Judge Compels State to Turnover JJ Records

[mcg]

I wonder if the entity the University is most interested in protecting is the University.

The have less to fear from a Krakauer book written about a 3 - 4 year old case at a University that reponded by adopting a model that is now the national standard of how a university should respond than the pissed off DOE. As far as any exposure to the "student" it would all be public if the predicted 2015 Armageddon for the University came to fruition anyway.

Wahlberg may be right, but I'm guessing The UM situation will be a chapter or two in a book about a broader situation. Football crazed town allowing athletes to get away with just about anything stuff is old stuff - been written about for years. Krakauer is more "trendy" than that.

So what is the 2015 Armageddon?

 

[BadlandsGrizFan]

Anyone think this could be a negative for old Royce Engstrom?

That's exactly what I was thinking...how great would it be to watch someone throw him out on his ass like he did to everyone else..im talking old school, wild west, throw him by his belt buckle head first through swinging wood saloon doors ON HIS ASS!!!!

 

[PlayerRep]

Having seen this story go through the news cycle several times now, it bothers me that allegations Johnson faced before a disciplinary panel are referred to as a "case" and that the panel "found Johnson guilty." That language suggests the proceeding and the conclusion of the panel are part of a the U.S. judicial system, which it isn't.

Furthermore, I don't it's right to suggest the disciplinary panel issued a finding of guilt. Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but I think using the "preponderance of evidence" standard that UM adopted, the conclusion by the panel is that something was either likely or unlikely to have occurred.
By throwing around a "finding of guilt" the press is giving more weight to the panel conclusion than is really there.

The other twist in this story is that the commissioner is not waiting for an assurance from the federal department of education that the school isn't violating FERPA by complying with the judge's order. Really? This FOIA has been going on for months and the feds still haven't responded to the commissioner's request?
The Department of Education jumped all over UM, demanded concessions that quite honestly violate the constitutional rights of teachers and students and now it can't be bothered with a quick response? This is the federal government at its dysfunctional worst.

A female district court Judge with an agenda? Never.

McRae said the commissioner’s office won’t release the records without calling in legal experts from the U.S. Department of Education for a closer review of Seeley’s order and the potential ramifications.

McRae said the state cannot risk violating the federal Family Education Rights and Privacy Act. Doing so could cost Montana students millions of dollars in educational grants, he said.

“Over the 30 days, we will be analyzing the judge’s order, in consultation with the U.S. Department of Education, to determine whether the instructions in that order comply with FERPA,” McRae said. “We have to make sure we’re protecting student privacy. The cost of violating that is severe.”

“We did expect it as a possibility,” McRae said. “Any time there’s a contested case of any kind, we realize the decision will be made in one direction or another. We need something official from DOE saying we’re not exposed to a FERPA violation. It’s very difficult situation that we’re in.” http://ravallirepublic.com/news/state-and-regional/article_cf8030e2-8c56-5f0a-ab58-4fea551cbc67.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Doesn't sound to me like anyone is rolling over. This is the same DOE who "Bullied" the University by working hand in hand with the DOJ on the Title IX investigation of UM. I doubt they are are going to roll over for a Montana District Court Judge.

PR does the fact this has already been before a federal Judge (in a different form) further complicate matters???

TNT, the short answer is that I don't know. Nevertheless, this is what I think. I don't think this particular issue was in front of the federal judge. The federal judge eventually ruled to unseal the file, based on other laws/principles. The documents, or many of them, had been filed by JJ's lawyer, who requested that the proceeding be confidential and the file kept sealed. In addition, I doubt that the federal student privacy law applies to federal judges, as opposed to colleges. I have not looked at the filings for the author's case in Helena, but I assume it may have made the practical argument that much of the file in the university proceeding was public, and had been provided by JJ's lawyer, so why not make the rest of the file public.

I see that disciplinary records are deemed to be education records which have the protected status under the federal act. Law enforcement records, i.e. campus police, are not. The campus police were not involved in this matter. In case of sexual assault, the university can dislose certain information in certain situations. My impression is that the school could make this determination (it's not some public right to know). See this quote from a government website:

"A postsecondary institution may disclose to an alleged victim of any crime of violence or non-forcible sex offense the final results of a disciplinary proceeding conducted by the institution against the alleged perpetrator of that crime, regardless of whether the institution concluded a violation was committed. An institution may disclose to anyone—not just the victim—the final results of a disciplinary proceeding, if it determines that the student is an alleged perpetrator of a crime of violence or non-forcible sex offense, and with respect to the allegation made against him or her, the student has committed a violation of the institution's rules or policies. See 34 CFR §§ 99.31(a)(13) and (14)." http://www2.ed.gov/policy/gen/guid/fpco/brochures/postsec.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I still think the federal student privacy law may trump the state court decision, although I don't know much about that law other than what I just read in 5 minutes of research. The above quote refers to final results, not to the disclinary file (which would include information on both students). I suppose one of the reasons to open, or to force open, the file, and not rule that the act requires confidentiality, is the question/argument you asked.

 

[tnt]

I wonder if the entity the University is most interested in protecting is the University.

The have less to fear from a Krakauer book written about a 3 - 4 year old case at a University that reponded by adopting a model that is now the national standard of how a university should respond than the pissed off DOE. As far as any exposure to the "student" it would all be public if the predicted 2015 Armageddon for the University came to fruition anyway.

Wahlberg may be right, but I'm guessing The UM situation will be a chapter or two in a book about a broader situation. Football crazed town allowing athletes to get away with just about anything stuff is old stuff - been written about for years. Krakauer is more "trendy" than that.

So what is the 2015 Armageddon?

Apparently according to eGriz Johnson is going to sue the University into oblivion for not expelling him following the disciplinary hearing process and suspending him while facing a felony indictment but keeping him on scholarship. Then the BOR is going to can RE for turning everything over to them to make the final decisions. Then they will also insure the the two University officials who handled the matter (Couture and Foley) are are also fired along with the University Attorney who advised everybody (Aronofsky) Well maybe not the last part, those three already "retired" or were fired along with Chief of Campus security and every official who had a hand on this in any way shape or form.

 

[Sea Bass]

The state should delete/shred everything. Hell, it worked for the IRS!

 

[CV Griz Fan]

 

[BadlandsGrizFan]

The state should delete/shred everything. Hell, it worked for the IRS!

The IRS, what a joke....I basically consider every time I file my taxes as my "first offer" to the IRS.

 

[PlayerRep]

I wonder if the entity the University is most interested in protecting is the University.

The have less to fear from a Krakauer book written about a 3 - 4 year old case at a University that reponded by adopting a model that is now the national standard of how a university should respond than the pissed off DOE. As far as any exposure to the "student" it would all be public if the predicted 2015 Armageddon for the University came to fruition anyway.

Wahlberg may be right, but I'm guessing The UM situation will be a chapter or two in a book about a broader situation. Football crazed town allowing athletes to get away with just about anything stuff is old stuff - been written about for years. Krakauer is more "trendy" than that.

So what is the 2015 Armageddon?

Apparently according to eGriz Johnson is going to sue the University into oblivion for not expelling him following the disciplinary hearing process and suspending him while facing a felony indictment but keeping him on scholarship. Then the BOR is going to can RE for turning everything over to them to make the final decisions. Then they will also insure the the two University officials who handled the matter (Couture and Foley) are are also fired along with the University Attorney who advised everybody (Aronofsky) Well maybe not the last part, those three already "retired" or were fired along with Chief of Campus security and every official who had a hand on this in any way shape or form.

If I were to bring the claim, I would say that the university used a bad, flawed, unfair, and unconstitutional process, caused him considerable harm, in terms of mental anquish and harm to reputation. In particular, the university's investigation by the dean was very poorly done. The dean's original letter looked like it had been done by a 3rd grader. The process violated his due process rights multiple times. The university used the lower standard which had not been adopted by the university at the time of the incident, nor when the university process began. Even the policy that the university provided to him, either in hard or copy or a link, had the higher standard in it. This, alone, would be enough to state a significant claim. As a result, scores of stories were done on him, and he was on the front page numerous times. A federal judget wrote in an opinion that the process was unfair or shocked his sense of fairness. The university proceeding and result is now all over the internet, and impossible to correct/repair. The continuing press about the proceeding and result contributed to the pressure on the county attorney to charge him. Eventually, allowing him to stay in school and on scholarship may help reduce the value of the claim, but it's also essentially an admission that the university completely goofed this up. If this memo by the lawyer for the board of regents exists in the form mentioned, this would be a huge smoking gun and admission for the university, both on substance and the amount of damages. I think this would be a huge problem for the university is a claim is made. I ahve chuckled at the prior posts that have said this will result in the stadium being renamed Johnson/Paoli stadium.

 

[tnt]

So you are basically saying the memo will prove was lack of intent on the University just stupidity on the part of the Dean of Students who was "retired" and his actions reversed. Not much room for punitive type damages there is there? Actual of course.

Then they would have to prove that the County attorneys office proceeded purely based on political motivation and not determining it was in the Public's best interest to have a trial. (Prolly another reason why we need a gran jury system) They would also have to prove Karen Townsend was equally corrupt in the omnibus hearings and pretrial motions. THEN they would be renaming the stadium.

If one was a true conspiratist, one would have to believe this is why fred was stonewalling the feds.

Hell the university could come at the county for enough to build the dome

 

[EverettGriz]

Not an easy thing to say, but I agree 100% with TNT on this. I think those of you hoping this thing makes UM look terrible may be disappointed.

 

[George Ferguson]

Jordan Johnson is not the target of this book or even a chapter. His case and the saudi student case are what Krakauer is interested. I will bet anyone any amount of money that the intent of this book is not to try and show "UM quarterback gets away with rape.". Any takers?

 

[gotgame75]

Jordan Johnson is not the target of this book or even a chapter. His case and the saudi student case are what Krakauer is interested. I will bet anyone any amount of money that the intent of this book is not to try and show "UM quarterback gets away with rape.". Any takers?

See Havgriz, we do agree on some things!

 

[Umista]

All said and done I'm on the side hoping Jordan will sue and win! Sue who? Whom? I do not give a hoot. Hope he sues and wins regardless. Not one person should endure what he went through. Many wimps were way out of order concerning this young mans rape debacle!

 

[NorthEndZoneDan]

Jordan Johnson is not the target of this book or even a chapter. His case and the saudi student case are what Krakauer is interested. I will bet anyone any amount of money that the intent of this book is not to try and show "UM quarterback gets away with rape.". Any takers?

how about a friendly wager, say a double hot pepper cheeseburger at the Mo Club?

 

[UMGriz75]

Jordan Johnson is not the target of this book or even a chapter. His case and the saudi student case are what Krakauer is interested. I will bet anyone any amount of money that the intent of this book is not to try and show "UM quarterback gets away with rape.". Any takers?

As a follow-up to the "Duke LaCrosse Case" and the many similarities here, the fact that Richard Brodhead and Royce Engstrom may as well have been interchangeable parts, as well as the extraordinary disparity of treatment given the Saudi student vs JJ, Krakauer may offer an interesting viewpoint.

 

[George Ferguson]

Northendzonedan, I'm confident enough that the book is not "UM QB gets away with rape" or even a chapter titled "UM QB gets away with rape." That yes, I will gladly take that wager :thumb:

 

[stubbins]

Jordan Johnson is not the target of this book or even a chapter. His case and the saudi student case are what Krakauer is interested. I will bet anyone any amount of money that the intent of this book is not to try and show "UM quarterback gets away with rape.". Any takers?

Agreed...book may shed some bad light on Griz fans and all the vitriol that was spewed...but other than that, I don't think JJ will be ripped on. Admin and quick, ridiculous decisions, followed by cow towing to everything and everyone may be a different story.

 

[PlayerRep]

So you are basically saying the memo will prove was lack of intent on the University just stupidity on the part of the Dean of Students who was "retired" and his actions reversed. Not much room for punitive type damages there is there? Actual of course.

Then they would have to prove that the County attorneys office proceeded purely based on political motivation and not determining it was in the Public's best interest to have a trial. (Prolly another reason why we need a gran jury system) They would also have to prove Karen Townsend was equally corrupt in the omnibus hearings and pretrial motions. THEN they would be renaming the stadium.

If one was a true conspiratist, one would have to believe this is why fred was stonewalling the feds.

Hell the university could come at the county for enough to build the dome

Intent? The intent is all there. It's the intent to do the acts, not harm. Did UM to apply the lower but not yet enacted standard? Did UM intend to intend to not provide the proper due process rights? Of course, they intended to take the actions they did. You obviously don't understand the legal process, standards, or law.

By the way, stupidly can, and often does, result in liability.

Significant actual damages, in my view. Punitive damages? I don't litigate, so I don't know. You may be right.

There won't be any claim against the county attorneys office. Almost absolute immunity to charge and prosecute. Same with the judge. No claim there.

Any claim would be only directed at the university, and perhaps individuals like the dean.

The county attorney's dispute with the DOJ had nothing to do with JJ.

I know you like to spew nonsense protective of the university, but you are either intentionally just trying to blow smoke or have no clue what you're talking about.

 

[PlayerRep]

Not an easy thing to say, but I agree 100% with TNT on this. I think those of you hoping this thing makes UM look terrible may be disappointed.

If the book is done, it will reflect very poorly on UM and the dean, as well as Engstrom. Multiple bad decisions and even more mistakes. Many undefensible mistakes.

You are such an apologist for UM that it clouds your judgment significantly. Think about it. How could a book based primarily on the UM proceeding and the Saudi incident do anything other than reflect poorly on UM and Engstrom. If the Krakauer gets the files, and does the book, I wonder if Engstrom will survive. He's not in a strong position as it is, but this type of book and the resultant publicity would likely tip the balance.

 

[PlayerRep]

Northendzonedan, I'm confident enough that the book is not "UM QB gets away with rape" or even a chapter titled "UM QB gets away with rape." That yes, I will gladly take that wager :thumb:

I would like some of this bet, on HavGriz's side.