Foley resigning as VP of External Relations

[garizzalies]

exactly. that's part of the perception problem: quietly handling these matters internally. If the tazer incident resulted in a one-quarter suspension, we are lead to believe the members in the alleged gang rape ran the M a couple times? If we acted like App state and suspended the alleged individuals immediately pending investigation maybe we could have avoided this shitstorm.

 

[PlayerRep]

exactly. that's part of the perception problem: quietly handling these matters internally. If the tazer incident resulted in a one-quarter suspension, we are lead to believe the members in the alleged gang rape ran the M a couple times? If we acted like App state and suspended the alleged individuals immediately pending investigation maybe we could have avoided this shitstorm.

For the most part, internal discipline is better and more fair. Many schools do that. App St didn't suspend the players immediately. The matter dragged on for 6 or more months, prior to suspension. Stop making up stuff. Try getting your facts correct before spouting off with incorrect information. Just a suggestion. And you'll save me alot of time pointing out incorrect information in posts.

 

[Noches de Passion]

How is UM equipped to handle felony sexual crimes internally? Do juries get pulled and do judges apply the same standards of proof on the UM campus?

 

[tnt]

exactly. that's part of the perception problem: quietly handling these matters internally. If the tazer incident resulted in a one-quarter suspension, we are lead to believe the members in the alleged gang rape ran the M a couple times? If we acted like App state and suspended the alleged individuals immediately pending investigation maybe we could have avoided this shitstorm.

For the most part, internal discipline is better and more fair. Many schools do that. App St didn't suspend the players immediately. The matter dragged on for 6 or more months, prior to suspension. Stop making up stuff. Try getting your facts correct before spouting off with incorrect information. Just a suggestion. And you'll save me alot of time pointing out incorrect information in posts.

Better check your facts on that one...

 

[PlayerRep]

exactly. that's part of the perception problem: quietly handling these matters internally. If the tazer incident resulted in a one-quarter suspension, we are lead to believe the members in the alleged gang rape ran the M a couple times? If we acted like App state and suspended the alleged individuals immediately pending investigation maybe we could have avoided this shitstorm.

For the most part, internal discipline is better and more fair. Many schools do that. App St didn't suspend the players immediately. The matter dragged on for 6 or more months, prior to suspension. Stop making up stuff. Try getting your facts correct before spouting off with incorrect information. Just a suggestion. And you'll save me alot of time pointing out incorrect information in posts.

Better check your facts on that one...

I know the basic facts. You need to check your supposed facts, as they're wrong.

The first assault occurred in the spring of 2011. I think this one involved 5 guys. A second one occurred in the fall of 2011. I think this one involved 2 of the guys from the first one. The first accuser went to the university in the fall of 2011. Two players were suspended, then reinstated for multiple months, and then eventually suspended again (after protests). Some of the university proceedsings occurred in the fall. I believe players played in games, before the university proceeding ruled against them. It's a bit confusing with the two assaults, and various suspensions and reinstatements, to figure out exactly what happened.

In any event, the players were not immediately suspended when the university charges were first made. In fact, some involved were not even suspended at times, after the university proceeding had gone against them.

One player was found guilty by the university, using preponderance of the evidence, but in a later proceeding many months later, he won his case.

Three players and one non-player have now been tossed out of schools for 8 semesters (in May 2012), and one other player is on suspension. No charges will be brought in the first assault; charges are being looked at in the second assault (involving one person, I believe).

http://www.charlotteobserver.com/2012/05/03/3217488/appalachian-torn-over-sex-assaults.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

 

[tnt]

You are correct they were NOT suspended when the accusation was made in Sept. There was no controversy over that.

But it didn't drag out for six months either.

Neither victim complained to the university immediatly either. One in Deccember and another in Janurary. Univesity hearings were held. Only one was found guilty of "rape" he was gone and stayed gone.
The others were suspended for "sexual harassment" and suspended (mind you school was not in session. Those four appealed and were reinstated. in late Jan and Early feb. The supensions were reimposed after an outcry in early late Feb. or early March (after the students returned) The victim got a letter confirming such march 8. Even stretching it, it was 6 weeks not six months. In "student time" it was days. The appeals and "trial" process were a mess.

http://www2.wataugademocrat.com/News/story/ASU-reinstates-football-players-suspensions-id-007199" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

But even at that the whole process was a bit more transparent and "clear" to the public and the University more responsive than here as was their sheriffs department. It could EASILY have blown up. Their papers were as proactive as the Missoulian.

 

[PlayerRep]

You are correct they were NOT suspended when the accusation was made in Sept. There was no controversy over that.

But it didn't drag out for six months either.

Neither victim complained to the university immediatly either. One in Deccember and another in Janurary. Univesity hearings were held. Only one was found guilty of "rape" he was gone and stayed gone.
The others were suspended for "sexual harassment" and suspended (mind you school was not in session. Those four appealed and were reinstated. in late Jan and Early feb. The supensions were reimposed after an outcry in early late Feb. or early March (after the students returned) The victim got a letter confirming such march 8. Even stretching it, it was 6 weeks not six months. In "student time" it was days. The appeals and "trial" process were a mess.

http://www2.wataugademocrat.com/News/story/ASU-reinstates-football-players-suspensions-id-007199" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

But even at that the whole process was a bit more transparent and "clear" to the public and the University more responsive than here as was their sheriffs department. It could EASILY have blown up. Their papers were as proactive as the Missoulian.

Nope, you are wrong on App St. Both victims complained in the fall of 2011. In fact, one university hearing was held in 2011. Two players, who were playing, were eventually suspended at some point last fall, but not when the complaints were made. The university goofed up the hearing process, and they got another hearing in 2012. They were then reinstated and allowed back in school in 2012. Then, after protests, they were suspended again a number of months later. I believe that of the 5 football players involved, only 2 had been suspended during this time. Another was suspended after the adverse result in May 2012.

Also, note this, which is from the article you linked: "On Saturday, Associate Vice Chancellor for University Communications Hank Foreman confirmed that one of the accused football players — who was listed on the 2012 ASU football team roster as recently as Feb. 23 — is no longer an enrolled student at ASU as of Feb. 28. Two of the accused football players remain listed on the 2012 roster as of Sunday evening."

UM's process has actually been much faster than App St's.