Regents Look to Commission Independent Investigation of Gophers Football Investigatio

Donate To GopherHole
Ozzy&Ray said:
Why just Winfield? Why not Green, Shenault, McCrary, and Williams? I don't understand why some seem to be identifying him as more wronged, or more righteous, than others. They each have every right to be very upset with how this all went down.


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

Im surprised they all stayed! I know sitting out a year sucks but kids do it all the time.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

So Kaler and Coyle are going to be suspended until the investigation is over, right? Isn't that how this works?
 


Props to GoldenGopherTilTheEnd for mentioning the resolution was in the PP article. I read it and it was very interesting.

Here is what I got out of it:

--They will examine why the University lifted the initial suspensions while the EOAA investigation was still ongoing. They will examine whether this was consistent with protecting those who report sexual assault.

--They will examine the communication, decisions, and actions of the administration: "inconsistent statements and descriptions of the events have been provided regarding the timing and basis for actions and decisions by the administration."

--What suprised me is that the resolution is remarkably sympathetic towards the players who decided to boycott: "The administration’s reversal on the initial suspensions and addition of individuals not alleged to be directly involved in the sexual assault led to confusion and concern among the remaining football players; and
WHEREAS, in response to their confusion and seeking clarification, team leaders announced a boycott of a pending bowl game"

I am glad to see them examining all sides of this issue. The tone of the resolution appears to be critical of the administration, and it makes me think the Regents are serious about this investigation. As someone on cares deeply about the University of Minnesota, I am glad to see it.





Here is the text, taken for the following article: http://www.twincities.com/2017/03/24/umn-regents-to-review-punishment-of-gopher-football-players/

REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION TO
Initiate an Independent Investigation

WHEREAS, one of the fundamental roles of the Board of Regents is to oversee the administration of
the University of Minnesota’s operations; and
WHEREAS, the University of Minnesota is a public institution committed to transparency and
accountability; and
WHEREAS, an incident between a female University student and members of the University of
Minnesota football team led to a report of sexual assault to the Minneapolis Police Department and to the
University, resulting in suspension of four football players from the team; and
WHEREAS, the police investigation yielded admissions by five members of the football team of
behavior that at a minimum reflected a lack of University values and an utter disregard and disrespect for
the reporting student; and
WHEREAS, despite the admitted behavior, when the Hennepin County Attorney announced no
charges would be made against the players on October 3, 2016, the administration lifted the suspension of
the four players despite an ongoing University EOAA investigation and despite the Hennepin County
Attorney’s opinion that the players should remain suspended; and
WHEREAS, the lifting of the suspensions compelled the reporting student to seek a protective order
against the four players; and
WHEREAS, after the regular football season concluded, the same facts and admissions were cited to
re-suspend the four players in contrast to the October 3, 2016 decision, with six additional players being
suspended. The administration’s reversal on the initial suspensions and addition of individuals not alleged
to be directly involved in the sexual assault led to confusion and concern among the remaining football
players; and
WHEREAS, in response to their confusion and seeking clarification, team leaders announced a
boycott of a pending bowl game, leading to a national and international story detrimental to the
University’s reputation and standing in Minnesota and beyond; and
WHEREAS, inconsistent statements and descriptions of the events have been provided regarding the
timing and basis for actions and decisions by the administration; and
WHEREAS, the lifting of the original suspensions during the EOAA investigation and the impact on
the reporting student of doing so appear inconsistent with the Regents’ commitment to addressing the
issue of sexual assault on campus and protecting those who report sexual assault.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Board of Regents shall commission an
independent investigation to review and assess the facts and processes related to the above events. The
report shall cover the time period of September 2, 2016 through March 24, 2017. The investigator shall
provide a completed report directly to the regents no later than May 5, 2017 to clarify and confirm
accountability for actions taken and to identify areas of improvement to address matters that may arise in
the future.
 

JTsolo612 said:
Im surprised they all stayed! I know sitting out a year sucks but kids do it all the time.


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

None of them are sitting out though. The only one who has to sit out, if he stays, is Djam. 5 play right away, 1 (Djam) suspended.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 


Ozzy&Ray said:
None of them are sitting out though. The only one who has to sit out, if he stays, is Djam. 5 play right away, 1 (Djam) suspended.


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

I think he meant he is surprised they didn't transfer, at which point they would have to sit out a year.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

Someone should investigate why they needed to talk in Duluth.

Sent from my SM-G935V using Tapatalk
 


Coyle's and Kaler's emplyment should be terminated as the first step.

They both would have been long gone in the business world.
 




Ozzy&Ray said:
None of them are sitting out though. The only one who has to sit out, if he stays, is Djam. 5 play right away, 1 (Djam) suspended.


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

You misunderstood, I meant they easily could have chosen to leave, sitting out a year is not the end of the world. I'm glad. They did not.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

I pity anyone who thinks Coyle is losing his job over this. Laughable doesn't even begin to describe it.
 

bizzle22 said:
I pity anyone who thinks Coyle is losing his job over this. Laughable doesn't even begin to describe it.
Click to expand...

Coyle will -vs- Coyle should


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 



bizzle22 said:
I pity anyone who thinks Coyle is losing his job over this. Laughable doesn't even begin to describe it.
Click to expand...
The person who should have lost her job scurried away to Johns Hopkins.

Sent from my SM-T550 using Tapatalk
 

GoldenGopherTilTheEnd said:
Read the PP article that actually has the resolution. The third to last and second to last paragraphs of the RESOLUTION establishing the review state:

"WHEREAS, inconsistent statements and descriptions of the events have been provided regarding the
timing and basis for actions and decisions by the administration; and

WHEREAS, the lifting of the original suspensions during the EOAA investigation and the impact on
the reporting student of doing so appear inconsistent with the Regents’ commitment to addressing the
issue of sexual assault on campus and protecting those who report sexual assault."

So it seems they're very concerned about the lifting of the original four suspensions after no criminal charges were filed. That seems to be where their interest lies. I wish they would look at improving the process of determining the original verdict and recommendations, but I don't see that in the text of the resolution.
Click to expand...

The resolution was not brought forward so its contents are moot. Johnson's quote basically threw a review blanket over everything, IMHO. I think everything is going to be reviewed. Johnson has made it pretty clear he is not a fan of the current process for investigating student conduct.
 

MrC said:
Props to GoldenGopherTilTheEnd for mentioning the resolution was in the PP article. I read it and it was very interesting.

Here is what I got out of it:

--They will examine why the University lifted the initial suspensions while the EOAA investigation was still ongoing. They will examine whether this was consistent with protecting those who report sexual assault.

--They will examine the communication, decisions, and actions of the administration: "inconsistent statements and descriptions of the events have been provided regarding the timing and basis for actions and decisions by the administration."

--What suprised me is that the resolution is remarkably sympathetic towards the players who decided to boycott: "The administration’s reversal on the initial suspensions and addition of individuals not alleged to be directly involved in the sexual assault led to confusion and concern among the remaining football players; and
WHEREAS, in response to their confusion and seeking clarification, team leaders announced a boycott of a pending bowl game"

I am glad to see them examining all sides of this issue. The tone of the resolution appears to be critical of the administration, and it makes me think the Regents are serious about this investigation. As someone on cares deeply about the University of Minnesota, I am glad to see it.





Here is the text, taken for the following article: http://www.twincities.com/2017/03/24/umn-regents-to-review-punishment-of-gopher-football-players/

REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION TO
Initiate an Independent Investigation

WHEREAS, one of the fundamental roles of the Board of Regents is to oversee the administration of
the University of Minnesota’s operations; and
WHEREAS, the University of Minnesota is a public institution committed to transparency and
accountability; and
WHEREAS, an incident between a female University student and members of the University of
Minnesota football team led to a report of sexual assault to the Minneapolis Police Department and to the
University, resulting in suspension of four football players from the team; and
WHEREAS, the police investigation yielded admissions by five members of the football team of
behavior that at a minimum reflected a lack of University values and an utter disregard and disrespect for
the reporting student; and
WHEREAS, despite the admitted behavior, when the Hennepin County Attorney announced no
charges would be made against the players on October 3, 2016, the administration lifted the suspension of
the four players despite an ongoing University EOAA investigation and despite the Hennepin County
Attorney’s opinion that the players should remain suspended; and
WHEREAS, the lifting of the suspensions compelled the reporting student to seek a protective order
against the four players; and
WHEREAS, after the regular football season concluded, the same facts and admissions were cited to
re-suspend the four players in contrast to the October 3, 2016 decision, with six additional players being
suspended. The administration’s reversal on the initial suspensions and addition of individuals not alleged
to be directly involved in the sexual assault led to confusion and concern among the remaining football
players; and
WHEREAS, in response to their confusion and seeking clarification, team leaders announced a
boycott of a pending bowl game, leading to a national and international story detrimental to the
University’s reputation and standing in Minnesota and beyond; and
WHEREAS, inconsistent statements and descriptions of the events have been provided regarding the
timing and basis for actions and decisions by the administration; and
WHEREAS, the lifting of the original suspensions during the EOAA investigation and the impact on
the reporting student of doing so appear inconsistent with the Regents’ commitment to addressing the
issue of sexual assault on campus and protecting those who report sexual assault.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Board of Regents shall commission an
independent investigation to review and assess the facts and processes related to the above events. The
report shall cover the time period of September 2, 2016 through March 24, 2017. The investigator shall
provide a completed report directly to the regents no later than May 5, 2017 to clarify and confirm
accountability for actions taken and to identify areas of improvement to address matters that may arise in
the future.
Click to expand...

The resolution was not bought forward, so it's a fun read but meaningless.
 

Where@sses gobblely-goob talk. Do we have to endure this round?
 


You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom