Doogie: RB Shannon Brooks was arrested, and here's the jail roster

Donate To GopherHole




I’m not going to pollute the thread any further. I see you are in fact new here and obviously new to the topic. So, search the 300 or so threads on this. Students and particularly high profile students deserve a fair, unbiased disciplinary adjudication process that ought to use something much closer to legal standards of due process if they are using legal terms to define an infraction and subsequent labeling of a student with massive monetary and career implications. That’s not currently happening at the U or many other places.
 


How long the investigation drags on is my concern. Are they going to be done by December 31st?
 


Why would the EOAA office investigate this case at all? This case doesn't involve sexual misconduct or discrimination.
 

tjgopher said:
Why would the EOAA office investigate this case at all? This case doesn't involve sexual misconduct or discrimination.
Click to expand...

Unless there is more to the case then we know, the EOAA is unlikely to be involved. But that won't prevent many posters in GopherHole from blaming the EOAA if the U's administration decides to follow its' student disciplinary process and take some sort of action. And there is very little doubt that if Fleck decides to suspend Brooks for violation of team rules more than a few posters will still blame an "out of control" EOAA for the decision. Too many of them have this ridiculous belief that the discipline of athletes at the U for violating the student code of conduct should only be handled by the criminal court system. Meanwhile, these very same posters will express little or no concern for the widespread corruption and abuse of civil rights that occurs in criminal courts systems all over America. It seems their only concern is to insulate college athletes from being held accountable for their actions rather than any real concern for the rights of citizens who are accused of crimes or other misconduct.
 
Last edited:



The Gophers are at the mercy of the Minneapolis City Attorney. I don't know if you can request a speedy investigation.

Does anybody know if they have given a timetable for resolution?

Brooks is in a Medical Red Shirt. If he can play up to four games, that will be great. If not, he's got extra time to heal and get stronger.

Maybe he is "nipping at the bit" to be on the playing field, he does a nicompoop thing and takes his frustrations at the Waterboy roomie.
 
Last edited:

hungan1 said:
The Gophers are at the mercy of the Minneapolis City Attorney. I don't know if you can request a speedy investigation.

Does anybody know if they have given a timetable for resolution?

Brooks is in a Medical Red Shirt. If he can play up to four games, that will be great. If not, he's got extra time to heal and get stronger.

Maybe he is "nipping at the bit" to be on the playing field, he does a nicompoop thing and takes his frustrations at the Waterboy roomie.
Click to expand...

Or not..
 

Cruze said:
Unless there is more to the case then we know, the EOAA is unlikely to be involved. But that won't prevent many posters in GopherHole from blaming the EOAA if the U's administration decides to follow its' student disciplinary process and take some sort of action. And there is very little doubt that if Fleck decides to suspend Brooks for violation of team rules more than a few posters will still blame an "out of control" EOAA for the decision. Too many of them have this ridiculous belief that the discipline of athletes at the U for violating the student code of conduct should only be handled by the criminal court system. Meanwhile, these very same posters will express little or no concern for the widespread corruption and abuse of civil rights that occurs in criminal courts systems all over America. It seems their only concern is to insulate college athletes from being held accountable for their actions rather than any real concern for the rights of citizens who are accused of crimes or other misconduct.
Click to expand...

I threw up in my mouth a little.
 

Pompous Elitist said:
fair, unbiased disciplinary adjudication process that ought to use something much closer to legal standards of due process if they are using legal terms to define an infraction and subsequent labeling of a student with massive monetary and career implications.
Click to expand...

Maybe it should be that way, but as of now this is just your sentiment. It has no actual basis in state law. I'm not saying that it should not ... I'm just saying it doesn't.

The easy argument, and again not necessarily MY argument, is that the less there is at stake, the lower the burden of proof needs to be.


And of course this is 100% relevent to the thread ... as Brooks could absolutely be facing some kind of U investigation and subsequent recommendation of admin punitive action by whatever office handles the investigation.
 
Last edited:



tjgopher said:
Why would the EOAA office investigate this case at all? This case doesn't involve sexual misconduct or discrimination.
Click to expand...

True, but the EOAA website says it handles harassment and nepotism, too. But OK, let's say this particular incident falls outside the specific purvue of the EOAA office.

You don't think there are other offices at the U, with similar scope/mission, to handle other types of student misconduct?? Whether that be physical assault accusations against another student, or cheating on test, etc etc.

The U will absolutely be investigating this, regardless if any criminal charges or civil suit are brought. And they will be allowed to use a much lower burden of proof, if they choose, because "less" is at stake (just student status).


Perhaps, in the era of MeToo, only the cases in the EOAA office are the ones that gain attention and spotlight. Perhaps people don't care nearly as much about physical alterations or cheating, as much as they care about sexual stuff. So perhaps then, it could be swept under the rug by whatever U office will be investigating it. I guess we will see!
 
Last edited:


Cruze said:
Unless there is more to the case then we know, the EOAA is unlikely to be involved. But that won't prevent many posters in GopherHole from blaming the EOAA if the U's administration decides to follow its' student disciplinary process and take some sort of action. And there is very little doubt that if Fleck decides to suspend Brooks for violation of team rules more than a few posters will still blame an "out of control" EOAA for the decision. Too many of them have this ridiculous belief that the discipline of athletes at the U for violating the student code of conduct should only be handled by the criminal court system. Meanwhile, these very same posters will express little or no concern for the widespread corruption and abuse of civil rights that occurs in criminal courts systems all over America. It seems their only concern is to insulate college athletes from being held accountable for their actions rather than any real concern for the rights of citizens who are accused of crimes or other misconduct.
Click to expand...


Oh, heaven forbid, roommates got in a fight. Never happened before at the U. The only reason, the only reason this got any airtime is because Shannon is a baller. If the DA office intervened in ever roommate, fight, it would be the only thing they do. PJ should play him when he wants to play him. And now that you have asked, no I’m not embarrassed to say he represents the U.
 

Gophers_4life said:
Maybe it should be that way, but as of now this is just your sentiment. It has no actual basis in state law. I'm not saying that it should not ... I'm just saying it doesn't.

The easy argument, and again not necessarily MY argument, is that the less there is at stake, the lower the burden of proof needs to be.


And of course this is 100% relevent to the thread ... as Brooks could absolutely be facing some kind of U investigation and subsequent recommendation of admin punitive action by whatever office handles the investigation.
Click to expand...

There are efforts underway to prove how unfair and biased the processes are around the country. There are also efforts underway by activists to brand transcripts of accused students with the sexual predator label which would effectively have massive economic penalties. If you’re arguing students don’t have a right to due process that’s incorrect. They do, and schools should do more but they currently are “all in” on an agenda.

Obviously interpretation of the laws is what’s important and as is very obvious the same people can look at the same situation (or law) and see completely different applications, scenarios and outcomes.
 

I have not heard about transcripts being labeled with sexual predator etc. That is new for me. It might make sense in some scenarios, like someone who was charged with a crime and found guilty in trial, perhaps.

And yes I will be very interested as to the outcomes of lawsuits against universities in the coming years that allege their internal processes are unfair and either are or should be illegal.
 

Cruze said:
Unless there is more to the case then we know, the EOAA is unlikely to be involved. But that won't prevent many posters in GopherHole from blaming the EOAA if the U's administration decides to follow its' student disciplinary process and take some sort of action. And there is very little doubt that if Fleck decides to suspend Brooks for violation of team rules more than a few posters will still blame an "out of control" EOAA for the decision. Too many of them have this ridiculous belief that the discipline of athletes at the U for violating the student code of conduct should only be handled by the criminal court system. Meanwhile, these very same posters will express little or no concern for the widespread corruption and abuse of civil rights that occurs in criminal courts systems all over America. It seems their only concern is to insulate college athletes from being held accountable for their actions rather than any real concern for the rights of citizens who are accused of crimes or other misconduct.
Click to expand...

Since when is having the even handed application of due process a way of insulating college athletes from accountability for their actions. This sounds like guilty until proven innocent for college athletes.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk
 

tjgopher said:
Why would the EOAA office investigate this case at all? This case doesn't involve sexual misconduct or discrimination.
Click to expand...

Maybe the water boy is gay. Maybe Brooks is gay. Maybe they’re bi. That would change things. It came out recently that Aaron Hernandez was bi.
 



G4L has an interesting point. Is attending the U of M a "right?" I would tend to say no. I don't believe there is any legal "right" to be a college student, or even a college student-athlete.

The U of M is a school. Football is an activity at that school. Now, obviously, D1 football is a quasi-business within the school, but I still don't see a legal right to be on the football team. the School can establish its own rules (working within the recognized law) about who can and cannot attend school at MN.
And the football team can establish its own rules about whether a player can be a part of the team, or not.

Sure, I would like to see Brooks play for the Gophers, and help them win. But if he did something wrong/illegal (which I do not know), then he will have to face the consequences of his actions.
 

This is probably not going to be popular but my general belief is that football players are bullies and thus Brooks is likely at fault in the incident. It sounds like nobody was hurt so it likely won't go anywhere but I completely believe a story that a number of players pushed around/ beat up another student. I suspect there are many incidents like this that don't go to the police.

It is unfortunate but the culture of the sport leads to a macho pack mentality that can lead to some bad decisions. That said, I think Fleck softens this mentality much more than most footbaw coaches.
 

Winnipegopher said:
This is probably not going to be popular but my general belief is that football players are bullies and thus Brooks is likely at fault in the incident. It sounds like nobody was hurt so it likely won't go anywhere but I completely believe a story that a number of players pushed around/ beat up another student. I suspect there are many incidents like this that don't go to the police.

It is unfortunate but the culture of the sport leads to a macho pack mentality that can lead to some bad decisions. That said, I think Fleck softens this mentality much more than most footbaw coaches.
Click to expand...

Getting into fights is part of growing up. Its not that big of a deal.
 

Winnipegopher said:
<b>This is probably not going to be popular</b> but my general belief is that football players are bullies and thus Brooks is likely at fault in the incident. It sounds like nobody was hurt so it likely won't go anywhere but I completely believe a story that a number of players pushed around/ beat up another student. I suspect there are many incidents like this that don't go to the police.

It is unfortunate but the culture of the sport leads to a macho pack mentality that can lead to some bad decisions. That said, I think Fleck softens this mentality much more than most footbaw coaches.
Click to expand...

Generalizing a group of people is always unpopular. For good reason. In fact, it is at the root of many problems.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

short ornery norwegian said:
G4L has an interesting point. Is attending the U of M a "right?" I would tend to say no. I don't believe there is any legal "right" to be a college student, or even a college student-athlete.

The U of M is a school. Football is an activity at that school. Now, obviously, D1 football is a quasi-business within the school, but I still don't see a legal right to be on the football team. the School can establish its own rules (working within the recognized law) about who can and cannot attend school at MN.
And the football team can establish its own rules about whether a player can be a part of the team, or not.

Sure, I would like to see Brooks play for the Gophers, and help them win. But if he did something wrong/illegal (which I do not know), then he will have to face the consequences of his actions.
Click to expand...

The U of M is a school, and can set it's own standards and policies. That said, as a public institution, it is generally also subject to federal constitutional protections, such as equal protection and due process. The due process for a school disciplinary action can be different than that of a criminal tribunal, but it is still a requirement.
 

Winnipegopher said:
This is probably not going to be popular but my general belief is that football players are bullies and thus Brooks is likely at fault in the incident. It sounds like nobody was hurt so it likely won't go anywhere but I completely believe a story that a number of players pushed around/ beat up another student. I suspect there are many incidents like this that don't go to the police.

It is unfortunate but the culture of the sport leads to a macho pack mentality that can lead to some bad decisions. That said, I think Fleck softens this mentality much more than most footbaw coaches.
Click to expand...

I would bet that any young men who spend as much time in the gym lifting and on the field getting knocked as these athletes do then it's only natural that they would have testosterone levels at the ceiling. -- And some of them would get into off field fights. This is natural human biology. Not culture.
 

a79krgm said:
I would bet that any young men who spend as much time in the gym lifting and on the field getting knocked as these athletes do then it's only natural that they would have testosterone levels at the ceiling. -- And some of them would get into off field fights. This is natural human biology. Not culture.
Click to expand...

Umm. What?? Is this theory based on anything other than your own bias. I have never heard the correlation between the amount of time of lifting weights and playing football leads a greater chance of being involved in a fight.
 

a79krgm said:
I would bet that any young men who spend as much time in the gym lifting and on the field getting knocked as these athletes do then it's only natural that they would have testosterone levels at the ceiling. -- And some of them would get into off field fights. This is natural human biology. Not culture.
Click to expand...

Nope. Quack supplement services will tell you so (umm, that would be all of them). Most all doctors will not.

"Sometimes it’s 15 minutes after exercise that testosterone is elevated. Sometimes it can be up to an hour,” says Todd Schroeder, PhD, who studies exercise and hormones in men at the University of Southern California. It's not yet clear what health effects, if any, these temporary boosts may have.

"Exercise alone probably won’t raise their levels enough to make a difference in how they feel," says endocrinologist Scott Isaacs, MD, of Emory University.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom