What are sufficient grounds for dismissal from football? From the University?

[everybody knows my name]

What are sufficient grounds for dismissal of a student from the football team, or from the University entirely? Should the U be able to suspend or expel students for conduct that isn't criminal?

Most importantly, is a public University (when investigating an offense against its code of conduct) obligated to observe "due process" in the same way that the criminal justice system is?

 

[CoMn]

Embarrassing the university on a national scale perhaps?

 

[GoGophersUMN]

Are you asking in a legal sense or for our personal opinions?

As of now, courts have been fine with universities punishing students however they want, as long as it isn't "discriminatory".

I wouldn't be surprised to see a case of a male student being accused of rape and being thrown out of school go to supreme court in the next few years though, and if a majority of the court is conservative, I think we'll see them say the 2011 guidelines are unconstitutional. But for now, the school can do whatever they want to students accused of rape and not get in trouble.

 

[Genious]

As for school, there is a constitutional right to an education as it pertains to public universities so being dismissed from school entails certain due process protections (notice of charges and right to a hearing among them). There is no constitutional right to play football.

 

[Ski U Mah 55]

Embarrassing the university on a national scale perhaps?

This.

 

[Bob_Loblaw]

As for school, there is a constitutional right to an education as it pertains to public universities so being dismissed from school entails certain due process protections (notice of charges and right to a hearing among them). There is no constitutional right to play football.

Removal of a scholarship affords due process protections.

That said, kicking someone off of a football team should be fair though right? Like put legal standards or any of that stuff to the side.

A University certainly cannot kick a person of a football team for what kind of sex partake in.

 

[Bob_Loblaw]

Embarrassing the university on a national scale perhaps?

You don't care at all if they were the cause of that embarrassment? Like, just your ideas of fairness.

For this hypothetical, assume it was consensual, in that case, should the players be kicked off the team? Kicked out of the school?

 

[Deleted_User]

Thank you, lawyer Bob for presenting nothing of evidence relating to the question.

So, I will do what the lawyer won't.

There were 1022 violations of liquor laws that resulted in 983 disciplinary actions against students in 2014.

In a case of Tatro v University of Minnesota, the ACLU reports this entry: The Minnesota Supreme Court ruled that the University of Minnesota had a right to discipline Amanda Tatro for off-color comments she made on the social networking site, Facebook. The Supreme Court found that Tatro was not protected by the right to freedom of speech because her Facebook posts violated the Mortuary Science Program's academic guideline rules, which were narrowly tailored and directly related to established professional conduct standards.

In each academic area of the University of Minnesota, there are usually, though not always, professional conduct standards. This could be why lawyer Bob is incorrect. In Tatro, the Minnesota Supreme Court ruled that Ms. Tatro had no free speech rights as a student enrolled in a professional school in regards to commenting on the program in Facebook. She had a duty to protect the image of the school and had an obligation to protect the school by reporting any faults in the program to the department, and not to the public or her friends. That was a code of conduct result.

Just because a person has a right, like speech, does not mean that that right is universal and unabridged by competing rights.
Isn't that right, lawyer Bob. Rights are not absolute. The right of one sexual partner does not grant that partner to share those rights with 3rd party individuals. It does not grant rights to share in the experience by having an open door or invite others in. And, it certainly does not give the players involved the right to introduce a minor to sexual relations with an adult. Am I not right on that, lawyer Bob. Remember, Bob, your oath and duty to the law to represent the law, and not some flim flam BS.

 

[Johnnyboy18]

You don't care at all if they were the cause of that embarrassment? Like, just your ideas of fairness.

For this hypothetical, assume it was consensual, in that case, should the players be kicked off the team? Kicked out of the school?

In your opinion should players be kicked off for gang banging a intoxicated female with a 17 year old recruit consensual or not?

 

[LesBolstad]

You don't care at all if they were the cause of that embarrassment? Like, just your ideas of fairness.

For this hypothetical, assume it was consensual, in that case, should the players be kicked off the team? Kicked out of the school?

Yes, assuming consensual, they should be kicked off team. They can stay in school on their own dime.

 

[Hates Monikers]

Yes, assuming consensual, they should be kicked off team. They can stay in school on their own dime.

I'm curious to know if you think the three Gopher basketball players who had consensual sex with a girl last spring should've been kicked off the team. At the time, there was a general distaste for that, and agreement that sharing the video online was a terrible decision. But I don't remember people thinking that the sex itself should lead to the guys being kicked off the team.

What number of sexual partners is too high?

 

[dpodoll68]

In your opinion should players be kicked off for gang banging a intoxicated female with a 17 year old recruit consensual or not?

The age of consent in Minnesota is 16, so the fact that he was 17 isn't really relevant. If he were 15 we'd have an issue.

 

[GopherinFlorida]

One of my issues is that the suspension of the 5 players who did not have sexual contact with the woman are from school and not from football. Suspension from school for a year will follow them wherever they go including if the want to get security clearance, federal jobs, etc. It is a huge deal...same as the expulsion.

I would think the player who had a threesome with the recruit as well as the recruits host (I thought they were different) should be expelled from school on this point alone.

The three other players who had sex with the girl should be kicked off team for being stupid.

The 5 players who did not have sex with the girl but had various interactions along the way should be suspended from bowl game and that is it.

The player up for probation should no be punished as he is just getting screwed because 10 matches the low number the accuser gave for how many men she claimed attacked her.

Just my opinion.

 

[PMWinSTP]

It's always been the concern for me that it went from 4 to 6 to 5 and EEOA then landed on 10. The additional five have real cause for legal action, and the others at least have the concern of lack of due process.

As I've said before, waiting for the BoR to weigh in...feels like that is the likely other shoe to drop.

 

[CoMn]

You don't care at all if they were the cause of that embarrassment? Like, just your ideas of fairness.

For this hypothetical, assume it was consensual, in that case, should the players be kicked off the team? Kicked out of the school?

She said "nooooo" on the tape....another player reported her saying no later. She had enough to drink that I wonder if she was even able to give consent. I am having trouble assuming it was consensual Bob. If you have sex with a woman and can't trust her not to go to the cops, perhaps you shouldn't have sex with her. If you decide to get a gang bang going and you and all your buddies are out hunting for "hoes" and then you find a drunk "Bit**" who allegedly wants everyone to screw her and you invite your buddies over to gang bang the woman you just filmed the recruit screwing....after this woman accuses you of rape (why would she do that...she was having such a grand old consensual time?)...and the report with all of your tweets calling women "hoes" and "bitc**" comes out. The entire nation reads it. While I know you think it is just fine and dandy...news Bob...polite society doesn't view it that way. It becomes a national embarrassment...and while you seem proud of these guys like Claeys apparently, most of us are embarrassed that we ever supported this team. You may think it is okay to support a team of gang bangers who have found women who want to do this thing...but some of us don't support that legal or not. You can call us prudes, old farts etc. But the truth is a lot of us have a lot of money and many of us aren't planning on sending it the university's way after this fiasco. I know you don't care...but apparently the big boys who make the decisions actually do care about what donors think. If you don't think this is a national embarrassment, then you really are so stuck on your consensual/not consensual thing you can't see the forest through the trees.

 

[gopherdudepart2]

Mostly agree with all of this

One of my issues is that the suspension of the 5 players who did not have sexual contact with the woman are from school and not from football. Suspension from school for a year will follow them wherever they go including if the want to get security clearance, federal jobs, etc. It is a huge deal...same as the expulsion.

I would think the player who had a threesome with the recruit as well as the recruits host (I thought they were different) should be expelled from school on this point alone.

The three other players who had sex with the girl should be kicked off team for being stupid.

The 5 players who did not have sex with the girl but had various interactions along the way should be suspended from bowl game and that is it.

The player up for probation should no be punished as he is just getting screwed because 10 matches the low number the accuser gave for how many men she claimed attacked her.

Just my opinion.

This has mostly been my stance on the new Five added new names especially Shenault( he should have his bowl game suspension lifted) and has been the one that has suffered the most for being lumped in the group except for maybe Green and Winfield.
The four of the new names suspended for the bowl game, expedited hearings, and an apology from the Athletic department after the hearings. Just because you are part of a social media group(not the administrator) and individuals at the apartment sent you crude text's to that messaging group, doesn't make you a party to an alleged assault. They were not obligated at a private residence, to intervene, even if Title IX group say's so, and a lot of people would have bailed for fear of the stupidity of what was going on.

The original five dudes, with the restraining orders and the harassment, court hearing settlement, the coach should have already dismissed them from the football program for violation of team rules and left it at that.

 

[Class_of_99]

She had enough to drink that I wonder if she was even able to give consent. I am having trouble assuming it was consensual Bob.

She had 4-5 shots 4 hours earlier. She could legally drive a car but you think she is unable to give consent for sex? Stop treating this woman like an infant.

 

[Jack jones]

Hey, I have a novel idea. If you can't support the players and the team with this situation, please go some where else. Find another source to have your opinions printed. I am tired of your down grading the players, the program, everyone and everything associated with Gopher football. Yes, your right I have changed my opinions on several fronts. But I decided enough is enough, lets go Gophers.

 

[Deleted_User]

Apparently some of you have a problem with the psychology of memory and recall. I will not school you on it. But, just look up witness and memory in google.com/scholar and you will get plenty to chew on for a lifetime of learning.

The recall issue is real, but not something that can be dismissed out of "instant recall". The EOAA report even covered the inconsistencies in detail. But, as in all such circumstances that go to trial, one must judge the evidence as presented. If we view the EOAA report as testimony or evidence, then the jury would be hung in Gopherhole court.

 

[Deleted_User]

Hey, I have a novel idea. If you can't support the players and the team with this situation, please go some where else. Find another source to have your opinions printed. I am tired of your down grading the players, the program, everyone and everything associated with Gopher football. Yes, your right I have changed my opinions on several fronts. But I decided enough is enough, lets go Gophers.

I'll be the devil's advocate. If you can't support the schools staff in this situation, please go somewhere else. I am tired of the degrading of students who are not football players.

 

[PMWinSTP]

Apparently some of you have a problem with the psychology of memory and recall. I will not school you on it. But, just look up witness and memory in google.com/scholar and you will get plenty to chew on for a lifetime of learning.

The recall issue is real, but not something that can be dismissed out of "instant recall". The EOAA report even covered the inconsistencies in detail. But, as in all such circumstances that go to trial, one must judge the evidence as presented. If we view the EOAA report as testimony or evidence, then the jury would be hung in Gopherhole court.

Gee, thanks for not "schooling" us on this...

Got it. So for the accuser a changing memory and recall of the set of events is not troubling, but anything of the sort from the accused is? Aren't they all technically witnesses? Thanks for the clarification. Misguided, misinformed arrogance does not suit you well.

 

[saintpaulguy]

Removal of a scholarship affords due process protections.

That said, kicking someone off of a football team should be fair though right? Like put legal standards or any of that stuff to the side.

A University certainly cannot kick a person of a football team for what kind of sex partake in.

Sloppy, not up to your usual work.

 

[UpnorthGo4]

The age of consent in Minnesota is 16, so the fact that he was 17 isn't really relevant. If he were 15 we'd have an issue.

Minnesota law makes it relevant because the girl was four years older than the recruit. She is at risk for prosecution.

 

[UpnorthGo4]

What are sufficient grounds for dismissal of a student from the football team, or from the University entirely? Should the U be able to suspend or expel students for conduct that isn't criminal?

Most importantly, is a public University (when investigating an offense against its code of conduct) obligated to observe "due process" in the same way that the criminal justice system is?

12 Players Investigated

Four players were charged with sexual assault.

Eight players were charged with sexual harassment.

Three players were charged with lying and obstruction of the investigation.

Nine players were charged with miscellaneous other violations of the Student Code of Conduct.

One player was charged with sexual assault but not sexual harassment.

Two players were not charged with anything.

It is all in the report. You should read it.

 

[PMWinSTP]

12 Players Investigated

Four players were charged with sexual assault.

Eight players were charged with sexual harassment.

Three players were charged with lying and obstruction of the investigation.

Nine players were charged with miscellaneous other violations of the Student Code of Conduct.

One player was charged with sexual assault but not sexual harassment.

Two players were not charged with anything.

It is all in the report. You should read it.

Charged?

 

[UpnorthGo4]

Charged?

Ok, accused of Code of Conduct violation. If you don't like this I will go with whatever you want.

 

[PMWinSTP]

Ok, accused if you prefer. If you don't like accused I will go with whatever you want.

Charged gives the notion that this is some sort of judicial process, which is clearly not the case. Found in Violation is probably the best way to characterize it, and pretty generous IMHO.

 

[GopherinFlorida]

Charged gives the notion that this is some sort of judicial process, which is clearly not the case. Found in Violation is probably the best way to characterize it, and pretty generous IMHO.

No point in talking to Upnorth he/she has an agenda and nothing will get in its way...especially not reason logic or the truth.

His/her response to this will be to tell me to read the report (I have) and understand that student code is not the law (I do) and there is a different burden of proof (still not confused) and that I must be too stupid to understand the complexities of the situation (all evidence to the contrary).

But you see that Upnorth's agenda is all about the persecution of these students, laying claim to the EOAA report as being fact, calling these men rapists, charged with assault, etc and that the due process is not flawed because the University of Minnesota doesn't make mistakes (except when they hired Claeys and gave scholarships to 85 women hating rapists).

 

[dpodoll68]

Minnesota law makes it relevant because the girl was four years older than the recruit. She is at risk for prosecution.

Wrong. If both parties are over 16, it doesn't matter what the age difference is. The woman could be 116 and it wouldn't matter. She is at zero risk of prosecution for statutory rape.

 

[50PoundHead]

She had 4-5 shots 4 hours earlier. She could legally drive a car but you think she is unable to give consent for sex? Stop treating this woman like an infant.

You are making a lot of assumptions as to how 4-5 shots 4 hours earlier may have affected her. What is her weight? Had she had anything to eat? What was the alcohol level of the shots? I'm not saying she was able or unable to give consent. I'm just saying there are a lot of variables here.