Remember all the eGriz posters who stated that, if a UM athlete is accused of a crime, he should be automatically suspended from participating in athletics until he is exonerated in court? Remember how those same posters lambasted other posters who argued that, in such cases, it was completely appropriate for the university to defer to the criminal justice system and decide on discipline after the justice system had run its course?
I wonder if any minds have changed as a result of this trial and acquittal.
Is an athlete in such a case truly innocent until proven guilty?
Does the university's current policy make sense?
I wonder if any minds have changed as a result of this trial and acquittal.
Is an athlete in such a case truly innocent until proven guilty?
Does the university's current policy make sense?