Ten Gophers football players indefinately suspended

Donate To GopherHole
Bob_Loblaw said:
I would hope most of the people on Gopherhole don't have strong opinions on the sexual practices between consenting adults. If this wasn't consensual, it was awful and we should have opinions. If this was consensual, it is bizarre and borderline creepy that you would have an opinion on the sex life of grown adults.
Click to expand...

Thanks for this.... I can't help but bring up my dismay over the Kevin Dorsey case. Essentially, Doogie and company had a strange fascination for what folks did behind closed doors. That curiosity begot scandal.
 

I wonder what Mr. Winfield is thinking right about now? As in Sr. Would be interesting if he had something to say.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

atsgopher said:
I'm Curious if anything can be learned from restraining order settlement whereby the girl requested relief from civil action by the players in exchange for lifting of the protection order? I understand that one needs more info, but I'll take a guess too.
Click to expand...

Well, this is all speculation.

However, the only reasonably explanation for this situation is that she lied and there is proof that she lied. It is also important to note that she took the 5th during the process. There are really two things that she could have possibly taken the 5th about - - (1) perjury or (2) underage drinking/drugs at the party. I have heard some people argue that maybe she was taking the 5th re: statutory rape, but that seems really unlikely (remember there was an underage recruit who joined in). Because the age of consent in MN is 16, I doubt it would be the statutory rape because you can only take the 5th to avoid self-incrimination (if she had sex with a 17 year old, it could not have incriminated her, so the 5th wouldn't apply).

As far as underage drinking/drugs - - I really doubt that she wouldn't admit to these. They bolster her claim. So it wouldn't make much sense for her to avoid those questions.

I'd guess, and I am pretty confident, that she took the 5th in regards to her lying or making false statements in a police report.

If she made false statements on a police report, she could certainly be liable to damages resulting from those statements.

On a side note, the involvement of the recruit is interesting. If Djam recorded his "turn", that would actually the creation of child pornography. The law is weird, you can sleep with a 17 year old, you can't record it.
 

This entire situation has become a complete disaster due to a lack of leadership. Where the heck is the AD and President of the university stearing the ship? Absolutely zero transparency regarding the facts, the decisions and what comes next. How is this possible? I could imagine that all involved, including the alleged victim and the players, could be in the same situation. Essentially, a rudderless ship which has taken on a life of its own as no one is manning the tiller.
 

Just because charges weren't filed doesn't mean a rape didn't occur. if there isn't enough evidence, charges often aren't filed as what would the point be? When people ask, namely Bob, what's wrong with people who representing the university having group sex and video taping it do you really think that donors won't be bothered when sex tapes go viral? Just because something is legal does not mean it someone doing it represents the university in a way that benefits the university. Not everyone will support a football team which condones this kind of behavior. Wasn't it also alleged that the players harassed her? If that is the case it could be that the guys sleeping in the other room harassed her later making her feel unsafe. The tone of this board is that there is no way that anything she alleges is true. Stop for a minute and ask yourself why. If the only evidence is that charges weren't filed, that is not evidence enough. On the other side they have all been suspended by people who saw all the evidence. Unfortunately there seems to be more evidence supporting her than the players. Our assumption that the university suspended players sleeping in an adjacent room is an assumption based on incomplete evidence. I would have a hard time believing that the only thing they did was happen to be there.
 


GopherBulldog said:
This entire situation has become a complete disaster due to a lack of leadership. Where the heck is the AD and President of the university stearing the ship? Absolutely zero transparency regarding the facts, the decisions and what comes next. How is this possible? I could imagine that all involved, including the alleged victim and the players, could be in the same situation. Essentially, a rudderless ship which has taken on a life of its own as no one is manning the tiller.
Click to expand...

I'm not defending the AD and the President, but this is an EXTREMELY difficult situation.

They are really in a damned if they do, damned if they don't situation.

If they support the court's findings and ignore the Title IX recommendation, they better be sure (to a 100% certainty) that everything is on the up and up. They need to be 100% certain that there wasn't any form of harassment or anything. The public perception for not acting in these situations (where a Title IX recommendation has been made) is brutal. Go read the comments in the Strib or Pioneer Press. It is crushing for a university that has more important things to think about than football.

If they take the Title IX recommendations seriously, they could face a potential lawsuit from the players.

These extra-judicial entities like the EoAA have run amok and the universities, throughout the country, are held hostage by these things. I'm not defending Kaler and Coyle, but it's a tough spot.
 

I thought I was clear that my concern was for the health of the program, and the future of the athletes. Apparently I did not adequately convey that. So, to clarify, I think that athletes should be warned of the danger of being involved in these situations, they can blow up.

I am not going to respond to your characterization of my post as creepy. I am not on here for that kind of bs.

This is response to the post from bob_loblaw copy and pasted below.

I would hope most of the people on Gopherhole don't have strong opinions on the sexual practices between consenting adults. If this wasn't consensual, it was awful and we should have opinions. If this was consensual, it is bizarre and borderline creepy that you would have an opinion on the sex life of grown adults.
 

GopherBulldog said:
This entire situation has become a complete disaster due to a lack of leadership. Where the heck is the AD and President of the university stearing the ship? Absolutely zero transparency regarding the facts, the decisions and what comes next. How is this possible? I could imagine that all involved, including the alleged victim and the players, could be in the same situation. Essentially, a rudderless ship which has taken on a life of its own as no one is manning the tiller.
Click to expand...

Legally they can't be transparent.

It a messed up situation where they're required to be a mini justice system, but can't show their work and prove they did it right....
 

atsgopher said:
I'm Curious if anything can be learned from restraining order settlement whereby <b>the girl requested relief from civil action by the players </b>in exchange for lifting of the protection order? I understand that one needs more info, but I'll take a guess too.
Click to expand...

I have always assumed that putting that in a settlement is SOP for a lawyer.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 



Bob_Loblaw said:
Well, this is all speculation.

However, the only reasonably explanation for this situation is that she lied and there is proof that she lied. It is also important to note that she took the 5th during the process. There are really two things that she could have possibly taken the 5th about - - (1) perjury or (2) underage drinking/drugs at the party. I have heard some people argue that maybe she was taking the 5th re: statutory rape, but that seems really unlikely (remember there was an underage recruit who joined in). Because the age of consent in MN is 16, I doubt it would be the statutory rape because you can only take the 5th to avoid self-incrimination (if she had sex with a 17 year old, it could not have incriminated her, so the 5th wouldn't apply).

As far as underage drinking/drugs - - I really doubt that she wouldn't admit to these. They bolster her claim. So it wouldn't make much sense for her to avoid those questions.

I'd guess, and I am pretty confident, that she took the 5th in regards to her lying or making false statements in a police report.

If she made false statements on a police report, she could certainly be liable to damages resulting from those statements.

On a side note, the involvement of the recruit is interesting. If Djam recorded his "turn", that would actually the creation of child pornography. The law is weird, you can sleep with a 17 year old, you can't record it.
Click to expand...

Ooh, didn't know she took the 5th.

I thought the victim statement odd:

"...This has never been about punishing anyone. I just wanted to feel safe. Because of the resolution we came to, now I can.”

I know rape victims that saw justice handed down in their cases, and still didn't feel safe. Reads like she is saving face.

Hutton stated at the end of one of the Strib lead articles he is now moving forward with a lawsuit against her.... although my guess is that is misquoted. I was thinking he is trying to somehow legally intervene in the suspension (injunction perhaps)?
 

short ornery norwegian said:
if I was coaching a D1 team in any sport, I would tell my players: here are the rules -
If you're going to have sex, you need to
1. be 100% sure your partner is sober
2. be 100% sure your partner is giving clear consent - in writing if possible, or film it on your phone
3. be 100% sure the two of you are alone in the room

If you don't follow the rules, and you get in trouble, I am unable to help you, and you will have to deal with any consequences on your own.

That may sound harsh, but in today's climate, I don't see coaches having any other options.
Click to expand...

That part is very bad advice.
 





CoMn said:
Just because charges weren't filed doesn't mean a rape didn't occur. if there isn't enough evidence, charges often aren't filed as what would the point be? When people ask, namely Bob, what's wrong with people who representing the university having group sex and video taping it do you really think that donors won't be bothered when sex tapes go viral? Just because something is legal does not mean it someone doing it represents the university in a way that benefits the university. Not everyone will support a football team which condones this kind of behavior. Wasn't it also alleged that the players harassed her? If that is the case it could be that the guys sleeping in the other room harassed her later making her feel unsafe. The tone of this board is that there is no way that anything she alleges is true. Stop for a minute and ask yourself why. If the only evidence is that charges weren't filed, that is not evidence enough. On the other side they have all been suspended by people who saw all the evidence. Unfortunately there seems to be more evidence supporting her than the players. Our assumption that the university suspended players sleeping in an adjacent room is an assumption based on incomplete evidence. I would have a hard time believing that the only thing they did was happen to be there.
Click to expand...

You are glossing over a major point. If a rape or subsequent harassment occured.....that would have been handled during the criminal process.....where a number of these players were never even mentioned. The EOAA is acting without any correspondence from the alleged victim.....who'd be the only person who could incriminate any of the players now that the case has been dismissed.

You clearly aren't thinking straight.
 

CoMn said:
Just because charges weren't filed doesn't mean a rape didn't occur. if there isn't enough evidence, charges often aren't filed as what would the point be? When people ask, namely Bob, what's wrong with people who representing the university having group sex and video taping it do you really think that donors won't be bothered when sex tapes go viral? Just because something is legal does not mean it someone doing it represents the university in a way that benefits the university. Not everyone will support a football team which condones this kind of behavior. Wasn't it also alleged that the players harassed her? If that is the case it could be that the guys sleeping in the other room harassed her later making her feel unsafe. The tone of this board is that there is no way that anything she alleges is true. Stop for a minute and ask yourself why. If the only evidence is that charges weren't filed, that is not evidence enough. On the other side they have all been suspended by people who saw all the evidence. Unfortunately there seems to be more evidence supporting her than the players. Our assumption that the university suspended players sleeping in an adjacent room is an assumption based on incomplete evidence. I would have a hard time believing that the only thing they did was happen to be there.
Click to expand...

Yeah. . I never said that "just because charges weren't filed didn't mean a rape didn't occur". According to the people who have gathered the evidence, the evidence suggests it is consensual. That is all that we ever have to go on in this situation.

Again, I try not to concern myself with the sex life of consenting adults. If there are donors that feel the need to have a strong opinion on the football team's sex life, they're creeps and good riddance. If some 50 year old man is sitting at home and deciding whether or not to donate to the University of MN based on the consensual sex life of the people on the team, he is an absolute creep and as a Gopher fan, I am glad to see him leave.

It was alleged that the players harassed her - - Again, we have LAWS for that kind of thing. IF they harassed her, the law should get involved. It should not be up to entity like the EoAA to redefine "harass" and then judge those players on that standard. If the county decided to press harassment charges, I would be whistling a completely different tune.

We can ALL agree, consent should be consent, right? We all know what the word means (besides the EoAA, they do not). The people who saw all of the evidence decided NOT TO FILE CHARGES and she agreed to drop the restraining orders to avoid potential liability. That doesn't tell you anything.

Some how it tells you something that the EoAA recommended punishment but it doesn't tell you anything that the county decided not to press charges. Do you really trust this entity more than the police department? Seriously?

If there was more evidence supporting her, charges would have been filed. I'm not saying that the lack of charges = innocence, I am saying that is patently absurd to suggest that "seems to be more evidence supporting her". Do you really think that the county makes a habit of not filing charges when the evidence suggests that non-consensual sex occurred? Do you really?
 

Bob_Loblaw said:
I'm not defending the AD and the President, but this is an EXTREMELY difficult situation.

They are really in a damned if they do, damned if they don't situation.

