Kaimen tweet

[PlayerRep]

My reading of the case is that Krakauer pretty much lost his case. We'lll see what the lower court judge does. If she gets too aggressive in ordering the release of certain things, the U system can certainly appeal and try to get the lower court judge reversed again. Again, there may be some things, regarding the process, that the judge will decide can be released.

 

[Ursa Major]

Some of you might not agree with me but I am still full of hate over Engstrom's poor handling along with his UM cronies all the way through to this Kraker nut.

I ain't going to no re-hab unit ....so leave me be.

Umista said no, no, No!

 

[ranco]

I know 3% of what is required to intelligently post about this, and I'm no big city lawyer. But, would the (presumably) obviously included confidentiality clause(s) in the JJ settlement with UM come into play here? I know a court order would trump, but in these parts, such clauses are given some deference; especially when contracted upon during the pendency of appeal. Kind of like a, "It's over, so f*** off" type of thing.

I'm sure I have some timeline stuff wrong, however.

The settlement wasn't confidential, the terms (amount) was disclosed publicly.

If I were JJ I would go on the offensive and voluntarily release the records in either a book or something similar that he, rather than Kracker, could benefit from, in a story form his perspective.

Yes, the amount of the settlement was disclosed publicly. Big deal. Most on here (me included) thought the $$$ seemed low. The conditions -- for the respective sides -- were not revealed, and that's what really matters.

My guess -- an educated guess, but still a guess -- is that the agreement severely constrained JJ and his people in his ability to "tell his side of the story" in a book or detailed article.

I don't think any part of the settlement terms are confidential. Public entities are generally not able to enter confidential settlements. If you dug hard enough, you could probably find a copy of the settlement agreement.

 

[bgbigdog]

I'm probably the only one, but just heartbroken that "I'm Back For More Cash" Krakauer is going to have to wait longer for that second book deal to pay off, if ever.

 

[UMGriz75]

I'm probably the only one, but just heartbroken that "I'm Back For More Cash" Krakauer is going to have to wait longer for that second book deal to pay off, if ever.

I'm still angry as hell that money and fame drove those attacks on JJ -- Krak and Florio combined. And they didn't get it and Krak still won't let go.

Montana Supreme Court has only published a "synopsis" of the case to date. That's an unusual approach, apparently because of the public interest in the case, pending the completion of a full written opinion.

https://supremecourtdocket.mt.gov/view/DA%2015-0502%20Synopsis%20of%20Opinion%20--%20Opinion?id={F00B4457-0000-C318-924E-5AC4FE36E9B4}

I agree with the Dissent. The records are protected.

 

[PlayerRep]

I know 3% of what is required to intelligently post about this, and I'm no big city lawyer. But, would the (presumably) obviously included confidentiality clause(s) in the JJ settlement with UM come into play here? I know a court order would trump, but in these parts, such clauses are given some deference; especially when contracted upon during the pendency of appeal. Kind of like a, "It's over, so f*** off" type of thing.

I'm sure I have some timeline stuff wrong, however.

The settlement wasn't confidential, the terms (amount) was disclosed publicly.

If I were JJ I would go on the offensive and voluntarily release the records in either a book or something similar that he, rather than Kracker, could benefit from, in a story form his perspective.

Yes, the amount of the settlement was disclosed publicly. Big deal. Most on here (me included) thought the $$$ seemed low. The conditions -- for the respective sides -- were not revealed, and that's what really matters.

My guess -- an educated guess, but still a guess -- is that the agreement severely constrained JJ and his people in his ability to "tell his side of the story" in a book or detailed article.

I don't think any part of the settlement terms are confidential. Public entities are generally not able to enter confidential settlements. If you dug hard enough, you could probably find a copy of the settlement agreement.

The settlement isn't confidential, but the underlying facts and background relating to the settlement, and presumably the reason for the settlement, are.

 

[ranco]

Yeah, certainly the detailed facts are likely confidential, though I think Paoli set forth the general basis for the settlement in the associated Missoulian story. ie: Johnson got railroaded by a kangaroo court.

 

[Eric_Shun]

The investigative journalist made a records request to learn the reason the commissioner’s office vacated campus decisions to expel former University of Montana Grizzlies quarterback Jordan Johnson after UM proceedings found he raped a fellow student. Johnson was acquitted of a criminal charge of sexual intercourse without consent after a 2013 trial in Missoula County District Court. The court heard oral arguments in the case in April.

The part about "UM proceedings" is scary - in my opinion, universities are notoriously biased and follow a self serving doctrine of unfairly convicting people just to placate the liberal left

FIFY

Well, that was very kind of you!!

You have a very interesting and ancient moniker. Curiously, I'm having a hard time telling if it originates from Europe or America - it's similar in both places but there are subtle differences in the pronunciation and inflection!

Thanks again!

 

[UMGriz75]

Yeah, certainly the detailed facts are likely confidential, though I think Paoli set forth the general basis for the settlement in the associated Missoulian story. ie: Johnson got railroaded by a kangaroo court.

Not even self-respecting Kangaroos would take credit for that fiasco.

One of the troubling aspects, and it may be part of enrollment problems relating to perceptions of Engstrom, is that, given yet another opportunity to stand up for the rights of students to due process and for once take a principled stand, he approved the Star Chamber proceeding, which trampled all over JJ's rights.

In combination with the later DOE Settlement, in which the largest concession of student Constitutional rights ever made was initiated under Engstrom's signature, sending the entire US higher education system into Title IX turmoil and costing hundreds of millions of dollars -- an agreement he later confessed he had not even bothered to read -- Engstrom signaled that he was not an advocate for or protector of students at the University of Montana.

In other news, Fall 2016 enrollment figures should have been released by now. They haven't been.

They're sitting on Engstrom's desk.

 

[ranco]

Yeah, certainly the detailed facts are likely confidential, though I think Paoli set forth the general basis for the settlement in the associated Missoulian story. ie: Johnson got railroaded by a kangaroo court.

Not even self-respecting Kangaroos would take credit for that fiasco.

One of the troubling aspects, and it may be part of enrollment problems relating to perceptions of Engstrom, is that, given yet another opportunity to stand up for the rights of students to due process and for once take a principled stand, he approved the Star Chamber proceeding, which trampled all over JJ's rights.

In combination with the later DOE Settlement, in which the largest concession of student Constitutional rights ever made was initiated under Engstrom's signature, sending the entire US higher education system into Title IX turmoil and costing hundreds of millions of dollars -- an agreement he later confessed he had not even bothered to read -- Engstrom signaled that he was not an advocate for or protector of students at the University of Montana.

In other news, Fall 2016 enrollment figures should have been released by now. They haven't been.

They're sitting on Engstrom's desk.

If we are lucky, they are sitting next to his letter of resignation.

 

[Eric_Shun]

So, Engstrom is the problem? An idiot?