn't equal actual.
Reggie Lynch categorically denies and breaking of the code of conduct. How do you actually investigate an alleged incident that is 2 years removed from allegedly happening?
The U is following a kangaroo court of justice.
 

MennoSota said:
How many ways will it be told that the EOAA is acting like a kangaroo court at a witch trial? Remember Salem? Remember Senator McCarthy?
Without transparency we have no ability to honestly determine whether justice is prevailing or whether injustice is taking place.
There is a possibility that every University student has violated the student code of conduct. Possible doesn't equal actual.
Reggie Lynch categorically denies and breaking of the code of conduct. How do you actually investigate an alleged incident that is 2 years removed from allegedly happening?
The U is following a kangaroo court of justice.
Click to expand...

Your entitled your opinion. I disagree about it being like Salem or McCarthy.
 

builtbadgers said:
Your entitled your opinion. I disagree about it being like Salem or McCarthy.
Click to expand...
Show us how the EOAA is functioning as a fair and just adjudicator of the student code of conduct. So far the entire process is shrouded in mystery and everyone is held at arms length by claims of FERPA privacy. However, no FERPA rules would be broken by the media identifying every person participating in the EOAA investigation including the organizations who are playing a part as advocates in the case.
No. The secrecy and shrouding of the EOAA is disconcerting and that shroud needs to be laid bare.
 


Block M said:
This article is a few years old but encapsulates what many perceive as major issues with the current system. Affirmative consent laws another discussion entirely.

https://www.thefire.org/harvard-law...ational-debate-rages-affirmative-consent-law/
Click to expand...

One must bomb the village to save the village. It’s just common sense.

Vox co-founder Ezra Klein recently poured gas on the fire in an op-ed where he declared the bill “terrible” but nonetheless affirmed his strong support of it, saying that “To work, [the law] needs to create a world where men are afraid,” and that unfair findings that students are rapists are “necessary for the law’s success.” Affirmative consent policies similar to California’s law have spread to the State University of New York System and are being proposed by lawmakers in other states.
 

MennoSota said:
You are ignoring that we have no idea if these women were assaulted by Lynch. What we know is that these women have made accusations that are nearly two years removed from what allegedly happened. Please educate yourself regarding the Constitution where people are innocent until proven guilty.
Click to expand...

When you say we, you mean you. The Constitution does not protect sexual assaulters. The internal review and discipline process at the U is legal. Stop being confused.
 

Ihatebucky said:
When you say we, you mean you. The Constitution does not protect sexual assaulters. The internal review and discipline process at the U is legal. Stop being confused.
Click to expand...
Legal and just are two different things. Slavery was once legal, but it was never just.
You have crucified Lynch as a person who committed 3 sexual assaults despite no physical evidence being produced or a transparent system of ajudication. Nice. Apparently you imagine that is a just system. I disagree.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom