Players should be kicked off team for being at a gang bang with 17 yr old recruit

Donate To GopherHole

Bob_Loblaw said:
No she wouldn't. The age of consent is 16 in MN.

Oddly enough, any video of the incident (even though the sex was legal (if she gave consent) would be illegal.
Click to expand...

Does difference in age matter?
 

Go Gophers Rah said:
You don't really think that's what this is all about, do you? I think you are just using that line as a red herring. Yes or no - do you believe that this woman gave consent to all 10-20 men who had sex with her? Yes or no?
Click to expand...

If there is this number 20 floating around, who do they suspect is the other 10?
 

STPGopher said:
If there is this number 20 floating around, who do they suspect is the other 10?
Click to expand...

I actually saw this printed under the "What we know for sure" part of the St Paul paper.

Very disturbing.
 

STPGopher said:
If there is this number 20 floating around, who do they suspect is the other 10?
Click to expand...

The number of up to 20 came from the report. It stated in there several times that she wasn't able to identify all of the men involved.
 


Go Gophers Rah said:
I respect most of your answer. So thanks for giving it a little thought.
I am of the (admittedly under-informed) opinion that she did not give consent to all of the men involved and that lack of consent in any of those cases is a rape in that such case.
I also differ with the opinion that if they didn't do anything illegal (or for which charges were pressed), then they shouldn't get suspensions, expulsions, etc. Playing on a football team is a privilege, not a right. Didn't a player get kicked off the team earlier this season for getting into fights with teammates? There were no charges pressed. If someone on the team (or any student) were to cheat on a test or have someone write a paper for them, they could (should) face disciplinary action even though they wouldn't be in jeopardy of the police taking them away in handcuffs. There are a lot of similar examples that I could come up with. I'm sure many of these examples would fall under some specific violation of the "Code of Conduct," while others might fall under some less specific language.
I have a hard time believing that ANY woman wants to have sex with 10-20 guys in a 2 hour period, but I guess I must concede that there may be such women out there. If the women in question in this case had never gone to the hospital, police, EOAA and confided in her sister and friends, then I would say "different strokes for different folks," be slightly disgusted and move on with my life without worrying whether the men involved should get in trouble or not.
Click to expand...

You should check out Craigslist sometime. They exist. This is also something that is openly talked about with musicians and athletes.

I don't think that you have to commit a crime to get kicked off the football team. However, I don't think one of the rules should be the kind of sex that you enjoy. The University could never have a section of the Code of Conduct that states "no group sex", they certainly couldn't have a section that states "no group sex if the men outnumber the women". For our hypothetical, we are assuming it was consensual (we both agree that if it wasn't consensual they should be thrown in jail). So if it was consensual, do you think a school should be allowed to punish you for the kind of sex that you like? It wouldn't even be Constitutional (U of MN is a public institution). Do you really want Coyle and Claeys sitting down and figuring out which consensual sexual activities they deem OK? Your examples (fights, cheating) are things that could be violations of the Code of Conduct. At a public university, group sex is not something that can be violation of that code.
 

atsgopher said:
I actually saw this printed under the "What we know for sure" part of the St Paul paper.

Very disturbing.
Click to expand...

No idea if you read the actual story in the newspaper or online but the online version is not stating this as fact. The remainder of the online section you are referring states: "That’s according to 23 pages of Minneapolis police reports and an 80-page report from the university’s Office of Equal Opportunity and Affirmative Action posted by KSTP."
 

Bob_Loblaw said:
You should check out Craigslist sometime. They exist. This is also something that is openly talked about with musicians and athletes.

I don't think that you have to commit a crime to get kicked off the football team. However, I don't think one of the rules should be the kind of sex that you enjoy. The University could never have a section of the Code of Conduct that states "no group sex", they certainly couldn't have a section that states "no group sex if the men outnumber the women". For our hypothetical, we are assuming it was consensual (we both agree that if it wasn't consensual they should be thrown in jail). So if it was consensual, do you think a school should be allowed to punish you for the kind of sex that you like? It wouldn't even be Constitutional (U of MN is a public institution). Do you really want Coyle and Claeys sitting down and figuring out which consensual sexual activities they deem OK? Your examples (fights, cheating) are things that could be violations of the Code of Conduct. At a public university, group sex is not something that can be violation of that code.
Click to expand...

It is a Title IX violation to discriminate against somebody based on their sexual preferences.
 




GopherinPhilly said:
Other than the initial statements by the "confused and forgetful" accuser, there is no evidence that anywhere near 10 men had sex with her that night, much less 20. That is part of the wildly inaccurate and unfair trashing of the football team by the U admin, media and EOAA.
Click to expand...

Of course there is no evidence because the cops called Coyle, told them they were doing an investigation and gave them a week to clean away all evidence so that by the time they searched Djam's room...all the condoms, the blanket etc. were gone. If they had gone there immediately after a young woman reported be raped by more guys than she could count, they might have plenty of evidence supporting her claim. Am I the only one on this board who read the police report and felt like officer Wente did all he could to help the players....like saying the woman was being sarcastic in the tape where she says "nooooo" to the first rapist. The players weren't charged because Officer Wente did everything he could to make sure of it..
 

CoMn said:
Of course there is no evidence because the cops called Coyle, told them they were doing an investigation and gave them a week to clean away all evidence so that by the time they searched Djam's room...all the condoms, the blanket etc. were gone. If they had gone there immediately after a young woman reported be raped by more guys than she could count, they might have plenty of evidence supporting her claim. Am I the only one on this board who read the police report and felt like officer Wente did all he could to help the players....like saying the woman was being sarcastic in the tape where she says "nooooo" to the first rapist. The players weren't charged because Officer Wente did everything he could to make sure of it..
Click to expand...

You think the Minneapolis Police Department's investigation was tainted by you trust the EoAA. HAHA. Wow. We all know that DA's hate getting their names in the paper for high profile cases.
 

The entire episode lasted 65 minutes, according to the report (page 3), and it seems like the girl was with Djam and the recruit for an extended portion of that. I know young guys are fast, but 10 seems like a high number and 20 near impossible.
 




CoMn said:
Of course there is no evidence because the cops called Coyle, told them they were doing an investigation and gave them a week to clean away all evidence so that by the time they searched Djam's room...all the condoms, the blanket etc. were gone. If they had gone there immediately after a young woman reported be raped by more guys than she could count, they might have plenty of evidence supporting her claim. Am I the only one on this board who read the police report and felt like officer Wente did all he could to help the players....like saying the woman was being sarcastic in the tape where she says "nooooo" to the first rapist. The players weren't charged because Officer Wente did everything he could to make sure of it..
Click to expand...

In either the woman's account, or in one of the player's, I read that someone was cleaning up the used condoms while the woman was still there. Did you expect them to leave them there for a few days ? I believe it was what, 15 hours before the incident was reported to the police.
 


Bob_Loblaw said:
You think the Minneapolis Police Department's investigation was tainted by you trust the EoAA. HAHA. Wow. We all know that DA's hate getting their names in the paper for high profile cases.
Click to expand...

But what do you make of how the Police handled that? As far as I'm concerned that is at best an atrocious way to conduct an investigation, all but guaranteeing that you'll end up with the least possible evidence still available, and at worst corruption.
 

I'm curious to know how our OL recruiting trips go. Buffet, beers, and some video games? We lost a local recruit under Mason because they took him to the strip club which is perfectly legal if 18.
 


You might be creeped out by the theoretical 34-year-age difference, and I'm not crazy about it myself, but if we assume for the sake of argument that (a) the 16-year-old is consenting, and (b) the accuser's allegations here are true and the conduct with the football players continued after she revoked consent, I would submit that you really might want to rethink which one troubles you more. One is willing participants doing something that offends your sensibilities; the other is rape.

To Bob Loblaw, I agree with you that a school code of conduct that specified certain sorts of consensual sexual conduct was out of bounds wouldn't fly . . . but would a team rule saying that any sort of group sexual activity that results in complaints gets you booted, based on "conduct detrimental to the team", pass constitutional muster? I tend to think it would. Given how often group sex ends up in disaster for Gopher athletics (Mitch Lee: the sequel, Dom Jones, Dorsey last year, and now this), it wouldn't be the worst rule to have.
 

CoMn said:
Of course there is no evidence because the cops called Coyle, told them they were doing an investigation and gave them a week to clean away all evidence so that by the time they searched Djam's room...all the condoms, the blanket etc. were gone. If they had gone there immediately after a young woman reported be raped by more guys than she could count, they might have plenty of evidence supporting her claim. Am I the only one on this board who read the police report and felt like officer Wente did all he could to help the players....like saying the woman was being sarcastic in the tape where she says "nooooo" to the first rapist. The players weren't charged because Officer Wente did everything he could to make sure of it..
Click to expand...

Yes, Dexter Morgan came to the apartment on Coyle's heads up and forensically cleaned the area, thereby ensuring that there would be no evidence for the cops. Thankfully, the EOAA are mind readers and used truth serum on the victim to remove the need for any evidence in their findings.
 

Bob_Loblaw said:
No she wouldn't. The age of consent is 16 in MN.

Oddly enough, any video of the incident (even though the sex was legal (if she gave consent) would be illegal.
Click to expand...

That's one thing about the police investigation that has me a little confused. I'm not advocating for whoever made or possessed the video to be in legal trouble. (I think it is kind of a silly law that, if consent is given, the act is legal but video of it is not.) But it doesn't seem to be disputed even in the police report that a sex act with a minor was filmed, yet no charges have been filed to my knowledge. Seems pretty cut and dried.
 

xyz1 said:
You might be creeped out by the theoretical 34-year-age difference, and I'm not crazy about it myself, but if we assume for the sake of argument that (a) the 16-year-old is consenting, and (b) the accuser's allegations here are true and the conduct with the football players continued after she revoked consent, I would submit that you really might want to rethink which one troubles you more. One is willing participants doing something that offends your sensibilities; the other is rape.

To Bob Loblaw, I agree with you that a school code of conduct that specified certain sorts of consensual sexual conduct was out of bounds wouldn't fly . . . but would a team rule saying that any sort of group sexual activity that results in complaints gets you booted, based on "conduct detrimental to the team", pass constitutional muster? I tend to think it would. Given how often group sex ends up in disaster for Gopher athletics (Mitch Lee: the sequel, Dom Jones, Dorsey last year, and now this), it wouldn't be the worst rule to have.
Click to expand...

Wow, slippery slope there.
 

I should make clear (a) this was mostly just a law school exam-type of question for Bob - he seems to know his stuff and I'm interested in his response, and (b) in this theoretical world of mine I'm not envisioning coaches monitoring what players are doing in their free time and counting up their coparticipants. If everybody's happy and no one complains, coach never hears, and nothing happens. But such a rule might help get a message across that players need to be real careful, and that if you're putting yourself in a position that carries this kind of risk, very bad things can happen, with getting kicked off the team being far from the worst.
 

MaxyJR1 said:
I'm curious to know how our OL recruiting trips go. Buffet, beers, and some video games? We lost a local recruit under Mason because they took him to the strip club which is perfectly legal if 18.
Click to expand...

As I remember it, the local recruit banged a stripper while on his recruiting trip and then felt guilty afterwards when he went back to rural Minnesota to his small town girlfriend.

That was a great Gopherhole scandal. Even the recruit and one his high school team-mates (who did not like him) were posting.
 

Winnipegopher said:
As I remember it, the local recruit banged a stripper while on his recruiting trip and then felt guilty afterwards when he went back to rural Minnesota to his small town girlfriend.

That was a great Gopherhole scandal. Even the recruit and one his high school team-mates (who did not like him) were posting.
Click to expand...

That might be a different time. Lydon Murtha from Hutchinson was taken to Deja Vu and noted that being taken there was a reason he chose Nebraska. Shaka Smart can confirm, as he was also at the Vu that night.
 

Bob_Loblaw said:
You think the Minneapolis Police Department's investigation was tainted by you trust the EoAA. HAHA. Wow. We all know that DA's hate getting their names in the paper for high profile cases.
Click to expand...

I know that the police had hard evidence of a woman saying "noooooo" which the male officer chose to interpret as meaning yes. I have asked you several times on this board Bob what about "noooooo" and a slap means yes? What about "noooooo" is giving consent. Please explain that to me. You are a lawyer...I ask you again...How does a cop, with video evidence of the alleged victim of a gang rape...interpret "noooooo" as meaning YES. Not only did she not say yes...she said "noooooo" since Officer Wente decided that meant yes, you are correct in saying I believe the EOAA report is less biased. But I am leaving open for someone on one of these long threads to explain to me so that I can see this police officer was obviously doing his job. Also explain to me why they called ahead of their visit to campus, giving the guys 7 days to clean up the evidence. Explain to me why the victim was not encouraged to have counsel present before her police interview (and why a male cop interviewed an alleged victim of a gang rape). Tell me why the police didn't go gather evidence upon learning of an alleged "higher interest" crime right away...especially when evidence would disappear. Explain these things and I will agree that clearly the EOAA is completely biased and Officer Wente was doing an awesome job.
 

Breakin' The Plane said:
That might be a different time. Lydon Murtha from Hutchinson was taken to Deja Vu and noted that being taken there was a reason he chose Nebraska. Shaka Smart can confirm, as he was also at the Vu that night.
Click to expand...

Same time. Your version is the version is the official one, Mine is the Gopherhole one.
 

It is my understanding that minnesota is one of 39 states that allow people to video another person without consent. However a person can be charged with a misdemeanor if they record in an area where a person has the expectation of privacy. Generally if a person is expected to disrobe in this area, there is an expectation of privacy. So given that the victim didn't know of the video until later, Djam violated the law. That the district attorney chose not to charge (not sure if is is the DA or the investigating officer's job to determine which laws might have been broken), I am concerned...especially since the video is on the internet. It would seem to me that her privacy has very much been violated and Mr. Djam should be charged with a crime. This is why women don't come forward...between the cops and the DAs office...there is so little chance anyone will try to bring justice mostly because it is a man's world.
 

Bob_Loblaw said:
The irony huh?
Click to expand...

Yup.

The stated reasoning for the EOAA to investigate sexual assault is essentially that the victim requires de facto due process.

Moreover, Equal Opportunity and Affirmative Action.... Come on..... I find it mind boggling to see an entity named that actually advancing arguments eroding due process.
 

CoMn said:
I know that the police had hard evidence of a woman saying "noooooo" which the male officer chose to interpret as meaning yes. I have asked you several times on this board Bob what about "noooooo" and a slap means yes? What about "noooooo" is giving consent. Please explain that to me. You are a lawyer...I ask you again...How does a cop, with video evidence of the alleged victim of a gang rape...interpret "noooooo" as meaning YES. Not only did she not say yes...she said "noooooo" since Officer Wente decided that meant yes, you are correct in saying I believe the EOAA report is less biased. But I am leaving open for someone on one of these long threads to explain to me so that I can see this police officer was obviously doing his job. Also explain to me why they called ahead of their visit to campus, giving the guys 7 days to clean up the evidence. Explain to me why the victim was not encouraged to have counsel present before her police interview (and why a male cop interviewed an alleged victim of a gang rape). Tell me why the police didn't go gather evidence upon learning of an alleged "higher interest" crime right away...especially when evidence would disappear. Explain these things and I will agree that clearly the EOAA is completely biased and Officer Wente was doing an awesome job.
Click to expand...

Well, a coy nooooooooo, followed by oral sex, making out, and a three way sounds like consent to me. Have you heard the video?

EOAA is Less biased!! Now I've heard it all. You're becoming my favorite poster.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom