All Things Gopher Players Appeals Process

Donate To GopherHole
37score said:
Shenault overturned... Williams upheld 1 yr suspension... Djam reduced to 1 yr suspension... Buford/Hardin/Johnson/Johnson expulsions upheld

From Doogie
Click to expand...

One year from school and football or one year from football?
 

So, we lose 3 DB's and a DL football wise to expulsions. We have 4 open scholarships.
 

rowdaboat said:
For the educated lawyer opinions.. If it seems clear that she lied about being drunk, fabricated claims against players, and changed story several times, who would players get to sue for slander/defamation/obstruction of justice- her or the university administration? If they have a case against her I'd love for them to pursue it, since she'd have it coming and it'd set a future precedent, and the initial protest groups might lose their minds
Click to expand...
Absolutely agree with this! If she did misconstrue things intentionally, she should face the music. And, as you stated, it would hopefully be a deterrent. Imagine people losing their minds if the roles were reversed. People would go ape**** bonkers!!!
 

So a 50% percent success rate for the EOAA. That's not speculating on due process, that's a huge red flag fact. It's something worth writing to the Regents about.
 



bizzle22 said:
"Felt" is the key word. Someone isn't lying if they felt a certain way and it proved to be wrong. I felt the Gophers were going to beat Penn State in football when we were winning with under a minute to go. We didn't, but that doesn't mean I was lying that I felt that way.
Click to expand...

So saying I felt drunk is different than saying I was drunk. Give me a break.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 


Spoofin said:
So saying I felt drunk is different than saying I was drunk. Give me a break.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

I guess the players should have said that they felt they never had sex with the accuser or that they felt they/others were never there so the EOAA couldn't have claimed they lied.
 




Guarantee some of those six will appeal to Provost. If based on testimony from the appeal hearings, there are enough holes poked in the investigation, more may be cleared.
 

Spoofin said:
So saying I felt drunk is different than saying I was drunk. Give me a break.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

What is drunk? Is it .08% even though no one was driving a car? Is it based on how you feel or what your BAC is? Do you know what your BAC is on a given night when you are having a few beers? I don't. Drunk is subjective.
 

PMWinSTP said:
Guarantee some of those six will appeal to Provost. If based on testimony from the appeal hearings, there are enough holes poked in the investigation, more may be cleared.
Click to expand...

And if she admits three were consensual, why are four expelled? Shouldn't it be one?
 

#2Gopher said:
One year from school and football or one year from football?
Click to expand...

My understanding is school and by default, football. They would not have gone through this process for just a football suspension.
 



GoGophersUMN said:
I guess the players should have said that they felt they never had sex with the accuser or that they felt they/others were never there so the EOAA couldn't have claimed they lied.
Click to expand...

Sex is not subjective. I don't think I need to spell it out for you what exactly sex is
 

bizzle22 said:
What is drunk? Is it .08% even though no one was driving a car? Is it based on how you feel or what your BAC is? Do you know what your BAC is on a given night when you are having a few beers? I don't. Drunk is subjective.
Click to expand...

You're really splitting this hair? She stated she was at one point, then she said she wasn't. You are actually questioning this...really?
 

bizzle22 said:
What is drunk? Is it .08% even though no one was driving a car? Is it based on how you feel or what your BAC is? Do you know what your BAC is on a given night when you are having a few beers? I don't. Drunk is subjective.
Click to expand...

Drunk really isn't subjective when you are describing how you yourself feel after drinking. This argument you are making is about as dumb as it gets.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

tato2001 said:
So a 50% percent success rate for the EOAA. That's not speculating on due process, that's a huge red flag fact. It's something worth writing to the Regents about.
Click to expand...

If they aren't paying attention already then they should be replaced.
 

PMWinSTP said:
You're really splitting this hair? She stated she was at one point, then she said she wasn't. You are actually questioning this...really?
Click to expand...

No, she said she felt drunk not that she was drunk. See how much sense that makes? Bizzle could work in the EOAA office with no problem.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

Tlsbhansen said:
And if she admits three were consensual, why are four expelled? Shouldn't it be one?
Click to expand...

Could they be expelled for say, other codes determined to be violated from the investigation? Maybe? Think about that, did you?
 

So basically the guys that had sex with the woman are expelled besides Djam who it was clearly consensual, the rest are cleared. So it seems that they're saying they don't believe those 4 were consensual but they can't prove wrongdoing on the other guys.
 

Spoofin said:
No, she said she felt drunk not that she was drunk. See how much sense that makes? Bizzle could work in the EOAA office with no problem.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

LOL...silly me.
 

bizzle22 said:
What is drunk? Is it .08% even though no one was driving a car? Is it based on how you feel or what your BAC is? Do you know what your BAC is on a given night when you are having a few beers? I don't. Drunk is subjective.
Click to expand...

Continuing on this...

Is your theory that she said she felt drunk initially because she thought she was, but then later decided she couldn't be certain she was .08 and so she was just setting the record straight?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

bizzle22 said:
What is drunk? Is it .08% even though no one was driving a car? Is it based on how you feel or what your BAC is? Do you know what your BAC is on a given night when you are having a few beers? I don't. Drunk is subjective.
Click to expand...

She knew the stakes of the investigation. She knew there was a good chance that her testimony would lead to the expulsion of some of the players. She made it sound like she was so drunk that she couldn't do anything about it.

Drunk is subjective in the sense that different people will have different definitions. There's still no reason for her to go from being "very drunk" to not drunk at all. How often does your perception of how drunk you were on a given night at a given time go from "very drunk" to not drunk at all?
 

It's a Friday evening maybe some of you should log of the GH now that we know the outcomes and go experiment with some alcohol.

Disclaimer: I'm at work until 10 so I cannot do this until then.
 

tato2001 said:
So a 50% percent success rate for the EOAA. That's not speculating on due process, that's a huge red flag fact. It's something worth writing to the Regents about.
Click to expand...

Wrong. A 50% success rate looks pretty good. The conviction rate in the criminal courts has averaged approximately 84% in Texas, 82% in California, 72% in New York, 67% in North Carolina, and 59% in Florida. And prosecutors usually only pursue cases they think they can win. The U had no choice but to have hearings for the 10 players. The six players who have had their suspensions or expulsions upheld are now going to have a more difficult time claiming they weren't given due process.
 

PMWinSTP said:
You're really splitting this hair? She stated she was at one point, then she said she wasn't. You are actually questioning this...really?
Click to expand...

I'm not really splitting any hairs. Just asking the question of what constitutes drunk. I haven't gotten an answer yet. If you'd like to answer then fire away...what is drunk?

She said she felt drunk. Then she might have said she wasn't. I don't think it is fair for anyone to criticize her on that without actually seeing the transcripts which I know none of you have. You are literally basing this on an interview with Lee Hutton (who also has his own agenda) done by Doogie (who you once told me was not credible at all.) I'm not saying she was or wasn't. I'm just saying anyone who says they know or don't know if she was is ridiculous.
 

oleboy41 said:
So basically the guys that had sex with the woman are expelled besides Djam who it was clearly consensual, the rest are cleared. So it seems that they're saying they don't believe those 4 were consensual but they can't prove wrongdoing on the other guys.
Click to expand...

They were found in violation of other Code related thing too...pretty sure we'll hear more from Hutton. Can't think most won't appeal to the provost. Stakes just got higher for the U administration.

I love the U so I do feel for the institution...it just has some administrators that need to go once this all settles out, maybe before.
 

If you have vehemently opposed the process it is hard to acknowledge that the results show that this was not a kangaroo court.
 

Spoofin said:
Continuing on this...

Is your theory that she said she felt drunk initially because she thought she was, but then later decided she couldn't be certain she was .08 and so she was just setting the record straight?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

My theory is simply that I don't think she said she was drunk in the first interview because she wanted to get the players in trouble. I think she just said that because she had taken shots that night. Beyond that, I don't know if she was drunk or not. The only reason I am making this point is because it sounds like some of you want to blame it on her and say that she was out to get them, and I just don't think that is the case. It is a huge leap to go there.
 

UpnorthGo4 said:
Wrong. A 50% success rate looks pretty good. The conviction rate in the criminal courts has averaged approximately 84% in Texas, 82% in California, 72% in New York, 67% in North Carolina, and 59% in Florida. And prosecutors usually only pursue cases they think they can win. The U had no choice but to have hearings for the 10 players. The six players who have had their suspensions or expulsions upheld are now going to have a more difficult time claiming they weren't given due process.
Click to expand...

Are you really that dumb? Comparing a conviction rate with an appeal overturn rate? The 'conviction rate' here was 100% percent. The rate at which they were overturned on appeal is currently 50%.

The bottom line is this: once both parties had their cases heard, the decision changed 50% of the time. That is a HUGE indictment of the EOAA.

...now consider how many poor schmucks don't have the resources or public standing to get lawyers for their appeal. This is a massive strike against the EOAA.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom