Lawsuit filed

Donate To GopherHole
PMWinSTP said:
Which I why I posted serious negotiations...
Click to expand...

I think any response to a lawsuit is serious... and even if we use another definition, no reason to think they ever even get that far.... I'm kinda skeptical as to where this all leads.
 

A_Slab_of_Bacon said:
I think any response to a lawsuit is serious... and even if we use another definition, no reason to think they ever even get that far.... I'm kinda skeptical as to where this all leads.
Click to expand...

To the bank of course.
 


A_Slab_of_Bacon said:
I would very much like to only have stuff at the bank to talk about in relation to gopher football ;)
Click to expand...

The plaintiffs lawyer(s) IMO are employing a tactic to maximize monetary gains for the clients and for all the other reasons previously stated.
 

Embarrassing

Worst part was when the lawyer claimed it was consensual because the girl matched with one of the guys on Tinder
 


Random Questions (BobLaw, you're my answer guy):
(1) Could this really backfire on the plaintiffs? Right now none of them have been prosecuted for rape in a criminal court. By forcing this trial, could evidence be brought forth that makes a rape charge a possibility?
(2) Did the plaintiffs lawyers make a huge mistake by including a claim of racial bias? (A) It will be extremely difficult for the plaintiffs to prove racism was involved -- The defense lawyers will say the reason the employees (e.g., Teague) were treated differently is the severity of the charges and that the employees were actually employees, not student athletes, so of course they're treated differently; and (B) there is no way the U of M will settle out of court to a charge of racism, if the plaintiffs are wanting to settle they should drop the racism charge.
(3) Should the four students that were not accused of rape charges have included themselves with the other group of five? It seems that the "group of four" has a much stronger case against the U of M than the "group of five".
 

<lawsuit

PMWinSTP said:
More often than not, there is. Looks like the attorney specializes in these types of cases. Air Force experience focused on prosecution of sexual assaults.
Click to expand...
Nasty situation, but the whole unseemly event was handled by the U in a clumsy manner which invited ultimate legal action.
 

I hope that President Kaler learned from his over reaction. In hindsight, PR and legal consultants should have been helping him before he made all those public pronouncements. There are painful and valuable lessons learned for the U administration.

Ignore it, and there may be more expensive legal time bombs ticking.
 

Former Gopher captain Jim Carter chimes in, per Shama:

Jim Carter, who has been a close observer of the issues that led to the lawsuit by former and current Gopher football players against the University of Minnesota, said the two sides failed to reach a settlement before the lawsuit was filed. Carter, a former Gopher football captain in the late 1960s and loyal supporter of the program under ex-head coaches Jerry Kill and Tracy Claeys, said the nine players are seeking $45 million in damages, or about $5 million per player.

Carter predicted it could be a “couple of years” before the lawsuit is tried in federal court before a jury. The players allege they were the victims of racial and gender discrimination involving a 2016 incident.

http://shamasportsheadliners.com/

Go Gophers!!
 



Carlton Dejam said:
Hey Gophers,

Very familiar with this case. AMA!

Kayler just lost his job. Our friends at the StarTribune didn't notice...

We're raising funds to help with our lawsuit against the University of Minnesota. If people can help spread the word, that'd be great. Link below:
https://www.gofundme.com/fooballplayersvsuniversityofminnesota
Click to expand...

What an odd place for you to come looking for money for your particular cause. Don’t think you’ll find much support here.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 









When the stakes are *legally* lower, then the bar can be (much) lower as far as the burden of proof.

That's why the University's investigation process can arrive at a different conclusion than the MPD's investigation process for criminal charges. In the latter, the stakes are criminal charges with penalties potentially including jail time. Those are very high stakes, and so the burden of proof must be very high. In the former, all that's at stake is being a student at the U of Minn. In the grand scheme of life, being expelled (let alone being suspended or put on probation) is nothing. So the burden of proof can be lower.

And that's exactly what happened.


This should NOT be confusing for anyone. Having two completely different systems, like that, which result in two completely different outcomes, like that, is completely logical, valid, and fair.
 


Bob_Loblaw said:
Why should he do that?
Click to expand...

This is an interesting question, in my opinion. I'm very naive on the legal system, private or public.

What truly are the "costs" that a legal team (or single lawyer) incurs, to take on a case. I don't think a valid answer is "well, I charge $$/hr", because that number is arbitrary in some sense. You can say it's set by the market, and that's not invalid, but I'm trying to get at what are the actual root costs for the legal side to do a case. Links are fine, if you have them ... you don't need to type out an essay.
 



Just curious. With this posting, could the U of M sue these folks for libel? I'm not saying the U will or should sue them, but do statements in the posting such as "After an investigation of five football players by the Minneapolis Police department, it was determined that we were not responsible for the alleged complaints" (which is a false statement -- they weren't found to be "not responsible", there just wasn't enough evidence to press charges), followed by the claims of discrimination based on race, open themselves up for such a suit?
 

Livingat45north said:
Just curious. With this posting, could the U of M sue these folks for libel? I'm not saying the U will or should sue them, but do statements in the posting such as "After an investigation of five football players by the Minneapolis Police department, it was determined that we were not responsible for the alleged complaints" (which is a false statement -- they weren't found to be "not responsible", there just wasn't enough evidence to press charges), followed by the claims of discrimination based on race, open themselves up for such a suit?
Click to expand...

I would guess if the lawsuit is filed, then at the very least some similar type of language already exists in the public domain as the lawsuit's formal complaint. So, can a lawsuit's complaint be viewed as libel? I guess that's a valid question? My lay opinion is no, but perhaps that's wrong. I would think libel would be more like if they then went on TV to talk about the lawsuit and said a bunch of nasty things about the defendants.
 

Bob_Loblaw said:
Why should he do that?
Click to expand...

Because, according to Mr. Carlton "Dejam's" gofundme plea:
"Five of us were improperly expelled or suspended from the University and have been deprived of a college education, our scholarships, and our right to participate in intercollegiate athletics without due process or equal protection of the law."

I don't think that they can be reasonably expected to pay.
 
Last edited:

They won't get a dime anytime soon. It is shameful what happened.
 


GophersInIowa said:
Schneider: UMN football player’s lawsuit diminishes the severity of sexual misconduct

http://www.mndaily.com/article/2018/09/o-schneider-umn-football-players-lawsuit-diminishes-the-severity-of-sexual-misconduct
Click to expand...
This is an opinion piece with no legal merit. It's as if Cruze was commissioned to write how fighting for legal rights diminishes the legitimacy of the U's Title IX investigation. There is no correlation.
The lawsuit by these men has to do with the injustice of public defamation when no crime was actually being tried in court. The U needed to be silent and not publish information about these young men. Silence was afforded to other investigations, but UMN chose a public, social, lynching of these men. This writer fails to see that her opinion has no bearing or correlation to this specific lawsuit.
 

Well, didn’t the U try to keep it silent, and then their investigation was leaked? Maybe someone paid someone off to get their hands on it, but that’s a wild guess.
 

Has the U finished with their million dollar internal investigation into the “leak” of the sexual misconduct finding vs the department staffer? The information about employees that is public record? The double standard is staggering.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom