Rumors tonight of Lynch no longer on Gopher team...

[Ski U Mah Gopher]

Yeah, and since we can't get an official comment on when the complaint was filed, there's no way to refute that piece of it.

I don't like that the process doesn't allow for swift action, but it seems to be fair.

Since there are people who are calling the process too slow, and others saying it doesn't protect the athlete enough, it's a good sign that as frustrating as the process is... It's about as good as you'll get.

Sent from my 2PZC5 using Tapatalk

We know it was about 60 + report writing and judgement time days ago (that is the investigative time frame per EOAA rules). That doesn't take 2 years.

 

[bizzle22]

So if it's found that Reggie is thrown under bus for it will Coyle and Kaler get their coats stuck in the wheels too? I guess that's a fair trade if he can't appeal despite the 2 year delay if it means the two clowns get fired for second major sports incident they've punished wrong

I don't think I understand what you are trying to say here, and it seems like others don't either. I kind of think you don't really understand the process, but if you explain further what you mean then I'm sure someone here could help you out.

 

[strommen]

if there isn't enough evidence to file a criminal charge, how can the University have enough evidence to punish the individual.

They are a simply a University, not the justice system. They're not enacting a criminal punishment. So they don't need enough criminal-level evidence. Which, btw, rarely exists in sexual assault cases.

Look at it this way: if you're a boss and multiple of your employees tell you that Bob in accounting has sexually assaulted them, do you require Bob to be convicted of assault before you fire him? Or do you do some diligence about the claims, and fire Bob if they appear to be true? And does it matter if Bob is really good at blocking shots?

 

[hyaluronic]

We know it was about 60 + report writing and judgement time days ago (that is the investigative time frame per EOAA rules). That doesn't take 2 years.

And it sounds like this violation was reported in fall of 2017, but the U won't comment on the exact date so we cannot confirm. That doesn't sound like an investigation dragged on for two years, which makes the tweet a mischaracterization of how the U handled it.

Sent from my 2PZC5 using Tapatalk

 

[Ski U Mah Gopher]

I'm bringing up a couple of CA cases for example:

In both the Rodney King & OJ cases there was not enough evidence to convict criminally.

But there was a preponderance of the evidence to find all involved civilly liable for the wrongs committed.

 

[Ski U Mah Gopher]

And it sounds like this violation was reported in fall of 2017, but the U won't comment on the exact date so we cannot confirm. That doesn't sound like an investigation dragged on for two years, which makes the tweet a mischaracterization of how the U handled it.

Sent from my 2PZC5 using Tapatalk

Figuring 2 weeks to write the report and for the powers that be to make a judgement, that would put the end of the investigation right around the 21st of December. Going back 60 days from there would put the report around Oct 21-23.

 

[DinkytownDiva]

Fair or not, this will be part of the national narrative:

<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>


Go Gophers!!

It would help if the U of M were a little more precise in their statements. Or maybe they have been but reporters are choosing to make it seem more fuzzy than it is. Or maybe people feel like everybody should just be fired or suspended or thrown out because of allegations, before anyone has tested those allegations. (Those of you who do believe that, by the way, may be happier living in China or in other countries where human rights are routinely ravaged.)

Great Plains Gopher - these are no longer merely allegations. They were allegations when they were reported to the University. They are now allegations that have been investigated by the Committee (regardless of what you think about the Committee) and have been found to be more likely true than not true. Hence the timing of the punishment.

I look over the record here as the University has presented it - not as the reporters have reported it - and cannot see anything wrong with the way the Athletic Department and the Basketball Program have handled the issue. He won't be competing while the appeal is pending. Is it fair to allow him to remain with the team? I don't know - but suppose things were resolved in his favor by mid-February. What would you want to have happen if it were you in this situation, and you were completely innocent (NOT saying that I know/believe Reggie is innocent)? That's the way our justice system is supposed to work. Throwing stones is great until they are directed at you.

Breakin' the Plane - that was my first post (and this my second ). But I'm a long-time reader and an unapologetic Minnesota sports fan (pro and college). Win or lose, I support my teams. That doesn't however, extend to induviduals on teams who are shown to have violated laws or rules. Let the process play out.

 

[hyaluronic]

Figuring 2 weeks to write the report and for the powers that be to make a judgement, that would put the end of the investigation right around the 21st of December. Going back 60 days from there would put the report around Oct 21-23.

Agreed - perhaps I misunderstood what you were trying to say. We can deduce when the report was filed, but that won't stop the 2 year narrative.

Sent from my 2PZC5 using Tapatalk

 

[Ski U Mah Gopher]

Agreed - perhaps I misunderstood what you were trying to say. We can deduce when the report was filed, but that won't stop the 2 year narrative.

Sent from my 2PZC5 using Tapatalk

I just tweeted my opinion of Tony's tweet

<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

 

[fraternity2017]

Weird stuff here, but remember - these are allegations. Reggie will have more due process protection than the football players got. You have to be proven guilty, no matter how damning early charges sound.

Due process is playing out right now. Due process got him accused, due process got him suspended and due process is allowing him to appeal.

 

[Ski U Mah Gopher]

<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

 

[Ski U Mah Gopher]

<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

 

[GophersInIowa]

Fair or not, this will be part of the national narrative:

<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>


Go Gophers!!

It's also inaccurate. Didn't this allegations come in the last 6 months?

 

[hyaluronic]

I just tweeted my opinion of Tony's tweet

<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

That's about the best you can do to pushback on his original tweet.

Sent from my 2PZC5 using Tapatalk

 

[tato2001]

<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

Yep. I don't see how the University did anything clearly wrong here, unless folks believe that punishment should begin immediately after allegations. Suspension is clearly a punishment. As Dinkytown Diva points out, that is a scary world indeed.

 

[bizzle22]

Figuring 2 weeks to write the report and for the powers that be to make a judgement, that would put the end of the investigation right around the 21st of December. Going back 60 days from there would put the report around Oct 21-23.

I'm curious about when exactly Abby Honold met with Coyle. Obviously a meeting happened at some point, but all she said was that it was "last year." Could that meeting have been in maybe mid-October? Possibly the thing that sparked the EOAA investigation?

I have no idea if that is true, I'm just thinking out loud. Coyle obviously isn't going to say, but I do think it would be a little bit ironic if while she has been complaining that they did nothing it was actually true that they initiated an investigation after meeting with her which ultimately led to this suspension.

Have no idea, just wonder if that is a possibility.

 

[GophersInIowa]

Abby Honold claims she met with Athletic department officials (sounds like Coyle in some of the media reports) specifically to talk about Lynch. If this is true and more women come forward, it could be the end of Coyle and anyone else who can be seen as sheltering an active sex offender.

https://twitter.com/abbyhonold/status/949172338041475072

Not sure if she is telling the truth or not but it appears she is saying this was handled differently than the football team last year. That's wrong, correct? The four players were suspended early in the season due to the criminal investigation, then were suspended again (along with others) after the internal investigation was completed.

Someone correct me if I'm wrong.

 

[GophersInIowa]

<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

And his response. I usually like Tony too.

 

[Zeppelin Gopher]

Pardon my ignorance, but who the hell is Abby Honold and why should her word mean anything here?

 

[hyaluronic]

Not sure if she is telling the truth or not but it appears she is saying this was handled differently than the football team last year. That's wrong, correct? The four players were suspended early in the season due to the criminal investigation, then were suspended again (along with others) after the internal investigation was completed.

Someone correct me if I'm wrong.

I think she is taking issue with how an initial report can be made, more or less. It seems she believes the U should have taken the allegations not made by the victims more seriously.

While I think the process is fair, I think it's a good point to consider how reports can be made. Also, I think it's good to consider how the EOAA reaches their decisions and ensure that process is fair.

Sent from my 2PZC5 using Tapatalk

 

[bizzle22]

Pardon my ignorance, but who the hell is Abby Honold and why should her word mean anything here?

She was raped by someone at the U a couple years ago. Can't remember when exactly. Coyle was asked about her by name twice at the press conference today. She is saying she met with Coyle to warn him that other women had problems with Reggie Lynch. Her word shouldn't necessarily mean anything, but she was asked about by name in the press conference so I think it is fair to say she is at least peripherally involved.

 

[hyaluronic]

Pardon my ignorance, but who the hell is Abby Honold and why should her word mean anything here?

She was a U of M student raped by another student. She is now an advocate of sexual assault victims.

Her story:

http://m.startribune.com/after-auth...e-her-rapist-u-student-fought-back/398051931/



Sent from my 2PZC5 using Tapatalk

 

[BleedGopher]

An unfortunate headline and article from the New York Times: At Minnesota, Another Athlete Is Suspended in a Sexual Assault Case

The University of Minnesota athletic department is once again grappling with a controversy surrounding sexual assault allegations after suspending one of its star basketball players from competition.

Athletic Director Mark Coyle announced on Friday that the senior center Reggie Lynch would not appear in any games, but that he would remain a member of the basketball program. Given his age, 23, and dwindling eligibility, however, it is unlikely he will ever play for the Golden Gophers again, unless a related ruling is overturned on appeal.

The decision to suspend Lynch stems from an incident in April 2016 in which he allegedly sexually assaulted a Minnesota woman in his dormitory.

The university’s Office of Equal Opportunity and Affirmative Action issued a decision on Thursday, ruling that Lynch was responsible for violations of the university code regarding sexual misconduct and sexual assault, stalking and relationship violence, and would be suspended from the university early next week, according to documents reviewed by The New York Times.

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/05/sports/ncaabasketball/minnesota-reggie-lynch-suspended.html

Go Gophers!!

 

[GoGophersUMN]

Sorry if this has already been covered, but is there any word on how the Pioneer Press got a hold of the findings of the investigation?

It seems that since it's confidential, the only people who should have access to it are the accuser, the accused (Lynch), and university employees who were involved in the process of compiling it.

If Lynch leaked it out to the press, I'd assume that would be against university rules as he'd be providing confidential information about his accuser. I doubt this is the case though as we probably would have heard if it was him considering he's a public figure and it changes the story.

If Lynch's accuser leaked it, I'd also assume that's against university rules as she'd be providing confidential information about Lynch. Which, if it turns out that Lynch did what he is accused of, is nowhere near as bad as what Lynch did, but would still be worthy of investigation and punishment. I also don't think this is likely because she went through the formal process rather than just going public about it earlier.

If a university employee leaked it, they should be fired. If a university employee associated with the EOAA leaked it, the entire EOAA should be investigated.

With the football incident there were so many people involved but here, it seems that it has to be one of these three possibilities, all of which are bad and the person responsible deserves punishment. With two high profile incidents like this about a year apart where the report was leaked to the press within a day, why isn't the university investigating who is leaking confidential information? Given the situation and the repeated nature, the most logical explanation seems to be that someone other than the accusers is responsible, which is very concerning considering the process is amended by individuals leaking information.

 

[34Gopher]

Sorry if this has already been covered, but is there any word on how the Pioneer Press got a hold of the findings of the investigation?

It seems that since it's confidential, the only people who should have access to it are the accuser, the accused (Lynch), and university employees who were involved in the process of compiling it.

If Lynch leaked it out to the press, I'd assume that would be against university rules as he'd be providing confidential information about his accuser. I doubt this is the case though as we probably would have heard if it was him considering he's a public figure and it changes the story.

If Lynch's accuser leaked it, I'd also assume that's against university rules as she'd be providing confidential information about Lynch. Which, if it turns out that Lynch did what he is accused of, is nowhere near as bad as what Lynch did, but would still be worthy of investigation and punishment. I also don't think this is likely because she went through the formal process rather than just going public about it earlier.

If a university employee leaked it, they should be fired. If a university employee associated with the EOAA leaked it, the entire EOAA should be investigated.

With the football incident there were so many people involved but here, it seems that it has to be one of these three possibilities, all of which are bad and the person responsible deserves punishment. With two high profile incidents like this about a year apart where the report was leaked to the press within a day, why isn't the university investigating who is leaking confidential information? Given the situation and the repeated nature, the most logical explanation seems to be that someone other than the accusers is responsible, which is very concerning considering the process is amended by individuals leaking information.

If someone leaked it, maybe we can drop another $74,000 on an investigation to find out who the leaker is, only to once again not discover who leaked it.

 

[Ewert86PC]

If someone leaked it, maybe we can drop another $74,000 on an investigation to find out who the leaker is, only to once again not discover who leaked it.

Hmmm.... maybe it was someone on ther Board of Regents.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

 

[GophersInIowa]

I think she is taking issue with how an initial report can be made, more or less. It seems she believes the U should have taken the allegations not made by the victims more seriously.

While I think the process is fair, I think it's a good point to consider how reports can be made. Also, I think it's good to consider how the EOAA reaches their decisions and ensure that process is fair.

Sent from my 2PZC5 using Tapatalk

Further down this was talked about. The football players were suspended during the criminal investigation. They were not suspended during the internal investigation. It appears the policy was applied the same with Lynch. Unless there was a criminal investigation recently that we don't know about?

 

[fraternity2017]

Pardon my ignorance, but who the hell is Abby Honold and why should her word mean anything here?

Rape survivor in the Dan Drill-Mellum case (Google it). Works with victims in the Twin Cities and does public speaking related to sexual violence.

 

[fraternity2017]

Coyle needs to take public speaking classes in any free time he has. His press conference today embarrassed the university


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[hyaluronic]

Further down this was talked about. The football players were suspended during the criminal investigation. They were not suspended during the internal investigation. It appears the policy was applied the same with Lynch. Unless there was a criminal investigation recently that we don't know about?

Ah, I didn't realize you were referring to something later in the twitter thread. I agree, she is mistaken on that point.

From what I can tell the U has been consistent between the two cases. To be fair to her, she made that comment 9 hours ago, and I wouldn't have been able to articulate the policy at that point.

Sent from my 2PZC5 using Tapatalk