How does???

[NorthwestFresh]

It doesn't set UM for a civil case by the woman. Jeez, what an idiotic thing to say. The police have already declined to pursue her allegation, and the UM panel apparently just voted 7-0 against her (according to what others have said).

Hey Einstein. The FEDs are in Missoula precisely because of 7-0 decisions like that one, and also because of emails from the idiot Foley and the rest of our incompetent leadership.

Stay away from the players, weirdo.

 

[Hammer]

Hold on guys I have to go get more popcorn, these pissing matches are pure enjoyment. Give me five minutes to pop the next bag, then please continue.

Just wow. Is your life that boring? Maybe you should consider getting a job. Or a hobby. Maybe go fishing or go spring bear hunting. Golf? 4 wheeling? If your daily entertainment is the time you spend on this board I feel very very sorry for you.

 

[MooUBaby]

Hold on guys I have to go get more popcorn, these pissing matches are pure enjoyment. Give me five minutes to pop the next bag, then please continue.

Just wow. Is your life that boring? Maybe you should consider getting a job. Or a hobby. Maybe go fishing or go spring bear hunting. Golf? 4 wheeling? If your daily entertainment is the time you spend on this board I feel very very sorry for you.

I do all of the above minus 4 wheeling don't have the time, thanks for the suggestions though.

 

[MooUBaby]

Oh I forgot to tell you hammer, but I have golf league on Monday nights, softball Tuesdays and Thursdays, and im camping in the breaks this weekend. I will keep you posted if I change my schedule.

 

[Hammer]

Oh I forgot to tell you hammer, but I have golf league on Monday nights, softball Tuesdays and Thursdays, and im camping in the breaks this weekend. I will keep you posted if I change my schedule.

When your busy schedule frees up, I would like to talk football. More specifically, the game on Nov 19. You know, that "passing of the torch" and "changing of the guard" game? Lets break that sucker down, K?

 

[Hammer]

If it rains while you are down in the breaks, you're Fcked and you won't get out till it dries up.

 

[MooUBaby]

If it rains while you are down in the breaks, you're Fcked and you won't get out till it dries up.

Thanks for the advice I grew up on hiline and that's where we have hunted my whole life so we have learned not to push it. That gumbo shit is the absolute shittiest thing on earth when it gets wet.

 

[PlayerRep]

It doesn't set UM for a civil case by the woman. Jeez, what an idiotic thing to say. The police have already declined to pursue her allegation, and the UM panel apparently just voted 7-0 against her (according to what others have said).

Hey Einstein. The FEDs are in Missoula precisely because of 7-0 decisions like that one, and also because of emails from the idiot Foley and the rest of our incompetent leadership.

Stay away from the players, weirdo.

Hey weirdo, stop dissing players and coaches on the internet, and telling lies. That's creepy.

 

[BWahlberg]

Rachac in his summary blog: http://billingsgazette.com/sports/college/blogs/catgrizinsider/you-ve-got-mail/article_5a7c66fe-a39c-11e1-884b-001a4bcf887a.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Agrees with the OP:

In defense of Foley, the headline in the Missoulian put him in a pretty negative light. It read: “UM vice president sought to punish alleged rape victim, emails reveal.” The Missoulian has done a pretty dang good job reporting this whole ordeal (ease up on Gwen Florio, bleeding hearts) but nowhere in that particular story does it quote Foley as seeking to “punish” the alleged victim.

 

[FCS Go!]

Is the headline misleading? Probably, but the real point here is that Foley is a moron for putting this in an email. Anyone who has ever been in a leadership position should know that everything you write down, type up or email can end up in court or (especially if you work for the govt.) in the newspaper. Foley should have expected that this correspondence would be made public, especially when dealing with something as serious as rape. Unfair? Perhaps, but the court of public opinion is seldom reasonable and he has brought this characterization on himself.

 

[EverettGriz]

Is the headline misleading? Probably

Wasn't that the entire point of the thread?

 

[getgrizzy]

so foley wasn't seeking to punish her? then why did he ask the question? was he just asking to see if the answer was no or if the answer was yes he was just going to let it go at that? "oh she did break break a rule. ok, see you at the staff meeting." it's obvious he thought she did and that he wanted to reprimand her if so.

it's almost like a coach arguing with a ref in any sport. they aren't arguing because they think the ref got the call right. the main difference is that in sports you rarely get a call reversed even if you're correct, but in real life you can point out a law/rule/code and the enforcement body will enforce it. had the girl broken a code of conduct rule, do you really think that foley wouldn't have seen to it that she was punished?

 

[getgrizzy]

3. "Griz athletes deserve no different ... than the regular american". Are you serious? Griz athletes are getting hammered in the press, much different than the regular american. They are being completely clobbered by the Missoulian. Where are you been? Do you not read the newspaper?

they no more get clobbered than anyone else. people that are alleged to abuse children have their names put in newspapers, as do those alleged of spousal abuse and any number of things, ya know, a bell that can't be unrung. being on the griz football team just means they get more press, because more people are interested in hearing about it, i.e. want the details. sorry if that doesn't fit your agenda, but newspaper articles aren't a police report.

 

[PlayerRep]

so foley wasn't seeking to punish her? then why did he ask the question? was he just asking to see if the answer was no or if the answer was yes he was just going to let it go at that? "oh she did break break a rule. ok, see you at the staff meeting." it's obvious he thought she did and that he wanted to reprimand her if so.

it's almost like a coach arguing with a ref in any sport. they aren't arguing because they think the ref got the call right. the main difference is that in sports you rarely get a call reversed even if you're correct, but in real life you can point out a law/rule/code and the enforcement body will enforce it. had the girl broken a code of conduct rule, do you really think that foley wouldn't have seen to it that she was punished?

Foley could have asked the question for dozens of different reasons, and none of them would have had anything to do with punishing her. One, he might have just wanted to know for his own purposes, or for future knowledge. Two, he may have been asked that question by someone else (like someone else in the university, the accused or his parents or his attorney, etc.), and was trying to get a definitive answer to respond. Three, he may have wanted to know if any or all of the parties were bound to keep things confidential. Four, he may have wanted to know so that he could put it in a report he was preparing. Five, he may have wanted to know so that the university could consider pointing out to her or the parties, that the proceedings and results are supposed to be confidential.

I will also point out that I doubt that Foley had any authority institute or suggest punishment of an accuser in this university process. This process is part of a different part of the university. I suspect that Foley wasn't even privy to the details of what was going on in the process, and who was involved. I don't believe the university spreads this type of information around; in fact, I believe they keep it among a very small group of people. Foley, as the university external relations and press guy, probably saw what had been reported in the media, and then asked for clarification in the email. It was probably a very small and spontaneous thing.
Even if it was more than this, there was no suggestion whatsoever that he sough to punish her.

I will use getgrizzy's athletic analogy. If the Big Sky conference's head press guy, while watching a game on tv, sends an internal email asking whether a referee made the correct call on a particular play, do you think he is suggesting that the referee be reprimanded?

 

[PlayerRep]

3. "Griz athletes deserve no different ... than the regular american". Are you serious? Griz athletes are getting hammered in the press, much different than the regular american. They are being completely clobbered by the Missoulian. Where are you been? Do you not read the newspaper?

they no more get clobbered than anyone else. people that are alleged to abuse children have their names put in newspapers, as do those alleged of spousal abuse and any number of things, ya know, a bell that can't be unrung. being on the griz football team just means they get more press, because more people are interested in hearing about it, i.e. want the details. sorry if that doesn't fit your agenda, but newspaper articles aren't a police report.

Are you equating abuse of children to getting charged with a dui? Even lots of child abuse cases don't get put on the front page; in fact, they are rarely on the front page. Griz athlete dui's are often on the front page.

 

[wbtfg]

I will use getgrizzy's athletic analogy. If the Big Sky conference's head press guy, while watching a game on tv, sends an internal email asking whether a referee made the correct call on a particular play, do you think he is suggesting that the referee be reprimanded?

So you're comparing a UM student who was allegedly gang raped to a football official?

 

[EverettGriz]

I will use getgrizzy's athletic analogy. If the Big Sky conference's head press guy, while watching a game on tv, sends an internal email asking whether a referee made the correct call on a particular play, do you think he is suggesting that the referee be reprimanded?

So you're comparing a UM student who was allegedly gang raped to a football official?

Instigator!

 

[getgrizzy]

so foley wasn't seeking to punish her? then why did he ask the question? was he just asking to see if the answer was no or if the answer was yes he was just going to let it go at that? "oh she did break break a rule. ok, see you at the staff meeting." it's obvious he thought she did and that he wanted to reprimand her if so.

it's almost like a coach arguing with a ref in any sport. they aren't arguing because they think the ref got the call right. the main difference is that in sports you rarely get a call reversed even if you're correct, but in real life you can point out a law/rule/code and the enforcement body will enforce it. had the girl broken a code of conduct rule, do you really think that foley wouldn't have seen to it that she was punished?

Foley could have asked the question for dozens of different reasons, and none of them would have had anything to do with punishing her. One, he might have just wanted to know for his own purposes, or for future knowledge. Two, he may have been asked that question by someone else (like someone else in the university, the accused or his parents or his attorney, etc.), and was trying to get a definitive answer to respond. Three, he may have wanted to know if any or all of the parties were bound to keep things confidential. Four, he may have wanted to know so that he could put it in a report he was preparing. Five, he may have wanted to know so that the university could consider pointing out to her or the parties, that the proceedings and results are supposed to be confidential.

I will also point out that I doubt that Foley had any authority institute or suggest punishment of an accuser in this university process. This process is part of a different part of the university. I suspect that Foley wasn't even privy to the details of what was going on in the process, and who was involved. I don't believe the university spreads this type of information around; in fact, I believe they keep it among a very small group of people. Foley, as the university external relations and press guy, probably saw what had been reported in the media, and then asked for clarification in the email. It was probably a very small and spontaneous thing.
Even if it was more than this, there was no suggestion whatsoever that he sough to punish her.

I will use getgrizzy's athletic analogy. If the Big Sky conference's head press guy, while watching a game on tv, sends an internal email asking whether a referee made the correct call on a particular play, do you think he is suggesting that the referee be reprimanded?

if he had wanted to know for any of those reasons he almost certainly would've said so. like, "i'm just curious for my own edification (or because someone asked me to find out), but is it not...?" but even if he did any of those things, his ultimate purpose for asking is to punish the girl, is it not?

there's rarely anything spontaneous in an email. had he been in the same room and reading the article for the first time with couture, then responded verbally it would be spontaneous. or maybe if couture emailed him the story and he read it and then fired back a reply with that question, it could kind of be considered spontaneous. but foley had plenty of time to craft his email. remember he isn't writing to one of his high school pals, this is the school's dean of students.

 

[PlayerRep]

so foley wasn't seeking to punish her? then why did he ask the question? was he just asking to see if the answer was no or if the answer was yes he was just going to let it go at that? "oh she did break break a rule. ok, see you at the staff meeting." it's obvious he thought she did and that he wanted to reprimand her if so.

it's almost like a coach arguing with a ref in any sport. they aren't arguing because they think the ref got the call right. the main difference is that in sports you rarely get a call reversed even if you're correct, but in real life you can point out a law/rule/code and the enforcement body will enforce it. had the girl broken a code of conduct rule, do you really think that foley wouldn't have seen to it that she was punished?

Foley could have asked the question for dozens of different reasons, and none of them would have had anything to do with punishing her. One, he might have just wanted to know for his own purposes, or for future knowledge. Two, he may have been asked that question by someone else (like someone else in the university, the accused or his parents or his attorney, etc.), and was trying to get a definitive answer to respond. Three, he may have wanted to know if any or all of the parties were bound to keep things confidential. Four, he may have wanted to know so that he could put it in a report he was preparing. Five, he may have wanted to know so that the university could consider pointing out to her or the parties, that the proceedings and results are supposed to be confidential.

I will also point out that I doubt that Foley had any authority institute or suggest punishment of an accuser in this university process. This process is part of a different part of the university. I suspect that Foley wasn't even privy to the details of what was going on in the process, and who was involved. I don't believe the university spreads this type of information around; in fact, I believe they keep it among a very small group of people. Foley, as the university external relations and press guy, probably saw what had been reported in the media, and then asked for clarification in the email. It was probably a very small and spontaneous thing.
Even if it was more than this, there was no suggestion whatsoever that he sough to punish her.

I will use getgrizzy's athletic analogy. If the Big Sky conference's head press guy, while watching a game on tv, sends an internal email asking whether a referee made the correct call on a particular play, do you think he is suggesting that the referee be reprimanded?

if he had wanted to know for any of those reasons he almost certainly would've said so. like, "i'm just curious for my own edification (or because someone asked me to find out), but is it not...?" but even if he did any of those things, his ultimate purpose for asking is to punish the girl, is it not?

there's rarely anything spontaneous in an email. had he been in the same room and reading the article for the first time with couture, then responded verbally it would be spontaneous. or maybe if couture emailed him the story and he read it and then fired back a reply with that question, it could kind of be considered spontaneous. but foley had plenty of time to craft his email. remember he isn't writing to one of his high school pals, this is the school's dean of students.

Nope, people don't normally state the reason for questions when they are asked, especially in emails when it takes time to type them, and especially when the reason is not important to the question. Also, way too many emails are sent too quickly and don't spontaneously.

 

[getgrizzy]

so foley wasn't seeking to punish her? then why did he ask the question? was he just asking to see if the answer was no or if the answer was yes he was just going to let it go at that? "oh she did break break a rule. ok, see you at the staff meeting." it's obvious he thought she did and that he wanted to reprimand her if so.

it's almost like a coach arguing with a ref in any sport. they aren't arguing because they think the ref got the call right. the main difference is that in sports you rarely get a call reversed even if you're correct, but in real life you can point out a law/rule/code and the enforcement body will enforce it. had the girl broken a code of conduct rule, do you really think that foley wouldn't have seen to it that she was punished?

Foley could have asked the question for dozens of different reasons, and none of them would have had anything to do with punishing her. One, he might have just wanted to know for his own purposes, or for future knowledge. Two, he may have been asked that question by someone else (like someone else in the university, the accused or his parents or his attorney, etc.), and was trying to get a definitive answer to respond. Three, he may have wanted to know if any or all of the parties were bound to keep things confidential. Four, he may have wanted to know so that he could put it in a report he was preparing. Five, he may have wanted to know so that the university could consider pointing out to her or the parties, that the proceedings and results are supposed to be confidential.

I will also point out that I doubt that Foley had any authority institute or suggest punishment of an accuser in this university process. This process is part of a different part of the university. I suspect that Foley wasn't even privy to the details of what was going on in the process, and who was involved. I don't believe the university spreads this type of information around; in fact, I believe they keep it among a very small group of people. Foley, as the university external relations and press guy, probably saw what had been reported in the media, and then asked for clarification in the email. It was probably a very small and spontaneous thing.
Even if it was more than this, there was no suggestion whatsoever that he sough to punish her.

I will use getgrizzy's athletic analogy. If the Big Sky conference's head press guy, while watching a game on tv, sends an internal email asking whether a referee made the correct call on a particular play, do you think he is suggesting that the referee be reprimanded?

if he had wanted to know for any of those reasons he almost certainly would've said so. like, "i'm just curious for my own edification (or because someone asked me to find out), but is it not...?" but even if he did any of those things, his ultimate purpose for asking is to punish the girl, is it not?

there's rarely anything spontaneous in an email. had he been in the same room and reading the article for the first time with couture, then responded verbally it would be spontaneous. or maybe if couture emailed him the story and he read it and then fired back a reply with that question, it could kind of be considered spontaneous. but foley had plenty of time to craft his email. remember he isn't writing to one of his high school pals, this is the school's dean of students.

Nope, people don't normally state the reason for questions when they are asked, especially in emails when it takes time to type them, and especially when the reason is not important to the question. Also, way too many emails are sent too quickly and don't spontaneously.

gonna have to strongly disagree with you on that. people, especially professionals in situations like this, carefully give details in order to not have their motive misconstrued. it isn't like someone calling up burger king to see what today's special is. this is a very controversial, tenuous topic, not unimportant and spur of the moment. one that you carefully word everything you're saying, then re-read it to make sure you aren't conveying it in a way that someone could mistake your tone. some people even do this on message boards at times, as you know very well.