Ten Gophers football players indefinately suspended

Donate To GopherHole
gopherdudepart2 said:
This is why there needs to be an emergency appeal process for those players. This is finals week, they all shouldn't be tossed out on their butt's withou due process from the University, at least not without an expedited appeal, and some form of relief.
Click to expand...

Good point. What if they 'win' their appeal but are academically ineligible due to missing finals?
 

citywok said:
You have no idea whatsoever if it is "guilt by association" or not. No clue!
Click to expand...

True. Neither do you, I assume. But if it's not, then it seems the first time this was investigated someone royally messed up and missed those 4 guys? That seems unlikely.
 

I just read all of today's posts. Too many things to respond to. One I will - no matter what side of this you fall on as far as the current process taking place, if you think the timing on this release wasn't carefully planned for maximum impact then you are very naive.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 


<script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
 


gopherdudepart2 said:
This is why there needs to be an emergency appeal process for those players. This is finals week, they all shouldn't be tossed out on their butt's withou due process from the University, at least not without an expedited appeal, and some form of relief.
Click to expand...
AS with all Student Conduct related issues, the accused have an appeal period before the final decision was made. Had the team not suspended them, and/or the media hadn't reported it we likely wouldn't have heard anything for another few weeks or so until the final decision was made.
 

MaxyJR1 said:
I think Buford is only one recommended for expulsion.

Mr. Buford quote

“How this entity has found something different from what the Minneapolis P.D., the Hennepin County prosecutor’s office. How they can find something different than these law enforcement entities is beyond me," said Ray Buford Sr., father of Ray Buford. “I'm coming from a point of expertise. I've never seen anything like this. Never. In all my 17 years of law enforcement have I never seen anything like this."

He's looking at it through legal lens. EOAA looks at it differently.


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

The KSTP article said "at least one." Last night Mr. Buford said in a tweet or article that there was more than one. And Doogie indicated on his podcast taped last night that some or all of the original players in the restraining order were expelled.

Yes, that last part is vague and I know how everybody feels about Doogie. He didn't say "some or all;" he actually made it sound like "all," but didn't say that, either. But it was plural, and it involved those guys.
 

bga1 said:
. ... My guess is that if the "code of conduct" were this strictly enforced across the board, the U of M would have half the enrollment it currently has. It's good that there is one, it just appears to be unevenly enforced with a special focus on athletes.
Click to expand...

BGA, I'm sure there are many, many, too many to count cases of "code of conduct" transgressions committed on campus that no one hears a word about. The difference is, those students are not recruited athletes playing 1 of the 2 highest revenue (most visible) sports in all of college athletics. To put it bluntly (and sadly), no one really cares about those other incidents because they don't affect our favorites teams' ability to win games. There's a personal responsibility that goes with signing that letter of intent. Part of that responsibility is staying out of situations exactly like the one being reported.

You are correct, we know few, if any, of the details.
 




Golden_Sloth said:
Disappointing amount of sexism in this thread.
Click to expand...

Agreed. It's rather odd that people equate being a woman with inability to equitably do one's job. If the committee was all male and the players were given no further punishment, would the assumption be that they were biased because of their gender?
 

SelectionSunday said:
BGA, I'm sure there are many, many, too many to count cases of "code of conduct" transgressions committed on campus that no one hears a word about. The difference is, those students are not recruited athletes playing 1 of the 2 highest revenue (most visible) sports in all of college athletics. To put it bluntly (and sadly), no one really cares about those other incidents because they don't affect our favorites teams' ability to win games. There's a personal responsibility that goes with signing that letter of intent. Part of that responsibility is staying out of situations exactly what is being reported.

You are correct, we know few, if any, of the details.
Click to expand...

I second this. The reason this is a big deal is because the media made it a big deal. Had it not been reported on, no one would have know anything until the appeal process was done. Someone went to the media and made it a big deal.

Student Conduct Code infractions happen all the time, the process is always the same: Report of incident with evidence, investigation, recommendation, appeal, and final decision.

The reason you don't hear about Joe Schmo getting expelled for Sexual Harassment is because the media doesn't care about Joe Schmo, and neither do most other people.
 

Taji34 said:
I second this. The reason this is a big deal is because the media made it a big deal. Had it not been reported on, no one would have know anything until the appeal process was done. Someone went to the media and made it a big deal.

Student Conduct Code infractions happen all the time, the process is always the same: Report of incident with evidence, investigation, recommendation, appeal, and final decision.

The reason you don't hear about Joe Schmo getting expelled for Sexual Harassment is because the media doesn't care about Joe Schmo, and neither do most other people.
Click to expand...

10% of the team just got suspended and it's the media's fault for reporting...
 




Taji34 said:
I second this. The reason this is a big deal is because the media made it a big deal. Had it not been reported on, no one would have know anything until the appeal process was done. Someone went to the media and made it a big deal.

Student Conduct Code infractions happen all the time, the process is always the same: Report of incident with evidence, investigation, recommendation, appeal, and final decision.

The reason you don't hear about Joe Schmo getting expelled for Sexual Harassment is because the media doesn't care about Joe Schmo, and neither do most other people.
Click to expand...

I think what some people are questioning is whether Joe Schmo would be expelled if he's not a football player. Not that it wouldn't be reported.

Were there only 11 people in the room that night --10 football players and the woman? If not, are the others who were present in trouble with the school? That's the kind of question that has been raised.
 

MaxyJR1 said:
10% of the team just got suspended and it's the media's fault for reporting...
Click to expand...

I'm mean, if 10% of the rowing team was suspended would there be the same type of media presence? How about 10% of a student group at the U? Yes the players may or may not have done something wrong, and yes these recommendations seem harsh, and the timing is suspect, but would any of us know had the media not reported it?

Yes, it's their job to report on things like this, but its the size of the media presence. It's not entirely the media's fault, but they sure did play a large part in why this is as big as it is.
 


A_Slab_of_Bacon said:
“I’m ticked, and I plan on exposing the office of EOAA for these unfounded conclusions,” Hutton said. “I was going to wait until after the new year to bring lawsuits on behalf of my clients against [the alleged victim]; we just decided to accelerate the process.”


This will be interesting to see how it plays out.
Click to expand...

Wasn't there a clause in the settlement that there couldn't be a counter-suit? What happened to that, as his wording implies they were planning to do that before all of this happened yesterday evening....
 

A_Slab_of_Bacon said:
“I’m ticked, and I plan on exposing the office of EOAA for these unfounded conclusions,” Hutton said. “I was going to wait until after the new year to bring lawsuits on behalf of my clients against [the alleged victim]; we just decided to accelerate the process.”


This will be interesting to see how it plays out.
Click to expand...

I think you missed the main update: What was actually claimed in much greater detail than before, plus the first confirmed existence of a video, which the Police reviewed and made notes that lended themselves to a finding that the altercation was consensual
 

Hates Monikers said:
I think what some people are questioning is whether Joe Schmo would be expelled if he's not a football player. Not that it wouldn't be reported.

Were there only 11 people in the room that night --10 football players and the woman? If not, are the others who were present in trouble with the school? That's the kind of question that has been raised.
Click to expand...

Fair point, but we also likely won't be able to find out whether more people were charged. The University certainly won't release that information due to student privacy issues. I think the media likely got the information from the players, family, or lawyers. This could have easily just been "10 unnamed players suspended" if no one released names.

Or someone close to the investigation released the information without permission and now the lawyers have had no choice but to be vocal, that is just as likely, but who knows. If there was an initial leak of info that shouldn't have happened, it is a breach of privacy and the University is likely doing all they can to prevent more breaches for anyone else involved.
 

CurveballJesus said:
I think you missed the main update: What was actually claimed in much greater detail than before, plus the first confirmed existence of a video, which the Police reviewed and made notes that lended themselves to a finding that the altercation was consensual
Click to expand...

Guessing from what is going on now: finding that PART of the altercation was consensual.
 

Taji34 said:
Fair point, but we also likely won't be able to find out whether more people were charged. The University certainly won't release that information due to student privacy issues. I think the media likely got the information from the players, family, or lawyers. This could have easily just been "10 unnamed players suspended" if no one released names.

Or someone close to the investigation released the information without permission and now the lawyers have had no choice but to be vocal, that is just as likely, but who knows. If there was an initial leak of info that shouldn't have happened, it is a breach of privacy and the University is likely doing all they can to prevent more breaches for anyone else involved.
Click to expand...

The U isn't releasing any information, yet we're learning it through the media via other sources. It would be a very relevant point for the media to report that other students were also cited by the EOAA in this case if they had that information (without giving names, of course). They could probably get that information from the same sources they're getting everything else. Simply put, it's very likely that no other students were cited.
 

A_Slab_of_Bacon said:
“I’m ticked, and I plan on exposing the office of EOAA for these unfounded conclusions,” Hutton said. “I was going to wait until after the new year to bring lawsuits on behalf of my clients against [the alleged victim]; we just decided to accelerate the process.”


This will be interesting to see how it plays out.
Click to expand...

Thanks for posting the link.

A day after the incident, the student told police she was drunk when she was raped in Djam’s apartment by several men that night, including some of players who the university suspended, according to police records and court testimony. She told police that men were lining up into the room, and that she had to yell to stop sending people in “because she couldn’t handle it.”

When police interviewed the players, they denied they raped the student and said the sex was consensual. In a video Djam took of the incident and viewed by police, the student appeared “alert, somewhat playful and fully conscious; she does not appear to be objecting to anything at this time,” Minneapolis Police officer Matthew Wente wrote in a police report.

On Oct. 8, the Hennepin County attorney’s office declined to press charges, saying in a news release “there is insufficient, admissible evidence for prosecutors to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that either force was used or that the victim was physically helpless as defined by law in the sexual encounter.”

The alleged victim, who is part of the Gophers gameday operations, later filed restraining orders against those four players, along with Djam, that kept the five players out of TCF Bank Stadium for the Oct. 29 Rutgers game.

The restraining orders were dismissed in a Nov. 2 settlement, which still required the players to stay 20 feet away from the alleged victim.

That day, after a morning of testimony at the Hennepin County Courthouse before Judge Mel Dickstein, the alleged victim gave a statement that said, “I’m glad this is over. This has never been about punishing anyone, I just wanted to feel safe. Because of this resolution that we came to, now I do.”
 

Hates Monikers said:
I think what some people are questioning is whether Joe Schmo would be expelled if he's not a football player. Not that it wouldn't be reported.

Were there only 11 people in the room that night --10 football players and the woman? If not, are the others who were present in trouble with the school? That's the kind of question that has been raised.
Click to expand...

In law school, I worked at a clinic that offered legal services to the students. These Title IX investigations are an absolute witch hunt.

Their "recommendations" put universities in impossible situations. When these recommendations come down, they are almost forced to treat the accused as if they were guilty. Having dealings with these types of cases, it does not surprise me one bit that this office made this recommendation in this case (even when there is exonerating video evidence).

Most people from the OT board would probably consider me left of center politically, but these progressive bodies within academic institutions are killing college campuses.

I do think Joe Schmo would be treated the same way as the players. Those people usually just transfer or drop out.
 

Based on the latest, most descriptive Strib Article, outlining what was captured on cell phone video.... indicating that the victim was fully alert-conscious, involved /somewhat playful during the event, ... without something more concrete to dispute the matter, I do not see how this can be viewed as anything other than a consensual (my apologies) gang bang.

And believe me, that sort of act is "not my thing" AND I have a 21 year old senior daughter attending the U.
 

Hates Monikers said:
The U isn't releasing any information, yet we're learning it through the media via other sources. It would be a very relevant point for the media to report that other students were also cited by the EOAA in this case if they had that information (without giving names, of course). They could probably get that information from the same sources they're getting everything else. Simply put, it's very likely that no other students were cited.
Click to expand...

Or the media is assuming the majority of people don't care if others were there or being investigated. Or honestly the only information they have is coming from people related to the team, meaning they would only know the info related to the players.

For the mass majority of readers of the Strib or other media outlets, I don't think they care much that this is happening unless they follow gopher sports. Even for those who do, I think a lot of them probably are less invested than us here on gopherhole, and thus likely don't care whether more people were cited.

Either way, it wouldn't hurt if someone posed the question on if only football players were cited.
 

Kaler weighs in (sort of)

<script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
 

TruDat said:
Guessing from what is going on now: finding that PART of the altercation was consensual.
Click to expand...

It doesn't matter to these institutions. Their ideas of "consensual" do not fine within standard definitions.

For example, the written note joke that someone made was 100% true. She comes from the school of thought that you need a "consent contract". Literally, it would be sexual assault (according to her policies) if a student had sex with another student without verbal consent. Like you'd have to stop and say "would you like to have sex?" and she would say "yes", rather than how I would guess every single one of everyone's sexual encounters has taken place, you read the situation and she consented. They literally want to redefine consent.

I am not saying that there is not additional information. I am saying that it would be an error (although a logical assumption) to deduce that anything about the situation has changed except for how this office defines the word consent.
 

Iceland12 said:
Thanks for posting the link.

A day after the incident, the student told police she was drunk when she was raped in Djam’s apartment by several men that night, including some of players who the university suspended, according to police records and court testimony. She told police that men were lining up into the room, and that she had to yell to stop sending people in “because she couldn’t handle it.”

When police interviewed the players, they denied they raped the student and said the sex was consensual. In a video Djam took of the incident and viewed by police, the student appeared “alert, somewhat playful and fully conscious; she does not appear to be objecting to anything at this time,” Minneapolis Police officer Matthew Wente wrote in a police report.

On Oct. 8, the Hennepin County attorney’s office declined to press charges, saying in a news release “there is insufficient, admissible evidence for prosecutors to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that either force was used or that the victim was physically helpless as defined by law in the sexual encounter.”

The alleged victim, who is part of the Gophers gameday operations, later filed restraining orders against those four players, along with Djam, that kept the five players out of TCF Bank Stadium for the Oct. 29 Rutgers game.

The restraining orders were dismissed in a Nov. 2 settlement, which still required the players to stay 20 feet away from the alleged victim.

That day, after a morning of testimony at the Hennepin County Courthouse before Judge Mel Dickstein, the alleged victim gave a statement that said, “I’m glad this is over. This has never been about punishing anyone, I just wanted to feel safe. Because of this resolution that we came to, now I do.”
Click to expand...
It's not up to this young lady to determine if this was OK or if it is over. The U of M needs to decide if these guys should be allowed the privilege of attending school at the University of Minnesota. Just so you know Buford was one of my favorite freshmen. The guy looked very good on the field but he and others made a horrible decision and frankly I am relieved the school is playing this tough. Set the tone University of Minnesota. Well done and keep it up.
 

I always make my women sign a waiver. It's just easier that way. :rolleyes:
 


You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom