TABinMO
Active member
- Joined
- Dec 16, 2008
- Messages
- 234
- Reaction score
- 41
- Points
- 28
I am a very frequent reader but infrequent poster. I have a law degree from the UofM (but don't practice law) and have no experience in these situations, which is why my title is what it is - so this is simply my opinion on where we are at.
In terms of the EOAA process, my problem with this I do not believe it is an impartial panel looking objectively at the facts yet it appears that they produce the record of evidence that is used by the decision makers to decide the punishment. So from that perspective, I personally do not believe it is a fair process and the process needs to change to make it more balanced. An example of the unfairness is allowing the victim to be represented by counsel but not the accused, if that is what the process allowed.
It is amazing how people take a side of guilty or innocent without knowing all of the facts! You certainly can't say that the EOAA report states all of the facts without knowing the details of the process and the arguments for the other side. It seems to me that people are either ready to lynch or absolve of responsibility way too early. I suppose that is the problem with this day and age of immediate "news" via the Internet. We have had several examples in the last few years where the public, the media or both rushed to condemn one side or another in various encounters well before all facts were known. Some people have an agenda! In this case, we are a long way away from knowing all the facts to make an informed decision.
We don't really know if the early suspensions should have been handled differently until we know who knew what and when. However, I certainly think that having a player encourage a recruit to have sex with a girl on a recruiting visit is a situation that should cause the player to be dismissed from the team. And if the coach or anyone else in authority knew that happened, then they made a bad decision to allow that player to stay with the team.
This whole situation escalated when the team threatened to boycott the bowl game. If they did that because they thought the players being disciplined were railroaded without due process, I can understand that and see why they took the stance they did. I think the process needs to be critiqued and improved. It's unfortunate that we are the ones that are the test case for doing that, but it was probably inevitable anyway (for some school).
I am reading most of the posts, while trying to remain objective. I will wait to state an opinion on who should be punished and whether the punishment is appropriate until all the facts are known (if ever). At a minimum, I would say that if I was a parent of ANY of the people involved, I would be very disappointed in their behavior.
In terms of the EOAA process, my problem with this I do not believe it is an impartial panel looking objectively at the facts yet it appears that they produce the record of evidence that is used by the decision makers to decide the punishment. So from that perspective, I personally do not believe it is a fair process and the process needs to change to make it more balanced. An example of the unfairness is allowing the victim to be represented by counsel but not the accused, if that is what the process allowed.
It is amazing how people take a side of guilty or innocent without knowing all of the facts! You certainly can't say that the EOAA report states all of the facts without knowing the details of the process and the arguments for the other side. It seems to me that people are either ready to lynch or absolve of responsibility way too early. I suppose that is the problem with this day and age of immediate "news" via the Internet. We have had several examples in the last few years where the public, the media or both rushed to condemn one side or another in various encounters well before all facts were known. Some people have an agenda! In this case, we are a long way away from knowing all the facts to make an informed decision.
We don't really know if the early suspensions should have been handled differently until we know who knew what and when. However, I certainly think that having a player encourage a recruit to have sex with a girl on a recruiting visit is a situation that should cause the player to be dismissed from the team. And if the coach or anyone else in authority knew that happened, then they made a bad decision to allow that player to stay with the team.
This whole situation escalated when the team threatened to boycott the bowl game. If they did that because they thought the players being disciplined were railroaded without due process, I can understand that and see why they took the stance they did. I think the process needs to be critiqued and improved. It's unfortunate that we are the ones that are the test case for doing that, but it was probably inevitable anyway (for some school).
I am reading most of the posts, while trying to remain objective. I will wait to state an opinion on who should be punished and whether the punishment is appropriate until all the facts are known (if ever). At a minimum, I would say that if I was a parent of ANY of the people involved, I would be very disappointed in their behavior.