Paper work filed by woman in court to drop order of protection against 1 of 6 players

Donate To GopherHole
A_Slab_of_Bacon said:
My understanding is the order doesn't mean that at all.... the orders are effectively granted by default. They don't actually determine anything. Thus the later finding of fact.
Click to expand...

Correct. Basically, the magistrate will issue a temporary restraining order ex parte (without giving other parties the chance to respond) if the allegations would, if proven, justify an order being issued. In other words, for the temporary order, the magistrate effectively assumes the allegations are true without making a determination as to credibility or if the allegations are true or even can be proven. Examining both sides, evaluating witness credibility, and making factual findings all take place at the evidentiary hearing.
 

The judge is doing his/her job. Same with the attorneys. The involved lady has issues with the situation and the no charges filed against the players and is now fully pursuing her legal rights. Obviously she feels strongly about what she is doing.

The named players were with her and that can not be denied. What happened is between them. Now the legal system is trying to figure it all out. She deserves her day in court. The players???? They are in need of help and have only to blame themselves for being in this situation, letting down their team, coaches and the UM.
 

Well the case made the pm on line edition of he NY Times.
Not the media attention the U was looking for this year.
 


olddoc said:
Well the case made the pm on line edition of he NY Times.
Not the media attention the U was looking for this year.
Click to expand...
Hmmm..... I wonder what the Basketball team will do to top this.... Actually I don't want to know.

Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk
 


Ewert86PC said:
Hmmm..... I wonder what the Basketball team will do to top this.... Actually I don't want to know.

Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk
Click to expand...


It is often said that the football and basketball programs are the window to the university. In the case of many GHs wearing their rose colored glasses, this is what they see:

IMG_1017.JPG


This is what the rest of the world sees:

IMG_1016.JPG
 



From the NYT article:

The Minnesota coach, Tracy Claeys, has declined to comment on the allegations. He said the six players will be on the roster to play Saturday at Illinois.

The lawyer for the players, Lee Hutton III, said his clients await their day in court. “Ultimately, we’re ready, willing and able to produce evidence that completely contradicts the petitioner’s story,” said Hutton, a former football player for the Gophers.

He added: “This is not a specific attempt to address legitimate judicial issues. This is vengeance after the fact that charges were dropped.”


There is also some chatter about Title IX not needing any evidence for conviction, yada yad, yada.

These young lawyers ought to keep in mind defamation is a thing. Kiondre already has a good case, and if Mr Hutton is not blowing smoke the others may as well. If the school defames these young men via the fatally flawed Title IX process,without due process, there will likely be blowback. Rape is a crime, not plagiarism.
 



Don't know the circumstances, but it seems many raised with a participation trophy mentality need a "safe zone." We have raised generation where many have not frown up and are unprepared for life. This may or may not apply in this instance, but it applies in many others.
 

Grasping at straws, the U is more likely to be penalized under Title
IX for not inestigating a possible sexual assault than face defamation charges.
 

olddoc said:
Grasping at straws, the U is more likely to be penalized under Title
IX for not inestigating a possible sexual assault than face defamation charges.
Click to expand...

Wait wat. The protective orders have nothing to do with Title IX...
 

Pompus wrote hat if the U started a Title IX investgation that included the players the U could be sued for defamation.
That is nonsense.
I am aware of the difference between the restraint order by a judge and a U investigation.
Without knowing any of the facts Pompus seems to want neither.
 



olddoc said:
Pompus wrote hat if the U started a Title IX investgation that included the players the U could be sued for defamation.
That is nonsense.
I am aware of the difference between the restraint order by a judge and a U investigation.
Without knowing any of the facts Pompus seems to want neither.
Click to expand...

Yeah that would be nonsense. All they need is a reason for an investigation and they're fine. The details of those investigations aren't even public most of the time.
 

I thought Hutton said the on site RO would be dropped against all players yesterday? I smell a rat.
 


Ski U Master said:
Believing what a lawyer says in the media is as foolish as believing what a coach says in the media.
Click to expand...
I would rather believe a used car salesman trying to sell me a car that I have not researched, than believe media statements from lawyers or coaches as fact.

Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk
 

olddoc said:
Grasping at straws, the U is more likely to be penalized under Title
IX for not inestigating a possible sexual assault than face defamation charges.
Click to expand...

Neither are even remotely likely.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom