We Stand With Survivors Rally at TCF Bank Stadium now scheduled for Saturday

[WoodburyTim]

Just off a hunch, what percentage of cases do you think come over their desks involving sexual assault or harassment where they DON'T recommend punishment for the accused?

Do you think this gaggle of regressive lunatics weighs the evidence and comes to an impartial decision?

It's shocking to me that some people are arguing that these loons are less partial than the police.

Bingo. I guarantee that the information you are asking about would also fall under information that cannot be shared publicly. It would also be interesting to know the background of those in this office. The criminal investigators train for this and conduct sensitive investigations all the time. It is their job. Are these people ex-detectives? Investigators? Or is their background more of a political nature, which I suspect?

 

[supadupafly]

Bingo. I guarantee that the information you are asking about would also fall under information that cannot be shared publicly. It would also be interesting to know the background of those in this office. The criminal investigators train for this and conduct sensitive investigations all the time. It is their job. Are these people ex-detectives? Investigators? Or is their background more of a political nature, which I suspect?

political....the EOAA office is a gaggle (6 of the 7 in it are women) of regressive leftist, male hating, title IX thumping, uber-feminists

 

[Robemcdo]

How welcome will male survivors be at this rally?

Sent from my SM-T550 using Tapatalk

The male victims tend not to survive
They end up in jail or expelled


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[beavergopher]

The EOAA is victimizing the alleged victim. She is being used to advance their agenda.
She wanted this to be over. Now it's just beginning, and on a whole new level.

You nailed it.

 

[Deleted_User]

Bob Loblaw, you are an ignorant person. The words you describe are accurate and precise. You put up the straw man argument to support your lack of evidence. Just because you are stupid, doesn't mean we have to believe you.

 

[Deleted_User]

This board appears to be over representative of the male, elitist opinion that 10 very intimidating guys in a bedroom do not represent an existential threat to a single, smaller, drunk woman. There could not have been consent in this situation. And, what kind of person videos this brutality for later viewing? The whole thing is morally corrupt. And, you people want to only condemn the office because it is mostly made up of women? With a cultural salute to the members of this misogynistic "sports" board, there is a great deal of group think and self congratulatory language run amok. You all act like a support group of rape culture.

Look at the language used. Highlight those action verbs. Assess the intended audience and then ask yourself if this language would be acceptable to a room full of mothers and fathers of daughters. What would they say about the EO office and the circumstances? From other sites, where there is a higher number of women on the "board", like Facebook, I can tell you for a fact that few of you would be found socially acceptable in your comments.

I think I will attend the rally. I'll make a point to go as a man, an alumnus, and a father. And, I think I will ask a few of my friends who are fathers of daughters to attend. And, I'll speak to a few producers of news and get them to attend as well.

 

[TruDat]

What Iowa is getting at is that their literally doesn't need to be any evidence other than testimony to convict. This has been borne out in other cases around the country.

They are not being convicted of anything. They are being told you can be a student here any more.

 

[TruDat]

The EOAA is victimizing the alleged victim. She is being used to advance their agenda.
She wanted this to be over. Now it's just beginning, and on a whole new level.

What is this agenda?

 

[Deleted_User]

They are not being convicted of anything. They are being told you can be a student here any more.

There is a rape kit. Unfortunately, there are at least 4 different sets of DNA on that kit result. That just means it takes longer to identify the men involved.

 

[citywok]

Bravo to Dean S for choosing to attend this. I am certain there will be many others like you there.

 

[GopherinPhilly]

This board appears to be over representative of the male, elitist opinion that 10 very intimidating guys in a bedroom do not represent an existential threat to a single, smaller, drunk woman. There could not have been consent in this situation. And, what kind of person videos this brutality for later viewing? The whole thing is morally corrupt. And, you people want to only condemn the office because it is mostly made up of women? With a cultural salute to the members of this misogynistic "sports" board, there is a great deal of group think and self congratulatory language run amok. You all act like a support group of rape culture.

Look at the language used. Highlight those action verbs. Assess the intended audience and then ask yourself if this language would be acceptable to a room full of mothers and fathers of daughters. What would they say about the EO office and the circumstances? From other sites, where there is a higher number of women on the "board", like Facebook, I can tell you for a fact that few of you would be found socially acceptable in your comments.

I think I will attend the rally. I'll make a point to go as a man, an alumnus, and a father. And, I think I will ask a few of my friends who are fathers of daughters to attend. And, I'll speak to a few producers of news and get them to attend as well.

See, this is the problem. The first highlighted line assumes facts not in evidence, the second is a bias based on personal beliefs about sex and the third is the continued troubling narrative that if you don't think like we do you are wrong, bad or immoral and we will publicly harm you.

I don't have an issue with any consensual sex (this would exclude rape, children and animals). If folks want to have sex with 10 in the room, want to video it, want to do it on the internet while people watch...that is up to them. And if a woman says she was assaulted it must be investigated by the law, where there is a public record and accountability. And if she feels harassed she must be allowed to have protection under the law.

The issue I have here is the tyrannical nature of this type of private, behind closed doors, lack of due process, arbitrary and completely opaque investigations being done by political appointees who may have an agenda that isn't unbiased justice. We know some on the EoAA have such an agenda by their writings, newspaper quotes and personal statements.

We have 10 young men and one young woman who are fighting for their lives and futures right now and based on public record and statements, all came to what they believed to be a fair and just conclusion several weeks ago through our fair and transparent legal system.

Now we have the biased, opaque political steamroller going on where everyone is afraid of being labeled something (much in the way Dean S labeled all us sexually free individuals in his post) and possibly losing their careers because to stand up and say I support our legal system and not this behind closed doors witch hunt is suicide in the PC circles of academia.

 

[Some Day...Maybe]

This is the type of thing special interests groups do, they imply strawman arguments.

There is an implicit statement that by supporting the EOAA, you are supporting victims of sexual assault.

These regressive groups devalue women and make a mockery of actual assault victims. They create terms like "rape culture", "triggering" and "safe spaces" to help build a false narrative. It's literally like 1984 - - they only bring up rape culture when there is not an actual rape.

They don't think women are as capable of men. Men can give consent. Men can even regret a sexual experience and deal with it. Get this, men can even give consent when drinking.

Women, they can kind of give consent, but they are pretty feeble creatures. We should make sure it's in writing and detail exactly what is going to happen. If they regret it, it's not real consent. If they felt any sort of pressure (even if it's just from society and not the guy), they didn't give consent, women can't be trusted to deal with that stuff. If they had a drink, bets are off.

If alcohol is being used as an excuse to why she didn't give consent, then why isn't she getting into trouble for sexual assault? I am certain the football players were drinking. They can give consent. . . even after a few drinks? Wow. They sound like adults.

Hey Bob, have you ever taken into consideration the size and strength of a woman vs the size and strength of a man? I'm going to let you in on a little secret Bob, there are differences between a man and a woman, but you don't seem to understand that.

Instead of looking at everything through your own life experience view, try for a minute to expand that view. If you don't think that comes into play, you are denying reality. Also Bob, who has more of a penchant for violence? The reality is that men commit a vast amount more of violent crimes than women and are on a whole more aggressive than women.

Your argument is both simplistic and ignorant. I'm not denying that there are false accusations of sexual assault out there, or that there are bad women out there, but you need to look at the whole, and expand your perspective a tad.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[LakerFan]

This board appears to be over representative of the male, elitist opinion that 10 very intimidating guys in a bedroom do not represent an existential threat to a single, smaller, drunk woman. There could not have been consent in this situation. And, what kind of person videos this brutality for later viewing? The whole thing is morally corrupt. And, you people want to only condemn the office because it is mostly made up of women? With a cultural salute to the members of this misogynistic "sports" board, there is a great deal of group think and self congratulatory language run amok. You all act like a support group of rape culture.

Look at the language used. Highlight those action verbs. Assess the intended audience and then ask yourself if this language would be acceptable to a room full of mothers and fathers of daughters. What would they say about the EO office and the circumstances? From other sites, where there is a higher number of women on the "board", like Facebook, I can tell you for a fact that few of you would be found socially acceptable in your comments.

I think I will attend the rally. I'll make a point to go as a man, an alumnus, and a father. And, I think I will ask a few of my friends who are fathers of daughters to attend. And, I'll speak to a few producers of news and get them to attend as well.

So this board is elitist, male dominated, but an EOAA counsel loaded with 5 women and one man who all sought out positions where they could sit in judgement without oversight on men accused (not necessarily guilty) of sexual assault that group couldn't have a bias.

Your pissed at the one kid who videoed this, who's video might be the only reason 4 guys aren't in jail for rape.

You think people who ask how a player not even in the building during an event that may have been consensual could be suspended for a year, are in support of rape culture.

Do you seriously hear yourself talk?

As for the people that assume there must be fire where there is smoke. We are living in an age where we are questioning the police and establishment when they convict people, but a shadow group with no accountability should be given an assumption of infaliability and unbias? Really?

 

[Deleted_User]

So this board is elitist, male dominated, but an EOAA counsel loaded with 5 women and one man who all sought out positions where they could sit in judgement without oversight on men accused (not necessarily guilty) of sexual assault that group couldn't have a bias.

Your pissed at the one kid who videoed this, who's video might be the only reason 4 guys aren't in jail for rape.

You think people who ask how a player not even in the building during an event that may have been consensual could be suspended for a year, are in support of rape culture.

Do you seriously hear yourself talk?

As for the people that assume there must be fire where there is smoke. We are living in an age where we are questioning the police and establishment when they convict people, but a shadow group with no accountability should be given an assumption of infaliability and unbias? Really?

Nothing evidentiary in your comment. Let's review what we don't know. We don't know why some players were put on suspension. My guess, and I'll admit it is a guess, they did something against this women. They may have only used words. And, as for those men's rights, they had the right to address the EOAA directly. If they failed to do so, or if their arguments did not withstand scrutiny, even from WOMEN (OMG!>!!!), they can appeal internally. Their ability to address this isn't over. However, the judgement of the panel of the EOAA has merit. They apparently are regarded as well qualified for the job function. And, yet, people who have zero knowledge of the situation are going after the panel at the EOAA because of their gender. How coincidental of the mob to address their gender as part of the defense of the "men" who "were not even there". I don't find that fact as essential to a suspension. It may not even be central to their particular role in this whole sordid affair. Justice, my friend, is based on the role of the institution in preserving the rights of fair treatment of all the students and not just the few. If those "men" did nothing more than flip the U the bird, I would have them out the door. Maybe my opinion is on the fringe and an extreme outlier of opinion, but I whole heartily admit I have zero tolerance for taking advantage of a drunk woman in a state of vulnerability in a roomful of athletes. And, those that support those team members who committed this heinous act, I also have zero tolerance for. The door of justice swings one way only.

I have arrested a rapist before, and have been witness to the same. And, I knew the guy I arrested. He did not think he was getting justice and we got into it in the interview room, believe me, as he was my superior. So, I am biased toward the rights of the woman. I will be unapologetic for it.

 

[GoldenRodents]

Hey Dean, have you seen the video?

 

[kcf]

Most of the comments in this thread are terrifying.

 

[RolGnav]

What's funny is that some of you think that the ones' who are defending the 10 players, are being unreasonable and some how are OK with rape and assaults. That's not the issue here with most of us. What most of us are defending is due process, and the timing of these suspensions. What if one or more of these players are deemed to have had nothing to do with the accuser? Then you've taken away a lot of things that can't be given back to the innocent players, which includes their name and image, not to mention a chance to make something of themselves. What if it's another Duke Lacrosse team situation again? You have to let it play out first before making any suspensions.

 

[GopherinPhilly]

Nothing evidentiary in your comment. Let's review what we don't know. We don't know why some players were put on suspension. My guess, and I'll admit it is a guess, they did something against this women. They may have only used words. And, as for those men's rights, they had the right to address the EOAA directly. If they failed to do so, or if their arguments did not withstand scrutiny, even from WOMEN (OMG!>!!!), they can appeal internally. Their ability to address this isn't over. However, the judgement of the panel of the EOAA has merit. They apparently are regarded as well qualified for the job function. And, yet, people who have zero knowledge of the situation are going after the panel at the EOAA because of their gender. How coincidental of the mob to address their gender as part of the defense of the "men" who "were not even there". I don't find that fact as essential to a suspension. It may not even be central to their particular role in this whole sordid affair. Justice, my friend, is based on the role of the institution in preserving the rights of fair treatment of all the students and not just the few. If those "men" did nothing more than flip the U the bird, I would have them out the door. Maybe my opinion is on the fringe and an extreme outlier of opinion, but I whole heartily admit I have zero tolerance for taking advantage of a drunk woman in a state of vulnerability in a roomful of athletes. And, those that support those team members who committed this heinous act, I also have zero tolerance for. The door of justice swings one way only.

I have arrested a rapist before, and have been witness to the same. And, I knew the guy I arrested. He did not think he was getting justice and we got into it in the interview room, believe me, as he was my superior. So, I am biased toward the rights of the woman. I will be unapologetic for it.

You are clearly an angry man with considerable bias based on past actions not related to this instance. Hope you are not still in law enforcement.

 

[Robemcdo]

.

I think I will attend the rally. I'll make a point to go as a man, an alumnus, and a father. And, I think I will ask a few of my friends who are fathers of daughters to attend. And, I'll speak to a few producers of news and get them to attend as well.

This is what has gotten us here . The idea that many males will say 'what if this was my daughter'

My answer to that is 'ask your daughter if she thinks these football players attacked this girl against her will'

I think you'd be surprised with the answer.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Deleted_User]

Let's talk about due process. "informing another student, staff, or faculty member who does not have a need to know that the individual has made a complaint or participated in an investigation of a complaint of sexual harassment; and"

All they had to do was share with somebody else that the investigation was being conducted to parties who had zero right to know about the investigation. I would assume that the players did not know that this was the policy. That does not excuse them from the consequences. Is that clear enough. This is not a court procedure. It is an administrative procedure. There is no requirement of due process. Yet, the office of the EOAA does do hearings and mediation. Did they know of the situation and did they share? There it is. All the due process in a nutshell. They violated the rules. End of story. Sorry they were caught in the trap of policy. Any good lawyer would have told the entire team if they had a chance to sit down, shut up and let the grown ups handle this. Sometimes, the grown ups have to bring the bad news to those they represent. I am sorry to inform you but you are expelled.

 

[RolGnav]

Let's talk about due process. "informing another student, staff, or faculty member who does not have a need to know that the individual has made a complaint or participated in an investigation of a complaint of sexual harassment; and"

All they had to do was share with somebody else that the investigation was being conducted to parties who had zero right to know about the investigation. I would assume that the players did not know that this was the policy. That does not excuse them from the consequences. Is that clear enough. This is not a court procedure. It is an administrative procedure. There is no requirement of due process. Yet, the office of the EOAA does do hearings and mediation. Did they know of the situation and did they share? There it is. All the due process in a nutshell. They violated the rules. End of story. Sorry they were caught in the trap of policy. Any good lawyer would have told the entire team if they had a chance to sit down, shut up and let the grown ups handle this. Sometimes, the grown ups have to bring the bad news to those they represent. I am sorry to inform you but you are expelled.

Wait wait... are you telling me that the process is already over? That they have already been expelled and the others' have already been suspended? So they have no way to appeal already? All the boycott is for, is to know what and why some of these players have been suspended. And don't even say it's a privacy concern, when many of the players' family members have demanded a reason, and not gotten one. Sorry but that is due process. This is long from being over, and yet these 10 players are already facing suspensions like it's already over. And their names are some how thrown into the rapists label too because of this. You are clueless.

 

[UpnorthGo4]

Let's talk about due process. "informing another student, staff, or faculty member who does not have a need to know that the individual has made a complaint or participated in an investigation of a complaint of sexual harassment; and"

All they had to do was share with somebody else that the investigation was being conducted to parties who had zero right to know about the investigation. I would assume that the players did not know that this was the policy. That does not excuse them from the consequences. Is that clear enough. This is not a court procedure. It is an administrative procedure. There is no requirement of due process. Yet, the office of the EOAA does do hearings and mediation. Did they know of the situation and did they share? There it is. All the due process in a nutshell. They violated the rules. End of story. Sorry they were caught in the trap of policy. Any good lawyer would have told the entire team if they had a chance to sit down, shut up and let the grown ups handle this. Sometimes, the grown ups have to bring the bad news to those they represent. I am sorry to inform you but you are expelled.

I don't think the players disclosing confidential information relates to the due process issue which is a requirement for administrative hearings at every level of federal and state government. There is a constitutional requirement for due process in all administrative hearings. But I would bet a whole bunch of money that the EOAA investigation process crossed every "T" and dotted every "I" from beginning to end. The people on the EOAA had to know their actions would be scrutinized by both the Minnesota and national news media, but every defense attorney in the state.

 

[GopherinPhilly]

Let's talk about due process. "informing another student, staff, or faculty member who does not have a need to know that the individual has made a complaint or participated in an investigation of a complaint of sexual harassment; and"

All they had to do was share with somebody else that the investigation was being conducted to parties who had zero right to know about the investigation. I would assume that the players did not know that this was the policy. That does not excuse them from the consequences. Is that clear enough. This is not a court procedure. It is an administrative procedure. There is no requirement of due process. Yet, the office of the EOAA does do hearings and mediation. Did they know of the situation and did they share? There it is. All the due process in a nutshell. They violated the rules. End of story. Sorry they were caught in the trap of policy. Any good lawyer would have told the entire team if they had a chance to sit down, shut up and let the grown ups handle this. Sometimes, the grown ups have to bring the bad news to those they represent. I am sorry to inform you but you are expelled.

If your son or daughter was being railroaded in such a fashion you would be going crazy on their behalf. And these are not children, they are young adults, 19, 20 & 21 year olds with rights and voices and capabilities.

 

[Section2]

This is not a court procedure. It is an administrative procedure. There is no requirement of due process.

I don't think anyone is arguing with you that this is the case. The argument is that this process stinks.

 

[UpnorthGo4]

I don't think anyone is arguing with you that this is the case. The argument is that this process stinks.

I guess you don't know the U.S. Constitution as well as I thought you did. Let me educate you.

Fundamental Fairness and Due Process

An administrative agency should follow fair procedures and provide due process. Due process demands a meaningful evidentiary review by the administrative agency[ii]. The discretion of an administrative agency is to be exercised in a manner not to defeat the ends of justice[iii]. A fair trial before an impartial administrative agency is a basic requirement of due process[iv].

The due process followed in an administrative proceeding depends upon the nature of the administrative agency’s actions[v]. In State ex rel. Ormet Corp. v. Industrial Com. of Ohio, 54 Ohio St. 3d 102, 107 (Ohio 1990), the court held that a practice which violates due process because of mere administrative inconvenience, is not excused. However in Medeiros v. Hawaii County Planning Comm’n, 8 Haw. App. 183 (Haw. Ct. App. 1990), the court held that due process is not a fixed concept requiring a particular procedure in every situation. In Medeiros the court observed that due process is a flexible concept and could be followed as per situation demands.

An administrative agency should follow principles of fundamental fairness[vi]. In State ex rel. White v. Parsons, 199 W. Va. 1 (W. Va. 1996), the court held that administrative agencies are limited by principles of fundamental fairness. The court further held that “cardinal test of the presence or absence of due process of law in an administrative proceeding is the presence or absence of the rudiments of fair play long known to law.”



What is EOAA's process?

EOAA’s approach varies depending on the circumstances. Below are examples of how we might typically approach a particular situation. EOAA retains the ultimate determination about the development and progression of the investigation process. However, we will continually seek your feedback and make every effort to address serious concerns about safety and retaliation.

You can find additional information about each of our processes described below:

Consultation
Informal resolution process
Discrimination, harassment, or retaliation investigation
Sexual harassment and/or sexual violence investigation relating to employee conduct
Sexual harassment and/or sexual violence investigation relating to student conduct
Nepotism

Consultations

EOAA usually begins by meeting with the individual who has requested a consultation. In a telephone conversation or in-person meeting, an Equal Opportunity Consultant will:

Listen to the individual’s concerns and the circumstances surrounding the situation;
Ask questions about the individual’s concerns and the circumstances;
Explore different approaches to addressing the situation;
Determine if EOAA is an appropriate University resource to address the concerns; and/or
Advise the individual of other available University resources for resolution and/or support.

Informal Resolution Process

After an initial consultation, an Equal Opportunity Consultant may be able to address the individual’s concerns without conducting a formal investigation. These efforts may include:

contacting other individuals with relevant information and/or those who have a “need to know” because of the nature of their position;
gathering relevant information;
facilitating or mediating meetings; and/or
exploring other resolutions acceptable to those involved in the situation and to the EOAA representative.

Resolutions may include, but are not limited to, discipline, education, training efforts, and agreements as to future conduct.

Formal Investigation: discrimination, harassment, and retaliation

Depending on the circumstances, a formal investigation may be appropriate, either before or after efforts to resolve the concerns informally. Typical steps in a formal investigation include:

interviewing the individual raising the concerns and other affected parties;
interviewing the individuals with information relevant to the situation;
informing responsible administrators about the concerns and investigation;
interviewing the accused person; and
collecting and reviewing documents and other forms of information from the individual raising the concerns, witnesses, Human Resources, administrators, or other individuals with relevant information.

At the conclusion of a formal investigation, EOAA will prepare a summary of the investigation and make a conclusion as to whether University policies against discrimination, harassment, or related retaliation were violated.

EOAA typically sends the report to: the individual(s) who raised the concerns; the accused party(s); and the responsible administrator(s). EOAA will also make recommendations for responsive action to the responsible administrator(s). We may provide recommendations to the responsible administrator whether or not there was a violation of policy.

https://diversity.umn.edu/eoaa/process

 

[Deleted_User]

If your son or daughter was being railroaded in such a fashion you would be going crazy on their behalf. And these are not children, they are young adults, 19, 20 & 21 year olds with rights and voices and capabilities.

Railroaded? Really? With 2000 other venues for a college education, I would assume my daughters or sons would have the right to transfer their credits and move on. There are no rights that would be violated in that sense. If I felt they were being abused, I would counsel them to go where they are more wanted.

 

[Pompous Elitist]

Absolutely terrifying takes. The EOAA process and procedures are incredibly faulty. These kids deserve better from so-called adults.

Dean, settle down and take a breath. Try to look at things from other than our own biased perspective.

 

[FireDaveLee]

The people on the EOAA had to know their actions would be scrutinized by both the Minnesota and national news media, but every defense attorney in the state.

I think they absolutely knew their actions would be talked about, but I think you're giving the EOAA too much credit about what their intent is.

 

[RolGnav]

Due process also includes appeals too right? I mean the players haven't even been expelled yet. I'm sure there's still a long fight for these players to appeal. But Kaler and Coyle has already thrown out suspensions though. And that's what most of us are addressing here.

 

[Deleted_User]

I don't think anyone is arguing with you that this is the case. The argument is that this process stinks.

What is stinky about what the process actually is, has been conducted, or in the future conduct of the EOAA? Look to what was posted above on the process. The process is full of due process. The EOAA did their job. The players failed to live up to the code. Is that really difficult to believe? As for the 6 who were "not involved". Cry me a river. They were all given the data on their case. Maybe Jr. did not want to reveal it to Dad. That is more likely than not.