• Hi Guest, want to participate in the discussions, keep track of read/unread posts access private forums and more? Create your free account and increase the benefits of your eGriz.com experience today!

The real details in the "unsealed document" - shocking

The problem is still a a growing number of folks believe No means No and a girl can say no at any time. There are still a group who believe no doesn't mean no but rather maybe,"I'll just keep going until you change mind because I'm sooooo good, beside I just want a little fun"

+1

What part of "NO" don't you understand?
 
Silvertip said:
Anybody who thinks Engstrom's athletic department escapades were actions carefully conceived over a lengthy period of time needs to reexamine the facts. There's no way to tell when he first got that bee in his bonnet, but the execution suggests an emotional epiphany run wild. (1) Nobody convenes a termination meeting with both parties in attendance, and (2) you don't execute it without one of your minions in attendance to verify details of the proceedings when your actions are destined to be questioned in court or in negotiations with the individuals involved. (3) The late timing, six months prior to fall practice, suggests that no thought was given to the need for an orderly posting of the vacant positions at a time when a meaningful search could have been effected closer to the conclusion of the just concluded football season when people are available (4) And how short-sighted was it ignore the reality of the rights of O'Day and Pflu who continue to receive pay for another year following termination. What we have is an accumulation of evidence, as if any more were needed, that Engstrom is a loose cannon who puts chippy personal emotion ahead of good sense.

And a lingering question, where was eagle beagle Aronofsky during all of this? Did Ol' Royce counsel with him before these fatal faux pas? It seems unlikely. And finally, several insiders confirm that Senor Presidente did not approach Mick Delaney until after the blood-letting. So was this all a temporary mental abberation or just a precursor of the kind of muddled action we can continue to see out of Main Hall? I think we all know the answer to that. And unfortunately we are looking at a badly-tainted BOR - which precipitated this mess - to right the badly listing UM ship. Till then Captain Queeg remains in command.

Great post. :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap:

And I LOVE that movie...perfect comparison. :lol: :lol: :lol:
 
I didn't claim anything Grizatwork. But I gotta tell you, a lot of people come into my business on a daily basis. I'm about ready to take down my stadium seat sponsors plaque, GSA Griz prints and the other memorabilia I have. There are a lot of opinions out there, and folks are pretty vocal. I'm tired of hearing it. Its not scientific by any means but its about 10 to one against the Athletic Department and interestingly the boosters. The document release stirred things up again. Saying "I don't know, sounds bad, hope it works out," isn't enough. No matter where folks stand, they are likely to climb down your throat.

BTW generally nothing gets to the Honor Court unless the Dean thinks they are guilty. It wasn't so long ago he made those decisions by himself.
 
tnt said:
I didn't claim anything Grizatwork. But I gotta tell you, a lot of people come into my business on a daily basis. I'm about ready to take down my stadium seat sponsors plaque, GSA Griz prints and the other memorabilia I have. There are a lot of opinions out there, and folks are pretty vocal. I'm tired of hearing it. Its not scientific by any means but its about 10 to one against the Athletic Department and interestingly the boosters. The document release stirred things up again. Saying "I don't know, sounds bad, hope it works out," isn't enough. No matter where folks stand, they are likely to climb down your throat.

BTW generally nothing gets to the Honor Court unless the Dean thinks they are guilty. It wasn't so long ago he made those decisions by himself.

The point I was trying to make was that you said you did not have enough facts to make an informed opinion yet you made one by saying the honor court did the right thing. I have long agreed with many of your posts and had similar opinions on a lot of things.

The release by Paoli and the court of the documents do not change my opinion of guilt-vs innocence. In fact it only gave me the alleged victims claims which on face value do not sound good for JJ. However, one thing was clear to me was that it appeared as if the alleged perpetrater was not given the opportunity to defend himself. I would say he brought a knife to a gun fight, but it appears as if he was just tied to the chair and executed. I am willing to wait for further information. Are you?
 
Engstrom's "style" hasn't done him any favors.

He appears, first, reactive, and then, over-reactive.

He wants to be viewed as a "strong leader" without the good judgment that strong leaders have; "leadership" is not a series of half-thought-out dramatic actions, done initially for public "effect" after which he finds himself paddling around in circles wondering why it had the wrong "effect."

Nearly everything he has done has been the opposite of "leadership." Was there a "problem" with the athletic department? No. It was likely the most proactive institution on Campus; and certainly acquitted itself better than Main Hall did with the Saudi incident.

Did Engstrom meet early on with his AD, his Deans, and other campus personnel to spell out the changes in harassment and sexual assault policies coming down from the DOE? Nope, he was busy stapling signs around campus that it was a "nicotine free" zone. THAT was the big deal for this guy. I have no idea what Aronofsky was doing. Nobody does.

Did he deal effectively with rumors, dating from 2010, about an alleged "gang rape?" Nope. Rather than recognizing it for what it was, a false and malicious report, he kept resurrecting it, and his VP kept referring to it as a "gang rape" without even the "alleged" in front of it. That's criminal defamation, by the way, if the names of the students involved ever get into the public record. Yes, it's a crime all by itself to make that kind of allegation after it has been refuted in every way that a system can honestly do it. And yet, Main Hall has continued to raise that allegation.

But, without that allegation, there's not much there. What there is is a rate of assault that shows the effectiveness of UM and City support programs to reduce such assaults by education and awareness programs as well as multiple support venues for victims; resulting in a rate that is nearly a third of that of the MSU Campus and similar institutions. Why doesn't Engstrom point that out? Why is he recycling failed accusations nearly three years old? What the hell is the matter with the man?
 
Absolutely I am waiting for more information. I'm not sure we will ever get it though, and unless the legal system takes a hold of it, we will never get all ov it. Sadly I think what will ultimately come from this is a decision based on what is perceived to be the Character of the accused.

I did not mean to suggest I thought the Honor Court did the right thing.... But I have certainly heard it a fair number of times which is what I was trying to say.....

I've even had visions that maybe Dave is representing more than one "accused" They way things are going it may be a lucrative sub specialty.....
 
Silvertip said:
Anybody who thinks Engstrom's athletic department escapades were actions carefully conceived over a lengthy period of time needs to reexamine the facts. There's no way to tell when he first got that bee in his bonnet, but the execution suggests an emotional epiphany run wild. (1) Nobody convenes a termination meeting with both parties in attendance, and (2) you don't execute it without one of your minions in attendance to verify details of the proceedings when your actions are destined to be questioned in court or in negotiations with the individuals involved. (3) The late timing, six months prior to fall practice, suggests that no thought was given to the need for an orderly posting of the vacant positions at a time when a meaningful search could have been effected closer to the conclusion of the just concluded football season when people are available (4) And how short-sighted was it ignore the reality of the rights of O'Day and Pflu who continue to receive pay for another year following termination. What we have is an accumulation of evidence, as if any more were needed, that Engstrom is a loose cannon who puts chippy personal emotion ahead of good sense.

And a lingering question, where was eagle beagle Aronofsky during all of this? Did Ol' Royce counsel with him before these fatal faux pas? It seems unlikely. And finally, several insiders confirm that Senor Presidente did not approach Mick Delaney until after the blood-letting. So was this all a temporary mental abberation or just a precursor of the kind of muddled action we can continue to see out of Main Hall? I think we all know the answer to that. And unfortunately we are looking at a badly-tainted BOR - which precipitated this mess - to right the badly listing UM ship. Till then Captain Queeg remains in command.

Very good post. You've had a number of good ones.
 
What I'm confused about is: Is this all common practice? Or is it just because of the individuals involved & the circumstances leading up to it?
 
tnt said:
Engstrom has said on several occasions, the restructuring of his cabinet an others, had been delayed 6 months because of the "rape issue" A total replacement of everyone is not unusual.

BTW talked to more than a few this weekend. I'm not sure that the release of douments may have had the effect of stirring up the frenzy Mr. Paoli was hoping for.

Commonly I heard sympathy for the victim. She is/was acting just as a victim normally does. They often question whether or not it was their fault, and what they could have done to avoid it.

Her right to change her mind (ie having/not having relations) has been affirmed.

Couture understood better than anyone what she had been through and was going through and concerned himself (and the "investigation") to only what happened in the bedroom.

Despite all the mess around lawyers, administrators etc. the honor court made a right decision.