If they support the court's findings and ignore the Title IX recommendation, they better be sure (to a 100% certainty) that everything is on the up and up. They need to be 100% certain that there wasn't any form of harassment or anything. The public perception for not acting in these situations (where a Title IX recommendation has been made) is brutal. Go read the comments in the Strib or Pioneer Press. It is crushing for a university that has more important things to think about than football.

If they take the Title IX recommendations seriously, they could face a potential lawsuit from the players.

These extra-judicial entities like the EoAA have run amok and the universities, throughout the country, are held hostage by these things. I'm not defending Kaler and Coyle, but it's a tough spot.
Click to expand...

I don't doubt they are in a tough spot. And can't pretend that I know all the possible ramifications of taking a position on this issue. However, leadership is all about charting a course and managing a situation where the outcomes cannot be perfectly predicted. And, frankly, they have failed miserably to provide any visible stability or direction to this situation.
 

Spoofin said:
I have always assumed that putting that in a settlement is SOP for a lawyer.


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

This isn't always true, especially in situations like this. Having that language in a settlement of this nature isn't standard (to the best of my knowledge). It isn't standard because accusing someone of a crime and charges not being filed on that crime does not leave you open to potential liability. You are almost better off (in the court of public opinion) to not include the language if the situation could not possibly present itself. Where this situation presents itself is where there is proof that someone lied on a police report.
 

GopherBulldog said:
I don't doubt they are in a tough spot. And can't pretend that I know all the possible ramifications of taking a position on this issue. However, leadership is all about charting a course and managing a situation where the outcomes cannot be perfectly predicted. And, frankly, they've have failed miserably to provide any visible stability or direction to this situation.
Click to expand...

I agree.

So many Universities have been so passive in dealing with these regressive nut job on their campuses. I wish the U would have taken a stand.

That said, I can't blame Coyle. I blame Kaler. This issue is not about athletics and I think it would look pretty bad for him to not let Kaler speak on this issue.
 

GopherBulldog said:
I don't doubt they are in a tough spot. And can't pretend that I know all the possible ramifications of taking a position on this issue. However, leadership is all about charting a course and managing a situation where the outcomes cannot be perfectly predicted. And, frankly, they've have failed miserably to provide any visible stability or direction to this situation.
Click to expand...

Legally they can't provide any meaningful visibility or insight into the process, nor let anyone know what is going on or ... what will happen.
 

A_Slab_of_Bacon said:
Legally they can't be transparent.

It a messed up situation where they're required to be a mini justice system, but can't show their work and prove they did it right....
Click to expand...

I agree. However, they are paid millions over the course of their contracts. They need to find a way to right the ship. And have had months to scenario plan for the worse. Yet, they seem completely flat footed and without a perspective. Sad.
 

Gogogopher said:
I thought I was clear that my concern was for the health of the program, and the future of the athletes. Apparently I did not adequately convey that. So, to clarify, I think that athletes should be warned of the danger of being involved in these situations, they can blow up.

I am not going to respond to your characterization of my post as creepy. I am not on here for that kind of bs.
Click to expand...

The "you" was generic in my post. I wasn't directly calling you creepy. I was saying that if you (generic) have a strong opinion on the sexual practices between consenting adults, it is creepy. I don't care if it is this case or in any other matter.

"why did they feel the need to include their friends?" Well, because they wanted to. That's how sex usually works. People do what they want to do and if it is consensual, the biggest problem is that anyone outside the parties involved would have an opinion on it.
 

GopherBulldog said:
I agree. However, they are paid millions over the course of their contracts. They need to find a way to right the ship. And have had months to scenario plan for the worse. Yet, they seem completely flat footed and without a perspective. Sad.
Click to expand...

Of course they seem flat footed, they can't say anything before it happens and when it does, still can't say anything.

The system is borked but it starts with Title IX and they can't ignore that or the consequences could be far worse.
 

A_Slab_of_Bacon said:
Legally they can't provide any meaningful visibility or insight into the process, nor let anyone know what is going on or ... what will happen.
Click to expand...

You know what they seem to me? Safe and lazy. Not what I would prefer to call the highest paid leaders in our major public university.
 

A_Slab_of_Bacon said:
Of course they seem flat footed, they can't say anything before it happens and when it does, still can't say anything.

The system is borked but it starts with Title IX and they can't ignore that or the consequences could be far worse.
Click to expand...

Then they need to change it and admit that it needs to be changed. If that's what they truly believe.
 

I don't understand how the University can suspend Seth Green, Mark Williams, Antoine Winfield Jr., Kobe McCrary, Antonio Shenault. Not involved in anything related to violations of student housing, and lack of being able to defend themselves against allegations by the EEOA office of the uNIVERSITY.
No physical contact with the alleged victim, not mentioned in the filing of the restraining order, and not in a position to do anything at said incident. These guy's were not even cited for underage drinking or anything like that. I'm struggling to understand why these additional players not named in the restraining order, or having been mentioned as having any physical contact with the alleged victim, were indefinitely suspended. I know they have the code of conduct, but the University is walking a fine line holding these student athletes to a higher standard than anything that occurred with the Reggie Lynch situation.
A year suspension or even being suspended for the bowl game does not seem like reasonable punishment for the newest players listed.
If I were the new named individuals I would be preparing civil lawsuits against the U of M's EOAA office and specifically the director of that department. Kim and her department are not exempt just because of the filings of there report to civil action by these students. They want things to get really messy and fast, keep trying to punish these five guys.
People that work in that group and the AD and Presidents office are not exempt if they are not applying the code of conduct equally even within the athletic department itself let alone the General University population and student housing. It's not going to take the attorney long to find evidence of unequal treatment of student code of conduct, look no further than the article about the student that belonged to the Fraternity where his fraternity brothers pressured the accused into making statements she was not comfortable with. Even though it didn't involve sports that definitely seems like a code of conduct case especially the intimidation by the fraternity brothers using intimidation where the University did not move to suspend and expell those students.
 

GopherBulldog said:
You know what they seem to me? Safe and lazy. Not what I would prefer to call the highest paid leaders in our major public university.
Click to expand...

Title IX is not theirs to change, that's a political issue. They can't change it.

If they oppose it publicly.... you can bet the first Title IX lawsuit will use that to point out how the administration doesn't support it.
 

A_Slab_of_Bacon said:
Title IX is not theirs to change, that's a political issue. They can't change it.

If they oppose it publicly.... you can bet the first Title IX lawsuit will use that to point out how the administration doesn't support it.
Click to expand...

If they disagree with it, they need to find an elegant way to state their opinion and change it. I see absolutely zero direction from them at this point. When leaders choose to not take a firm direction, the people that suffer are those with the least amount of power. Namely, it will be the players, the alleged victim, or both.
 

As in the movie "Get Shorty", they hire fixers to clean up messes at crime scenes.

Why can't the U hire a fixer to put in place preventative measures in Gopher Athletics before things escalate out of control? Also to look at improving the situation with the EOAA? They have way too much power with no oversight authority over them.

IMHO, some of the players in this case are getting a bump rap. On the other hand, we want this university to be a safe place for your sons and daughters.
 

http://m.startribune.com/punished-gophers-football-players-are-the-news-not-bowl-talk/406682886/

Sawvel said that one of the players that is suspended wasn't even present the night of the incident. Is the joke on us? Are we the idiots that continue to support this school? Usually off the field incidents, progress reports, etc don't bother me - I'd be bummed, complain on gopherhole and then get over it. I usually only really care about watching the Gophers on the field on Saturday's. For some reason the lack of leadership has really rubbed me the wrong way. I told my wife tonight I really don't even care if I purchase tickets next year. It used to be my favorite thing to do, but I'm just burnt out.
 

hungan1 said:
As in the movie "Get Shorty", they hire fixers to clean up messes at crime scenes.

Why can't the U hire a fixer to put in place preventative measures in Gopher Athletics before things escalate out of control? Also to look at improving the situation with the EOAA? They have way too much power with no oversight authority over them.

IMHO, some of the players in this case are getting a bump rap. On the other hand, we want this university to be a safe place for your sons and daughters.
Click to expand...

Wouldn't it be easier to bring back Luther Darville and blame him for everything?
 

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom