DOJ announcement today at 11

[Jerry Punch]

This is a quote from the DOJ release.

"The problems we found at the University of Montana were real and significant. These concerns, however, are not unique to this campus."

Haven't many people been saying all along that all campuses and college towns have issues with sexual assault, and that by the stats, the problems in Missoula are lower than they are in other similar college towns?

That's a slippery slope. If your community has a problem, you should deal with it, not say "it isn't as bad as it is elsewhere."

I thought Missoula liked to separate itself from the rest of the country, and if you're CopperGriz, the rest of Montana for its forward thinking. That's like noticing a DUI problem in your town but saying it isn't that bad compared to the rest of the country. If it is local, then it should be your problem.

 

[Washgrizfan1]

This is a quote from the DOJ release.

"The problems we found at the University of Montana were real and significant. These concerns, however, are not unique to this campus."

Haven't many people been saying all along that all campuses and college towns have issues with sexual assault, and that by the stats, the problems in Missoula are lower than they are in other similar college towns?

That's a slippery slope. If your community has a problem, you should deal with it, not say "it isn't as bad as it is elsewhere."

I thought Missoula liked to separate itself from the rest of the country, and if you're CopperGriz, the rest of Montana for its forward thinking. That's like noticing a DUI problem in your town but saying it isn't that bad compared to the rest of the country. If it is local, then it should be your problem.

Who said anything about dealing or not dealing with the problem? I sure didn't. I was just framing the problem. Again, nothing unique. Dealing with it or not dealing with it is a different topic.

 

[Washgrizfan1]

Sure they do, and when its all over the U will look great. The comments from the DOJ have already confirmed that. And should the U keep things up they will look even better. That doesn't mean it was all smoke. FVV and the City police department will likley NOT fare so well.

In admist all the defensive posturing was the fact what got the ball rolling was the handeling was the Saudi incident, and the fact at minimum coach had knowledge for over a year that he didn't pass along (as required) delaying university investigation (as required) As usual it was not the action that caused the problem but the attempt to cover it up or hide it....... Note the Missoula city Police department also had the information and failed to pass it on.

The DOJ lawyer is quoted as saying there is no evidence of a cover up.

The city police have no obligation to notify the University of their investigations. They notified the football coach that they wouldn't be pressing charges. Should he have reported it up the chain? ABSOLUTELY, but you are really stretching things here...

Why should the matter have been reported up? Police had declined to pursue. No policy at the time to report up. Coach had mininmal information and wasn't informed by the police that the woman was a student, or was her name given. What would the university have done with the information?

Because the football coach has a boss, and they should tell that boss about serious matters. If this scenario was in any other position, most people on this board would agree a supervisor should have been told. At any rate, I think you should focus on the bigger issue I am laying out here that TNT is making this bigger than it is, and not this completely irrelevant point.

So, every "serious" thing should be reported to a boss, no matter what the level of the reporter would be? Not in my business. So, you view the head coach as having a supervisor? If reported up, what would anyone at the university have done about it?

 

[ALPHAGRIZ1]

Holy fu*kchops..............not again..................

 

[tnt]

Here is the biggie, they didn't say yea or nay. After the fact they can only speculate whether the cops did their job or not. Knowing the Missoula town clowns I wouldn't be very confident saying there was no wrong doing by the cops or the district attorney. I think RE is doing the right thing by cooperating and not taking a hard line stance with the feds. It will be good in the long run to play along with them.

"Federal officials declined to discuss specific cases or to say if any cases went unprosecuted without good reason."

You are exactly correct. I don't think anyone is trying to make a "big deal" out of it. The outcome is what I expected. To say it was a summary of "nothing" is wrong. RE has managed to avoid a big deal believe it or not, that was clear in the DOJ statement.

 

[fencer24]

The DOJ lawyer is quoted as saying there is no evidence of a cover up.

And now you know why the whole sequester mess is so stupid. We are cutting essential services so that the DOJ can threaten and intimidate.

 

[Gaeilge1]

Shakespeare had it right 400 years ago! "Much Ado about Nothing"!!

 

[mtgrizrule]

Shakespeare had it right 400 years ago! "Much Ado about Nothing"!!

Just like there will be very little wrong doing coming from the NCAA investigation as well. Sorry, but the bashers and GRIZ hater will be a little disappointed. Wonder what is delaying the official announcements of the investigation? Maybe it is being delayed to announce what the university is going to do about the violations to make prevent them from happening again.

 

[mikegriz]

Nope, just a bunch of out of control raping and sexual assaulting of women that lead to a $60 million drop in revenue, the firing of an AD and head football coach, and a massive effort to change policy for an entire campus. Not much doing. I'm sure the cynicism egrizzers have is just as biting in person.

Amazing! You hit every wrong talking point. Out of control raping? Really?

How about a system biased against males to their Constitutional detriment being manipulated by politicians who are trying to look like they care so they can be re-elected?

Yeah, I am a cynic.

How about neither. Both descriptions pretty absurd

 

[kemajic]

If I were a male high school senior choosing a college to attend, why would I entertain the risk of attending UM where all the cards are now stacked against male students and any conflict could lead to an accusation and life-changing legal process? And if I did, in spite of this, I don't believe I would even have a conversation with a female student.

 

[Mineral Griz]

I have followed this whole thing...............

Two questions

1. What did this cost the American Taxpayer?

2. Why were they there.?

Job security!

:? :? :? :? :? :? :? :? :? :?

 

[grzz]

The DOJ lawyer is quoted as saying there is no evidence of a cover up.

The city police have no obligation to notify the University of their investigations. They notified the football coach that they wouldn't be pressing charges. Should he have reported it up the chain? ABSOLUTELY, but you are really stretching things here...

Why should the matter have been reported up? Police had declined to pursue. No policy at the time to report up. Coach had mininmal information and wasn't informed by the police that the woman was a student, or was her name given. What would the university have done with the information?

Because the football coach has a boss, and they should tell that boss about serious matters. If this scenario was in any other position, most people on this board would agree a supervisor should have been told. At any rate, I think you should focus on the bigger issue I am laying out here that TNT is making this bigger than it is, and not this completely irrelevant point.

So, every "serious" thing should be reported to a boss, no matter what the level of the reporter would be? Not in my business. So, you view the head coach as having a supervisor? If reported up, what would anyone at the university have done about it?

Three students investigated for rape doesn't rise to your level of seriousness to report up the chain? That's fine, we just choose to disagree. And the reason he should have reported it, is because reporting it is required by Title IX. If UM had a better understanding of those requirements, much of this would have been avoided. I don't believe there was any malicious intent on his part, but he should have reported it up the chain to O'Day. Aside from that, this whole press conference and report just comes off as the Feds strong arming teh University into "agreeing" to fix things. There was no major revelation of new fact, there was no cover up. Even in their long and detailed accounting of issues at UM, there is never a statement of violation, just need to be improved upon. Even the statements like assault victims were belittled, disbelieved, and so on, are not confirmed in any sort of formal way, just based on statements. There is no smoking gun here. The reason for the agreement is that UM (Or really any university or municipality) does not have the capability to go toe to toe with the Federal government. They can bully them in to acknowledging some level of issues and working on a solution so that it looks like time was well spent and everyone is appeased. If there was violations discovered, there would be fines and sanctions. The DOJ doesn't just slap people's hands if they have legitimate evidence of issues. UM needs to do a better job investigating sexual assaults, they need to make protocol more clear, but they did not knowingly or willingly disallow victims from reporting. The article makes it sound like no one was able to press any student conduct charges for sexual assault, but that isn't the case.

 

[Washgrizfan1]

Why should the matter have been reported up? Police had declined to pursue. No policy at the time to report up. Coach had mininmal information and wasn't informed by the police that the woman was a student, or was her name given. What would the university have done with the information?

Because the football coach has a boss, and they should tell that boss about serious matters. If this scenario was in any other position, most people on this board would agree a supervisor should have been told. At any rate, I think you should focus on the bigger issue I am laying out here that TNT is making this bigger than it is, and not this completely irrelevant point.

So, every "serious" thing should be reported to a boss, no matter what the level of the reporter would be? Not in my business. So, you view the head coach as having a supervisor? If reported up, what would anyone at the university have done about it?

Three students investigated for rape doesn't rise to your level of seriousness to report up the chain? That's fine, we just choose to disagree. And the reason he should have reported it, is because reporting it is required by Title IX. If UM had a better understanding of those requirements, much of this would have been avoided. I don't believe there was any malicious intent on his part, but he should have reported it up the chain to O'Day. Aside from that, this whole press conference and report just comes off as the Feds strong arming teh University into "agreeing" to fix things. There was no major revelation of new fact, there was no cover up. Even in their long and detailed accounting of issues at UM, there is never a statement of violation, just need to be improved upon. Even the statements like assault victims were belittled, disbelieved, and so on, are not confirmed in any sort of formal way, just based on statements. There is no smoking gun here. The reason for the agreement is that UM (Or really any university or municipality) does not have the capability to go toe to toe with the Federal government. They can bully them in to acknowledging some level of issues and working on a solution so that it looks like time was well spent and everyone is appeased. If there was violations discovered, there would be fines and sanctions. The DOJ doesn't just slap people's hands if they have legitimate evidence of issues. UM needs to do a better job investigating sexual assaults, they need to make protocol more clear, but they did not knowingly or willingly disallow victims from reporting. The article makes it sound like no one was able to press any student conduct charges for sexual assault, but that isn't the case.

Could you explain why you believe a police "heads up" to a coach that they have investigated an allegation that some players were involved in a group blow job, and decided that it was not a legal violation and thus it will not be pursued and charges won't be filed, of a woman who is not named or nor said to be a UM student, is required to be reported under Title IX. Give us some legal or other cites, please. Just doesn't seem like something would be "required" to be reported to anyone up the university chain. I would have thought that Title IX would protect only college student or employees. Please educate me. Thank you in advance.

 

[GrizLA]

Cody, the findings of the DOJ investigation did not turn up much, if anything, that is not experienced on other campuses across the country. The consequences of having a DOJ investigation did have a negative impact on the University. We can all b^tch and moan about the consequences and regurgitate what went on or we can accept the events knowing they can not be changed, and move on. I favor the latter.

I wonder if there will now be such a thorough evaluation of Occidental College In LA, not known for athletics, but one of the best academic reputations world wide....the evidence seems to point to real abuses but they have no football team and the town is larger..

 

[UMGriz75]

What about this doozy, UmGriz75?

"Six University of Montana football players, including three who allegedly attacked a single woman, have been accused over the three years of involvement in sexual assaults, according to a yearlong U.S. Department of Justice investigation into how UM handled sexual assaults.

The university did not institute Student Conduct Code procedures against those three players until nearly a year after the coach knew the alleged victim had filed a report with the Missoula Police Department, according to a letter from the DOJ to UM President Royce Engstrom and Lucy France, university counsel."

Do you think the University handled that issue properly?

This underscores the problem. Five University of Montana football players were wrongly accused, and one pleaded guilty as he should have.

None of those involved violence whatsoever.

But, look at the those numbers.

The fact is, 83% of the accusations were false. I intentionally use the word "false" instead of "unproven."

If there is a problem here, it is with false accusations tying up resources, disrupting lives, and defaming innocent people. It should be an outrage.

And it keeps happening, and there are political or social overtones associated with these false allegations.

http://trib.com/news/state-and-regional/update-some-question-allegations-uw-student-lied-about-rape-threat/article_40df0871-b3cf-5170-87c3-80424953de19.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

On the other hand, the statement does briefly point to the two violent acts of assault -- the only violence alleged -- committed by a non-athlete student who apparently was part of a privileged class, far more privileged it appears than any student-athlete.

Indeed, 100% of accusations involving violent sexual assault were committed by one single student -- a "thug" perhaps, recruited here for diversity and "cultural" purposes -- but Pat Williams remained oddly silent on that recruitment process, as does the DOJ "investigation."

The most outrageous assault(s) that actually did happen get little play here; the politics just weren't "right."

Five false allegations were resurrected because, without them, there was nothing left to talk about.

The moronic duplicity of this process is to proclaim that UM does not take false reports seriously enough.

The upshot is that UM must create a "gold standard," not of discouraging false reports, but of encouraging them.

 

[AZGrizFan]

What about this doozy, UmGriz75?

"Six University of Montana football players, including three who allegedly attacked a single woman, have been accused over the three years of involvement in sexual assaults, according to a yearlong U.S. Department of Justice investigation into how UM handled sexual assaults.

The university did not institute Student Conduct Code procedures against those three players until nearly a year after the coach knew the alleged victim had filed a report with the Missoula Police Department, according to a letter from the DOJ to UM President Royce Engstrom and Lucy France, university counsel."

Do you think the University handled that issue properly?

This underscores the problem. Five University of Montana football players were wrongly accused, and one pleaded guilty as he should have.

None of those involved violence whatsoever.

But, look at the those numbers.

The fact is, 83% of the accusations were false. I intentionally use the word "false" instead of "unproven."

If there is a problem here, it is with false accusations tying up resources, disrupting lives, and defaming innocent people. It should be an outrage.

And it keeps happening, and there are political or social overtones associated with these false allegations.

http://trib.com/news/state-and-regional/update-some-question-allegations-uw-student-lied-about-rape-threat/article_40df0871-b3cf-5170-87c3-80424953de19.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

On the other hand, the statement does briefly point to the two violent acts of assault -- the only violence alleged -- committed by a non-athlete student who apparently was part of a privileged class, far more privileged it appears than any student-athlete.

Indeed, 100% of accusations involving violent sexual assault were committed by one single student -- a "thug" perhaps, recruited here for diversity and "cultural" purposes -- but Pat Williams remained oddly silent on that recruitment process, as does the DOJ "investigation."

The most outrageous assault(s) that actually did happen get little play here; the politics just weren't "right."

Five false allegations were resurrected because, without them, there was nothing left to talk about.

The moronic duplicity of this process is to proclaim that UM does not take false reports seriously enough.

The upshot is that UM must create a "gold standard," not of discouraging false reports, but of encouraging them.

:clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap:

 

[Jerry Punch]

So, your point is to suggest that UM is under assault from females who want to bring down the institution by planning to create false reports of rape? Your assumption is supported by a statistic that is as ridiculous as it is humorous. Here's an example of how to manipulate small numbers by using percentages and applying it to larger populations to generalize your point:

"Last week in Missoula it was only cloudy 28% of the time. Thus, Missoula regularly enjoys sunshine 72% of the time throughout the year."

To reiterate the point, I don't think there was any problem with how UM handled most of its business regarding this alleged onslaught of sexual incidents. If we're going on the assumption that UM has no worse a problem then anywhere else, then so too must we assume that football coaches at UM would be held to similar standards as those across the country. If there is one incident of unacceptable behavior that a coach knows about or should know about and it creates public scrutiny, it is possible that this coach would be terminated. There's no ascertainable standard. There's no due process. That's not how college football works at UM or any other place. At some point, it is acceptable to hold your leaders responsible for the acts of people below them.

Someone else mentioned above that giving women the benefit of the doubt would create fear in the potential student. That's just ridiculous. Many guys get through college enjoying all the perks that come with it, whether it be under age drinking, weekend flings, etc, without getting into any sort of trouble. Unless you can positively prove to me and the community at large that women are out there to create trouble for men at UM, you'll have to take your ball and go home. Your resentment and anger are palpable.

 

[tnt]

Actually he represents the view that got the University in trouble in the first place there are two mechanisms for reporting and handeling reports: through the student conduct system and through law enforcement. At point along the way are coaches teachers other students to pass judgment its not their job. The judgement is NOT to be made by people taking the report nor are they to express their opinions or judgement along the way. It seems a shame that it took a year to clear the students involved in the blow job incident while all the time the rumors inuendo etc floated around campus building up a huge problem.

It could have ended a year before it did. But instead coaches and whoever decided it had no merit the girls involved were threatened ostracised etc while on the other side resentment built towards the players and the programing general. As a result a flury ended up as a full blown shit storm. it has never been about who was guilty or who wasn't. It has been about how things were/are handled at the University of Montana and the environment fostered there.

They incidents quite simply were handled badly and the culture was horrible the people involved are gone. The Dean that screwed up several incidents early retired , the VP who tried to white wash it fired after a series of demotions, the Director of Public Safety "retired" the athletic staff who chose to keep it in houses "non renewed" Several hundred pages of deficiencies in the handling of things addressed, and an independent over site director oversee the implementation brought in.

Far from rolling over University leadership has made the changes, cooperated with the heavies, become a leader and turned the example of how not to be, into the Standard of how to be. Correctly U of M is no different in how many assaults etc occur, but were different in how they handled them.

Now fixing things at the MPD is going to be a bit more difficult. If you want to talk about an imeptmess and lack of leadership thats the place to start. We taze physicians for working with suicidal patients, beat the hell out of mentally ill inmates lost and confused in our jails, taze black kids for being PO'd about being verbally attcked, and leadership who base their decisions not on the law but rather the precepts of the Assembly's of God.

And Freddy.... The leadership left that department I fear the DOJ will take it over. Its not just raped but people driving down side walks over charging over reacting, playing to the press, what cluster ****

 

[UMGriz75]

Here's the rub in the "DOJ Report," over the three year period there was exactly two violent or forcible sexual assaults on the UM campus, committed by one person in the same weekend, who was not an athlete.

Here's the statistics for MSU over the same three year period:

Total Forcible Sex Offenses on campus: 12
Total occurrences, Forcible Sex Offenses in residence halls: 10
Total occurrences, non campus, Forcible Sex Offenses: 4

http://www2.montana.edu/policy/security_report/crime_report.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

As a result, at UM, the coach who introduced sexual assault prevention seminars to the players was fired, as was the athletic director who supported that training.

At MSU, everyone continued on in their jobs.

 

[UMGriz75]

So, your point is to suggest that UM is under assault from females who want to bring down the institution by planning to create false reports of rape?

It isn't just that the hyperbole of the statement is extreme, I would be hard pressed, if I felt even a token responsibilty for statements I make, to show that any female had decided to "bring down the University of Montana" by making a false rape claim to the Missoula Police Department.

Please color within the lines, and don't eat the crayons.