The problem is still a a growing number of folks believe No means No and a girl can say no at any time. There are still a group who believe no doesn't mean no but rather maybe,"I'll just keep going until you change mind because I'm sooooo good, beside I just want a little fun"

Whether it rises to "Rape" and what happened in this situation even after reading the whole PDF, I'm not sure. But the one thing I'm sure of is that there will never be vindication, and commmunity support will be deeply divided. I'm sure I don't have enough facts to have an informed opinion.

The rumor mill indicates that there is other evidence supportive of the accused. Refusing to admit and consider other statements the accuser has made. Some people have noted that the cited evidence didn't indicate that the accused took off accuser's clothes. The issue in the case was the whether the judge would stop the university panel hearing, due to a biased investigation, bad process and the changing of the standard. The judge didn't seem to like what the university has done and seemed to indicate that a similar case brought further along in the process and plead differently might be looked upon favorably. Still no legal charges. From what I saw, I doubt that the university panel would have been able to rule as it did, had the matter been investigated and presented without bias and the standard had been clear and convincing. The university looks horrible as a result of this bad process and changing of the standard after-the-fact.
 
tnt said:
I did not mean to suggest I thought the Honor Court did the right thing.... But I have certainly heard it a fair number of times which is what I was trying to say.....
Couture refers students to the proceeding when "he thinks" they are guilty. He chooses the judges. He prevents the participation of legal counsel. He imposes his own rules of evidence. He effectively handicaps preparation of any kind. He refuses to allow either exculpatory evidence or impeachment evidence to be introduced.

The fact that a neutral third party, a Federal Judge it happens, made such a strong statement about the proceeding makes it far, far from an "Honor Court."
 
MTOutsider said:
The problem is still a a growing number of folks believe No means No and a girl can say no at any time. There are still a group who believe no doesn't mean no but rather maybe,"I'll just keep going until you change mind because I'm sooooo good, beside I just want a little fun"

+1

What part of "NO" don't you understand?

I don't know the facts, of course, but if the bulk of the other evidence indicates a woman was saying and indicating yes, and the guy says she didn't say no, then there's doubt as to the truthfulness of what the woman is saying after-the-fact. Again, I don't know the facts of this matter, and my comment is intended to be a general and generic comment and not a comment on this particular matter.
 
tnt said:
I didn't claim anything Grizatwork. But I gotta tell you, a lot of people come into my business on a daily basis. I'm about ready to take down my stadium seat sponsors plaque, GSA Griz prints and the other memorabilia I have. There are a lot of opinions out there, and folks are pretty vocal. I'm tired of hearing it. Its not scientific by any means but its about 10 to one against the Athletic Department and interestingly the boosters. The document release stirred things up again. Saying "I don't know, sounds bad, hope it works out," isn't enough. No matter where folks stand, they are likely to climb down your throat.

BTW generally nothing gets to the Honor Court unless the Dean thinks they are guilty. It wasn't so long ago he made those decisions by himself.

I call BS on your 10 to 1. I have not heard one person, since the case materials were released, who supported the university. This probably included about 50 people. I have also not heard people dissing the accuser. Generally, the subject didn't come up. The people I know have said: this process would make a Kangaroo court look good, and the U should do an unbiased and fair investigation and then decide whether to take it to a new university panel using the proper clear and convincing standard.
 
MTOutsider said:
The problem is still a a growing number of folks believe No means No and a girl can say no at any time. There are still a group who believe no doesn't mean no but rather maybe,"I'll just keep going until you change mind because I'm sooooo good, beside I just want a little fun"

+1

What part of "NO" don't you understand?

PcKCN.jpg
 
PlayerRep said:
tnt said:
I didn't claim anything Grizatwork. But I gotta tell you, a lot of people come into my business on a daily basis. I'm about ready to take down my stadium seat sponsors plaque, GSA Griz prints and the other memorabilia I have. There are a lot of opinions out there, and folks are pretty vocal. I'm tired of hearing it. Its not scientific by any means but its about 10 to one against the Athletic Department and interestingly the boosters. The document release stirred things up again. Saying "I don't know, sounds bad, hope it works out," isn't enough. No matter where folks stand, they are likely to climb down your throat.

BTW generally nothing gets to the Honor Court unless the Dean thinks they are guilty. It wasn't so long ago he made those decisions by himself.

I call BS on your 10 to 1. I have not heard one person, since the case materials were released, who supported the university. This probably included about 50 people. I have also not heard people dissing the accuser. Generally, the subject didn't come up. The people I know have said: this process would make a
Kangaroo court look good, and the U should do an unbiased and fair investigation and then decide whether to take it to a new university panel using the proper clear and convincing standard.
TNT probably doesn't even live in Missoula.
 
WaGriz4life said:
PlayerRep said:
TNT probably doesn't even live in Missoula.

Oh, but I do. The perception that athlete's are full of attitude, assume entitlement, and that the bulk of the Boosters are either Rah Rah boys trying to relive their glory days, or wanna be's is alive and well and are automatically guilty of anything they are accused of.
 
tnt said:
I didn't claim anything Grizatwork. But I gotta tell you, a lot of people come into my business on a daily basis. I'm about ready to take down my stadium seat sponsors plaque, GSA Griz prints and the other memorabilia I have. There are a lot of opinions out there, and folks are pretty vocal. I'm tired of hearing it. Its not scientific by any means but its about 10 to one against the Athletic Department and interestingly the boosters. The document release stirred things up again. Saying "I don't know, sounds bad, hope it works out," isn't enough. No matter where folks stand, they are likely to climb down your throat.

BTW generally nothing gets to the Honor Court unless the Dean thinks they are guilty. It wasn't so long ago he made those decisions by himself.

Interesting.
My office is in downtown Missoula, and we have Griz memorabilia all over the place. We’ve had exactly the opposite reaction.

Personally, the reaction I’ve heard is about 10-1 the other direction, ranging from clients, neighbors, etc. Some Griz fans, some not.
 
Raider said:
tnt said:
I didn't claim anything Grizatwork. But I gotta tell you, a lot of people come into my business on a daily basis. I'm about ready to take down my stadium seat sponsors plaque, GSA Griz prints and the other memorabilia I have. There are a lot of opinions out there, and folks are pretty vocal. I'm tired of hearing it. Its not scientific by any means but its about 10 to one against the Athletic Department and interestingly the boosters. The document release stirred things up again. Saying "I don't know, sounds bad, hope it works out," isn't enough. No matter where folks stand, they are likely to climb down your throat.

BTW generally nothing gets to the Honor Court unless the Dean thinks they are guilty. It wasn't so long ago he made those decisions by himself.

Interesting.
My office is in downtown Missoula, and we have Griz memorabilia all over the place. We’ve had exactly the opposite reaction.

Personally, the reaction I’ve heard is about 10-1 the other direction, ranging from clients, neighbors, etc. Some Griz fans, some not.

Southside here, speciatlty retail, mostly womwn
 
I was surprised, talking this morning with some students, including two females, who generally are "anti-athletics" to varying degrees, to find that they see Engstrom's and Couture's conduct throughout as "outrageous."

Comments were: "this isn't due process of any kind." "Johnson is getting railroaded." "This isn't fair to anybody." "What I read in the court documents says this is too close a call to wreck someone's life over, either way."

A comment that surprised me, from one of the women: "the part about saying "no" is at the beginning, not on the way home." A follow up: "she didn't 'deserve' any of this, but then he doesn't either."
 
If the bleeding heart fems on egriz think JJ is guilty as sin then by all means quit going to the football games. Burn all your Griz clothes, hats and shorts. Stay out of the Mo club and other haunts. Quit bitchin and find a new fountain upon which to blow your bubbles!

For others on the fence, figure out and explain why the accuser is constantly getting in touch with Jordy?

Those knowing of his innocence will miss him this fall.....more than likely. In my opinion Johnson got screwed! Not raped, screwed!
 
GrizMusician said:
What I'm confused about is: Is this all common practice? Or is it just because of the individuals involved & the circumstances leading up to it?
During the period of time, 2009-2011, Montana State University had a total of 16 reported instances of "forcible" sexual assault, of which ten occurred in residence halls on campus.

Had Diane Barz had the presence of mind to look it up, she would have been able to provide the necessary perspective.

She didn't.
 

Latest posts

Back
Top